“For some reason, the Navy seems to be very accepting of gays, but that doesn’t mean that other branches of the military share that opinion. – Esthier”

This is exactly what I mean. Esthier obviously has no clue about the military but because she/he heard the song by the village people, she feels qualified to make an obviously ridiculous statement.

If anyone has been through OCS, boot camp, etc(as I have), you would realize that it is completely impractical to have people serve openly in regard their homosexuality. Whether it be the fact that we constantly see the same gender buck naked in showers, have to share rooms with each other, etc, it’s impractical. The military is not a social project. We don’t want to force straight people to subject themselves to being roommates with homosexuals who, just as I would have problems rooming with an attractive woman(particularly when she takes off her clothes), would create a ridiculously uncomfortable situation.

Why do we separate the genders? For no other reason than sexuality. If we allow homosexuals to serve openly, there’s absolutely no reason to separate genders anymore, and I can guarantee you that would lead to a ridiculous amount of sexual harassment and other problems.

The military is not a social project. I have every right to not want a homosexual man to stare at me in the shower as any woman has a right not to want some guy to stare at her. This doesn’t make me a bad person, a homophobe, or whatever insult you can come up with, it makes me REASONABLE.

Benaiah on July 9, 2008 at 6:51 PM

I’ve served in 2 branches of the military and I’ve served in Iraq. I’m well aware that there are gays in the military. I am also aware of the mindset of soldiers and how they feel about this issue. Many soldiers I know, good men all of them, either would not reenlist or would never have joined in the first place if DADT was not in place. I could care less if a fellow soldier was a closeted gay. If you have some sissy prancing around openly there will be problems.

Soldiers are not a bunch of Latte sipping liberals having a spaz attack on the unfairness of discrimination over Nancy-boys. They have their own sense of justice and will thin the herd when necessary. I’ve seen it done. They will take matters into their own hands. Laws written by desk jockey liberal lawyers don’t mean squat on the battlefield. They never have and never will.

A hell of a lot of comments on this. But here’s a point I haven’t seen made although I may have missed it. Recruitment. What kind of people are going to voluntarily enlist into an organization that promises to force them to live and work with people that will make them uncomfortable? Every kid who talks about enlisting will be ridiculed for wanting to live, shower and work with gays. Take away DADT and I guarantee you will have to resort to the draft. Either that or most military personnel will be gays and liberals.

The military is the wrong place for PC bullsh*t.

Guardian

Another bogus argument. Again, gays are in the military whether they are open about it or not. Your argument is just another attempt to pretend they aren’t there but obviously they are.

Do you think we should prevent gay people from serving as ER doctors, policemen or firemen? In the course of their jobs they may see naked people or share close living conditions.

dedalus on July 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM

They are not living in combat situations, showering with 20 people in a small stall, is different then an ER. I don’t think doctors live and bunk like the military…just a guess.

The military is the wrong place for PC bullsh*t.

So, being single, young, lower enlisted men, we bring women back to our home. Girlfriends, some of them are other military, most are not, can be spotted here and there. They are not supposed to live there, but they spend the night quite often. Most of this was accepted because young men in good shape are at the peak of thier sex lives. It is going to happen. You’d see unit morale plunge if Joe’s couldn’t bring back some ladies to spend time with.

My last roomate in the barracks was a 26 year old guy who liked to watch movies with his girlfriend in bed, not 10 feet from me. I’m sure they wanted more privacy, and I’d do my best to give them that when I could as long as it didn’t iterfere with my sleep. Hell, I had my (then) girlfriend stay some nights with me.

Ok, my point – you let openly gay men serve and live in the same barracks, they no longer have to keep thier sexual lives hidden. I can tolerate my squadleader or one of my soldiers bringing back a girl to his bunk to get some R&R – but a gay fella bringing back another man (military or not) to snuggle on the bed? Or to have some sex hoping your buddy don’t wake up?

Trust me, men and women have sex in the barracks all the time, it is what happens when you have young people all living close).

It isn’t that we all think the gay soldiers are suddenly going to try and rape us. But gay men are more sexually active and have more partners, and they’ll be bringing that stuff around instead of keeping it off to the side to keep unit cohesion.

I’m not going to be forced to live with someone that has a lifestyle that is an affront to my religious and moral values.

spec_ops_mateo

Ok so basically your stance is that gay men shouldn’t allowed to be openly gay around you because that might mean you have to have them fooling around with other men around you. How is that any different from a closeted gay man being forced to watch you have sex with your girlfriends near him?

And the part about it being against your religious and moral values is laughable considering you make it sound like those particular morals and values don’t preclude you from having pre-marital sex. I don’t agree with homosexuality either because of my beliefs btw but your argument against them being open doesn’t hold up because of your own actions.

As I said before, this is all a bunch of excuses and I have yet to see a legit argument in this thread supporting the continuation of current policies.

highhopes on July 9, 2008 at 4:12 PM

How are you disputing my statement?

All you’ve done is add more people who lie. I never said that only homosexuals lie. I’ve only said that DADT forces them to lie or else get kicked out, which is exactly how the policy works.

