A Marine's take on DADT, I agree with it

[Ravi]

How difficult would it to have different shower times for different orientations?

It is not about a soldier worrying about a homosexual attacking him for sexual reasons.
Socirety for many years painted homosexual men as "sissies".

Yes, such is wrong, but it is still the perception many have.

How willing will a soldier be , who is policitcally incorrect in his thinking, if he feels the man who has his back is a "sissy"?

Yes, his thinking is wrong, but it is still his thinking.

Stop being naive...it is an emotional thing. On the field we can not ask our soldiers to wipe out of their minds something that they believe...whether they are right or wrong.

I once knew a gay marine...he was a captain or something. As far as I could tell those in his charge trusted and respected him.

But you seem to be saying to make special accommodations for homophobes but not for gay people...that's messed up, imo.

 

[Jarhead]

What many of you fail to understand is how the mind can affect you when in the heat AND danger of battle.
Whether the thinking is just or not is irrelevant. Me, personally? I have no issue with my wingman being a homosexual.
But all of you are being naive if you think that many out there, for good or for bad, dont think that homosexuals are different. Many do. It is slowly changing, but as of now, many still do.
This polkicy needs to be addressed from a reality situation not from a PC stance...
If a soldier has an issue with his wingman being a homosexual, he may be politically wrong, but it can create a dangerous situation for the two of them.
I do not see homosexuals as sexual deviants...I see them as people with different sexual preferences than I do.
But lets be real here....many srtill see them as different and until that is cleared up in society, it could be life threatening on the battlefield.

Attitudes change..

Many soldiers had the same feelings about blacks being their wingmen. Blacks were said to lack the inteligence and skills of whites. They were OK for menial labor but critical combat needed to be handled by whites. The Tuskegee airmen was a good example of changing attitudes to wingmen

In the late 70s it was attitudes towards women in uniform that changed. Women would break down and cry under stress, they lacked the physical strength. Women were best suited to be typists and nurses, leave the real jobs to the men

All it takes is a chance. The old... "I still don't trust blacks, but I served with so and so and he did a good job" Once gays openly serve, most soldiers will just say it is not such a big deal

Tuskagee is a classic example.....yes, they were ostersized and had their own squad....and since, their success proved to be a trurning point in thinking toward black soldiers.

And trust me, if there were an all Gay brigade or squad...the same would come to light in time.

But there isnt and there hasnt been...and God willing, there never will be.

We can argue this till the cows come home. The bottom line is many poeople think wrong, but we can not ask them to change their thinking while on the battlefield.

I disagree with the reason for DADT....but I agree with the need for it.

 

[Jarhead]

How difficult would it to have different shower times for different orientations?

It is not about a soldier worrying about a homosexual attacking him for sexual reasons.
Socirety for many years painted homosexual men as "sissies".

Yes, such is wrong, but it is still the perception many have.

How willing will a soldier be , who is policitcally incorrect in his thinking, if he feels the man who has his back is a "sissy"?

Yes, his thinking is wrong, but it is still his thinking.

Stop being naive...it is an emotional thing. On the field we can not ask our soldiers to wipe out of their minds something that they believe...whether they are right or wrong.

I once knew a gay marine...he was a captain or something. As far as I could tell those in his charge trusted and respected him.

But you seem to be saying to make special accommodations for homophobes but not for gay people...that's messed up, imo.

No...I am not saying that.
I would support the idea of telling all enlisted men that DADT is being lifted and if you have an issue with it you may leave the military even if your term has not come to fruition.

But we can not ask our military to go to battle with a gay wingman that they are aware is gay if they feel it may endanger them. Even though it wont endanger them, if they have ven the slightest hesitation, it can create a disaster.

 

[The Rabbi]

What many of you fail to understand is how the mind can affect you when in the heat AND danger of battle.
Whether the thinking is just or not is irrelevant. Me, personally? I have no issue with my wingman being a homosexual.
But all of you are being naive if you think that many out there, for good or for bad, dont think that homosexuals are different. Many do. It is slowly changing, but as of now, many still do.
This polkicy needs to be addressed from a reality situation not from a PC stance...
If a soldier has an issue with his wingman being a homosexual, he may be politically wrong, but it can create a dangerous situation for the two of them.
I do not see homosexuals as sexual deviants...I see them as people with different sexual preferences than I do.
But lets be real here....many srtill see them as different and until that is cleared up in society, it could be life threatening on the battlefield.

