Don't ask, don't tell

Southern Man said:
Prove it.
Click to expand...

Are you really suggesting that gays have not served honorably? If that really is your suggestion, I suggest that YOU prove it. I served. You, of course, did not. (coward). I personally served with scores of gays during my career and can personally attest to the high quality of their service and their valor.
 
maineman said:
Are you really suggesting that gays have not served honorably? If that really is your suggestion, I suggest that YOU prove it. I served. You, of course, did not. (coward). I personally served with scores of gays during my career and can personally attest to the high quality of their service and their valor.
Click to expand...
Along with most of the public I didn't serve, so you call all of us cowards then. Yet you don't have the balls to back up what you say, and attempt to have me do it for you. LOL
 
Southern Man said:
Along with most of the public I didn't serve, so you call all of us cowards then. Yet you don't have the balls to back up what you say, and attempt to have me do it for you. LOL
Click to expand...

Maybe he would tell you where you can go to meet him standing in a river, and he will have a gun??


"Yet you don't have the balls to back up what you say..."
Coming from you that is funny.
 
Southern Man said:
Along with most of the public I didn't serve, so you call all of us cowards then. Yet you don't have the balls to back up what you say, and attempt to have me do it for you. LOL
Click to expand...

I don't call most of the public cowards... I just happen to know with absolute certainty that you are one.

And I don't NEED to back up what I say. I stated the basis for my assertion: my first hand observations of the quality of service of several gay shipmates over the course of a 25 year career in uniform. You want to call me a liar but have nothing to back up your claim that I am not being truthful. I know what I know and I know what I witnessed.

If you were to say, "A budweiser truck just drove by my house" and I were to reply, "prove it"... that would be kind of silly, wouldn't it? Why should you be forced to try and "prove" what you yourself saw with your own eyes?

If you don't believe me, I really could give a shit.

got it? good.
 
maineman said:
I don't call most of the public cowards... I just happen to know with absolute certainty that you are one.

And I don't NEED to back up what I say. I stated the basis for my assertion: my first hand observations of the quality of service of several gay shipmates over the course of a 25 year career in uniform. You want to call me a liar but have nothing to back up your claim that I am not being truthful. I know what I know and I know what I witnessed.

If you were to say, "A budweiser truck just drove by my house" and I were to reply, "prove it"... that would be kind of silly, wouldn't it? Why should you be forced to try and "prove" what you yourself saw with your own eyes?

If you don't believe me, I really could give a shit.

got it? good.
Click to expand...

That should be: "I really couldn't give a shit", unless of course people not believing you causes you to give a shit.

Simply put, it means it matters.
 
maineman said:
I don't call most of the public cowards... I just happen to know with absolute certainty that you are one.

And I don't NEED to back up what I say. I stated the basis for my assertion: my first hand observations of the quality of service of several gay shipmates over the course of a 25 year career in uniform. You want to call me a liar but have nothing to back up your claim that I am not being truthful. I know what I know and I know what I witnessed.

If you were to say, "A budweiser truck just drove by my house" and I were to reply, "prove it"... that would be kind of silly, wouldn't it? Why should you be forced to try and "prove" what you yourself saw with your own eyes?

If you don't believe me, I really could give a shit.

got it? good.
Click to expand...
You assert "with absolute certainty" that I'm a coward, which is a lie, so therefore your other point is most likely a lie. :)
 
Southern Man said:
Actually I've never advocated discriminating against queers. All I've asked for is not be lied to. Queers and their enablers should simply admit that its not normal moral natural and healthy. My argument against queers serving in the military is that poor lifestyle decisions are indicative of making poor decisions elsewhere.
Click to expand...

a coward and draftdodgers opinion on which real men can serve is a good joke. Thanks SOUTHERNCOWARD!!!
 
The argument is a distraction and serves to detract from the military rather than "protect" it. We have as evidence pretty much every other military in the western world to show that gays don't make the military fall apart, and Israel proves that it doesn't even make it less effective.

We waste our time worrying about whether people who want to serve should be allowed to simply because of some ick factor in the citizens. It might be "icky" to some people, but so is some of what I see others eat. (That slimy okra crap in something other than a soup would be one of them, one of the few things that don't get better when deep fried...)

The President should simply give the order and move on. Let's get to arguing about some important stuff. It's not like allowing them to serve will allow them to somehow desanctify the service of others.
 
Damocles said:
The argument is a distraction and serves to detract from the military rather than "protect" it. We have as evidence pretty much every other military in the western world to show that gays don't make the military fall apart, and Israel proves that it doesn't even make it less effective.

We waste our time worrying about whether people who want to serve should be allowed to simply because of some ick factor in the citizens. It might be "icky" to some people, but so is some of what I see others eat. (That slimy okra crap in something other than a soup would be one of them, one of the few things that don't get better when deep fried...)

The President should simply give the order and move on. Let's get to arguing about some important stuff. It's not like allowing them to serve will allow them to somehow desanctify the service of others.
Click to expand...

OK, I'm going to take issue with your okra dissing comments...you're talking about my #2 crop here.. :)
 
Damocles said:
The argument is a distraction and serves to detract from the military rather than "protect" it. We have as evidence pretty much every other military in the western world to show that gays don't make the military fall apart, and Israel proves that it doesn't even make it less effective.

We waste our time worrying about whether people who want to serve should be allowed to simply because of some ick factor in the citizens. It might be "icky" to some people, but so is some of what I see others eat. (That slimy okra crap in something other than a soup would be one of them, one of the few things that don't get better when deep fried...)

The President should simply give the order and move on. Let's get to arguing about some important stuff. It's not like allowing them to serve will allow them to somehow desanctify the service of others.
Click to expand...

The idea that sexual orientation is a determining factor is who should be able to serve is ridiculous.

After this bit passes, I suggest we start allowing wome into combat roles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top