I will go with the many… and I am tired of cowtowing.

upinak on July 9, 2008 at 4:41 PM

I understand.

dedalus on July 9, 2008 at 4:29 PM

No, and as long as their detrimental lifestyle choices remains outside the military, I don’t see the problem. It’s when the adulterers partner starts calling the command for child support or the homosexual starts dating his tent-mate that the military should deal with either situation.

DADT is simply nothing more than keeping the lifestyle choices private. I’ve served with individuals who were clearly gay but I didn’t care what they did on their own any more than I would want to know about the sex life of any co-worker.

Esthier on July 9, 2008 at 3:46 PM

I understand what you are saying.

But it is like this when it comes to this project. Are you willing to treat with special regard the few … or go off what is right for the good of the many?

I will go with the many… and I am tired of cowtowing.

Military people who engage in behaviors counter to good order and discipline lie too. Adulterers will lie about affairs with co-workers. Officers will lie about having sexual relations with enlisted troops. Drug abusers will lie about their off duty activities….. etc.

Legitimizing a counter-cultural lifestyle choice is decidedly against good order and discipline.

highhopes on July 9, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Should an adulterer be treated differently than a homosexual, assuming that both engage in their activity outside of the military?

I haven’t been given many reasons that it isn’t except for the idea that homosexuals are forced to lie, but that’s a problem that seems to only affect homosexuals and not the military at large.

Not true. Military people who engage in behaviors counter to good order and discipline lie too. Adulterers will lie about affairs with co-workers. Officers will lie about having sexual relations with enlisted troops. Drug abusers will lie about their off duty activities….. etc.

The fact of the matter the gay agenda demands that homosexuals be seen as victims when, in reality, the military doesn’t care about sexual orientation beyond how it affects the unit. Legitimizing a counter-cultural lifestyle choice is decidedly against good order and discipline. The dirty little secret that the gay activists refuse to admit is that legitimizing homosexuality would result in a massive attrition of trained troops unwilling to put up with the new order and they could clear out San Francisco and still not get enough homosexuals to fill the holes left behind- even if they stood up the Big Pink 69 Division to create a gays-only military command.

I don’t disagree.

dedalus on July 9, 2008 at 3:46 PM

I love double negatives. They’re useful but sometimes momentarily confusing.

Trust me. DADT is the best solution. All the way around.

upinak on July 9, 2008 at 3:42 PM

I haven’t been given many reasons that it isn’t except for the idea that homosexuals are forced to lie, but that’s a problem that seems to only affect homosexuals and not the military at large.

On the other hand, many have made arguments to the effect that outing homosexuals in the military will negatively affect it.

I get your point, and it’s decent. But I also get the point being made that unique environments exist in the military which make homosexuality a different issue than it would be under normal working conditions.

Esthier on July 9, 2008 at 3:39 PM

I don’t disagree.

Esthier on July 9, 2008 at 3:39 PM

Trust me. DADT is the best solution. All the way around.

My point is most people would be more concerned with whether the ER doctor paid attention in Med school than who they were having sex with at home.

dedalus on July 9, 2008 at 3:33 PM

Sure, but that’s partially because the ER doctor gets to go home.

Sure, though an ER doctor not only sees naked bodies (of whichever gender they are attracted to), but can touch, probe and pentrate those bodies often while the patient is unconscious.

Well, not alone.

I get your point, and it’s decent. But I also get the point being made that unique environments exist in the military which make homosexuality a different issue than it would be under normal working conditions.

As to the second half, I’m not expert, but I would assume all (or nearly all) of those civilian jobs are a little more relaxed in shower times, at least more relaxed than Professor Blather’s description.

Esthier on July 9, 2008 at 3:16 PM

Sure, though an ER doctor not only sees naked bodies (of whichever gender they are attracted to), but can touch, probe and pentrate those bodies often while the patient is unconscious.

My point is most people would be more concerned with whether the ER doctor paid attention in Med school than who they were having sex with at home.

One difference is it is standard for homosexuals to shower with the same gender from an early age through adulthood.

Good point, though I would think that’s the only difference. What else is there?

As to the second half, I’m not expert, but I would assume all (or nearly all) of those civilian jobs are a little more relaxed in shower times, at least more relaxed than Professor Blather’s description.

Did it have a good outcome eventualy? Sure… but it was not done for purely social reasons.

Romeo13 on July 8, 2008 at 3:23 PM

Thanks for the insight. It makes sense.

If yes to either situation, then why would 3 gay guys showering day after day, dressing and sleeping, with men (whom they are physically attracted to) be any different…wouldn’t they be “driven” or distracted by all of exposed sexuality?

right2bright on July 9, 2008 at 2:09 PM

One difference is it is standard for homosexuals to shower with the same gender from an early age through adulthood.

Do you think we should prevent gay people from serving as ER doctors, policemen or firemen? In the course of their jobs they may see naked people or share close living conditions.

I like the way you think.

Alden Pyle on July 9, 2008 at 12:55 PM

:)

Also, I find it hilarious the dichotomy of the Left pushing a study to get gays in the military while holding hands with Osama.

Oh, the webs we weave when we practice to deceive!

upinak on July 9, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Those are just the ones she tried during arguments.

Squid Shark on July 9, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Only 5? Did she ever mention Duct Tape and your head? I think that is my favorite!