Attitudes change..

Many soldiers had the same feelings about blacks being their wingmen. Blacks were said to lack the inteligence and skills of whites. They were OK for menial labor but critical combat needed to be handled by whites. The Tuskegee airmen was a good example of changing attitudes to wingmen

In the late 70s it was attitudes towards women in uniform that changed. Women would break down and cry under stress, they lacked the physical strength. Women were best suited to be typists and nurses, leave the real jobs to the men

All it takes is a chance. The old... "I still don't trust blacks, but I served with so and so and he did a good job" Once gays openly serve, most soldiers will just say it is not such a big deal

Warning: Inappropriate analogy to civil rights spotted.
The inclusion of women in combat and near-combat units has been a disaster.

I personally don't care one way or another. But I think the decision ought to be the military's.

 

[rightwinger]

It is not about a soldier worrying about a homosexual attacking him for sexual reasons.
Socirety for many years painted homosexual men as "sissies".

Yes, such is wrong, but it is still the perception many have.

How willing will a soldier be , who is policitcally incorrect in his thinking, if he feels the man who has his back is a "sissy"?

Yes, his thinking is wrong, but it is still his thinking.

Stop being naive...it is an emotional thing. On the field we can not ask our soldiers to wipe out of their minds something that they believe...whether they are right or wrong.

I once knew a gay marine...he was a captain or something. As far as I could tell those in his charge trusted and respected him.

But you seem to be saying to make special accommodations for homophobes but not for gay people...that's messed up, imo.

No...I am not saying that.
I would support the idea of telling all enlisted men that DADT is being lifted and if you have an issue with it you may leave the military even if your term has not come to fruition.

But we can not ask our military to go to battle with a gay wingman that they are aware is gay if they feel it may endanger them. Even though it wont endanger them, if they have ven the slightest hesitation, it can create a disaster.

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

 

[The Rabbi]

I once knew a gay marine...he was a captain or something. As far as I could tell those in his charge trusted and respected him.

But you seem to be saying to make special accommodations for homophobes but not for gay people...that's messed up, imo.

No...I am not saying that.
I would support the idea of telling all enlisted men that DADT is being lifted and if you have an issue with it you may leave the military even if your term has not come to fruition.

But we can not ask our military to go to battle with a gay wingman that they are aware is gay if they feel it may endanger them. Even though it wont endanger them, if they have ven the slightest hesitation, it can create a disaster.

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

Which units have you served in?

 

[Jarhead]

I once knew a gay marine...he was a captain or something. As far as I could tell those in his charge trusted and respected him.

But you seem to be saying to make special accommodations for homophobes but not for gay people...that's messed up, imo.

No...I am not saying that.
I would support the idea of telling all enlisted men that DADT is being lifted and if you have an issue with it you may leave the military even if your term has not come to fruition.

But we can not ask our military to go to battle with a gay wingman that they are aware is gay if they feel it may endanger them. Even though it wont endanger them, if they have ven the slightest hesitation, it can create a disaster.

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

 

[rightwinger]

What many of you fail to understand is how the mind can affect you when in the heat AND danger of battle.
Whether the thinking is just or not is irrelevant. Me, personally? I have no issue with my wingman being a homosexual.
But all of you are being naive if you think that many out there, for good or for bad, dont think that homosexuals are different. Many do. It is slowly changing, but as of now, many still do.
This polkicy needs to be addressed from a reality situation not from a PC stance...
If a soldier has an issue with his wingman being a homosexual, he may be politically wrong, but it can create a dangerous situation for the two of them.
I do not see homosexuals as sexual deviants...I see them as people with different sexual preferences than I do.
But lets be real here....many srtill see them as different and until that is cleared up in society, it could be life threatening on the battlefield.

Attitudes change..

Many soldiers had the same feelings about blacks being their wingmen. Blacks were said to lack the inteligence and skills of whites. They were OK for menial labor but critical combat needed to be handled by whites. The Tuskegee airmen was a good example of changing attitudes to wingmen

In the late 70s it was attitudes towards women in uniform that changed. Women would break down and cry under stress, they lacked the physical strength. Women were best suited to be typists and nurses, leave the real jobs to the men

All it takes is a chance. The old... "I still don't trust blacks, but I served with so and so and he did a good job" Once gays openly serve, most soldiers will just say it is not such a big deal

Tuskagee is a classic example.....yes, they were ostersized and had their own squad....and since, their success proved to be a trurning point in thinking toward black soldiers.

And trust me, if there were an all Gay brigade or squad...the same would come to light in time.

But there isnt and there hasnt been...and God willing, there never will be.

We can argue this till the cows come home. The bottom line is many poeople think wrong, but we can not ask them to change their thinking while on the battlefield.

I disagree with the reason for DADT....but I agree with the need for it.

The point is that prejudice continues when you isolate one group from another. If you never worked with a black, your prejudices on their capabilities will continue because you have no personal experience to refute it.

I have worked side by side with gays throughout my career. Some of them weren't worth shit and some were pretty damned good at what they do........just like regular people

 

[Jarhead]

Attitudes change..

Many soldiers had the same feelings about blacks being their wingmen. Blacks were said to lack the inteligence and skills of whites. They were OK for menial labor but critical combat needed to be handled by whites. The Tuskegee airmen was a good example of changing attitudes to wingmen

In the late 70s it was attitudes towards women in uniform that changed. Women would break down and cry under stress, they lacked the physical strength. Women were best suited to be typists and nurses, leave the real jobs to the men

All it takes is a chance. The old... "I still don't trust blacks, but I served with so and so and he did a good job" Once gays openly serve, most soldiers will just say it is not such a big deal

Tuskagee is a classic example.....yes, they were ostersized and had their own squad....and since, their success proved to be a trurning point in thinking toward black soldiers.

And trust me, if there were an all Gay brigade or squad...the same would come to light in time.

But there isnt and there hasnt been...and God willing, there never will be.

We can argue this till the cows come home. The bottom line is many poeople think wrong, but we can not ask them to change their thinking while on the battlefield.

I disagree with the reason for DADT....but I agree with the need for it.

The point is that prejudice continues when you isolate one group from another. If you never worked with a black, your prejudices on their capabilities will continue because you have no personal experience to refute it.

I have worked side by side with gays throughout my career. Some of them weren't worth shit and some were pretty damned good at what they do........just like regular people

But if one of your co workers was a homophobe, his PC incorrect thinking would not endanger the life of anyone.

You can not compare real life with the field of battle.

 

[rightwinger]

No...I am not saying that.
I would support the idea of telling all enlisted men that DADT is being lifted and if you have an issue with it you may leave the military even if your term has not come to fruition.

But we can not ask our military to go to battle with a gay wingman that they are aware is gay if they feel it may endanger them. Even though it wont endanger them, if they have ven the slightest hesitation, it can create a disaster.

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

Are you saying that soldiers receive no combat training after basic? That they don't go to NTC? That they don't work and train with their squad and platoon? Of course live combat is different...but soldiers still make constant assessments of who they trust and who they dont

Are you implying that soldiers don't know who they trust and who isn't worth shit?

 

[Flaylo]

I see nobody has bothered to address with the Marine said in his letter. To homosexuals, anyone who doesn't accept their lifestyle for any reason is a homophobe, so if I as a senior NCO were to treat a homosexual soldiers with all the fairness and professionalism is regards to their duty performance but I rejected the homosexual lifestyle I woud still be a homophobe, even if I reated them on an NCOER with all Excellent ratings.

@rightwinger

Not accepting the homosexual lifestyle doesn't mean I hate anyone, this is the kind of bullshat I'm talking about.

 

[Ravi]

No...I am not saying that.
I would support the idea of telling all enlisted men that DADT is being lifted and if you have an issue with it you may leave the military even if your term has not come to fruition.

But we can not ask our military to go to battle with a gay wingman that they are aware is gay if they feel it may endanger them. Even though it wont endanger them, if they have ven the slightest hesitation, it can create a disaster.

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

A lot of people think Tom Brady is gay and I haven't noticed any problems with the Pats.

 

[Valerie]

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

A lot of people think Tom Brady is gay and I haven't noticed any problems with the Pats.

 

[The Rabbi]

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

Are you saying that soldiers receive no combat training after basic? That they don't go to NTC? That they don't work and train with their squad and platoon? Of course live combat is different...but soldiers still make constant assessments of who they trust and who they dont

Are you implying that soldiers don't know who they trust and who isn't worth shit?

Which units have you served in? What kind of combat training have you had?

 

[Jarhead]

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

Are you saying that soldiers receive no combat training after basic? That they don't go to NTC? That they don't work and train with their squad and platoon? Of course live combat is different...but soldiers still make constant assessments of who they trust and who they dont

Are you implying that soldiers don't know who they trust and who isn't worth shit?

I will say it again. Ones mindset in training is different when those munitions are aimed to kill.

 

[Jarhead]

You train with your wingman, you deal with him under routine conditions and under extreme stress. You test and assess the mettle of those around you on a daily basis. You know which soldiers you can trust and those you can't. That soldier may be black, muslim, female or gay. The assessment needs to be done on a case by case basis...just like any other soldier

You will ultimately decide....so and so is gay ...but he is a good soldier or he is not

lol...if you think that a soldiers thinking during basic is the same when real bullets are being used and fired to kill on the field of battle, you are sadly mistaken.

Simple fact...the intesnisty and mindset of a pro quarterback during practice is competely different during the game.

Your post is quite naive RW. You either have never been in the military or never been in the arena itself.

Basic and battle are night and day.

A lot of people think Tom Brady is gay and I haven't noticed any problems with the Pats.

I dont recall any lineman depending on Brady to defend their lives.

I dont aghree with the sentiment that Gays are sissies...but I am a realist. Many think they are.

 

[mdn2000]

Repeal not OK with Marine - Letters to the Editor - Stripes

"Even if a Marine Corps policy is set demanding that “official” family readiness programs accept homosexuals into their ranks, many families will resort to “unofficial” gatherings of the wives, creating a very unhealthy rift. As a professional, if “don’t ask, don’t tell” is repealed, I will treat homosexual Marines with professionalism and fairness when it comes to promotions, awards, assignments, etc., but I have no intention of ever accepting or promoting their lifestyle choice. It is a perversion of nature, not accepted by mainstream America and a violation of God’s principles. Even California could not legalize homosexual marriage, and that state is as liberal as it gets."


That bolded emphasis of mine is next to impossible to accomplish without being called a homophobe, if we as leaders are impartial with respect to awards, promotions, assignments yet reject the homosexual lifestyle and refuse to accept it potential homosexual service members are going to cry homophobia and say the military isn't doing enough. I'm sorry but the military cannot force its members to accept the homosexual lifestyle nor can it make rejecting it an offense punishable under the UCMJ.

Why are you afraid of being called a homophobe?

I am not afraid of being called a homophobe, people should fear that which can give them AIDS.

People should also fear homosexual men that rape children then murder them.

 

[Jarhead]

Repeal not OK with Marine - Letters to the Editor - Stripes

"Even if a Marine Corps policy is set demanding that “official” family readiness programs accept homosexuals into their ranks, many families will resort to “unofficial” gatherings of the wives, creating a very unhealthy rift. As a professional, if “don’t ask, don’t tell” is repealed, I will treat homosexual Marines with professionalism and fairness when it comes to promotions, awards, assignments, etc., but I have no intention of ever accepting or promoting their lifestyle choice. It is a perversion of nature, not accepted by mainstream America and a violation of God’s principles. Even California could not legalize homosexual marriage, and that state is as liberal as it gets."


That bolded emphasis of mine is next to impossible to accomplish without being called a homophobe, if we as leaders are impartial with respect to awards, promotions, assignments yet reject the homosexual lifestyle and refuse to accept it potential homosexual service members are going to cry homophobia and say the military isn't doing enough. I'm sorry but the military cannot force its members to accept the homosexual lifestyle nor can it make rejecting it an offense punishable under the UCMJ.

Why are you afraid of being called a homophobe?

I am not afraid of being called a homophobe, people should fear that which can give them AIDS.

People should also fear homosexual men that rape children then murder them.

The same as we should fear heterosexual individuals that can give them aids?
The same as we should fear heterosexual men that rape children and murder them?

I agree. But the difference between you and I is that I fear ALL people that have aids and dont admit it before sexual relations and I fear ALL people that rape and murder.

You seem to only fear the gay ones.

That makes you a homophobe.

 

[Flaylo]

People are still avoiding what was posted in the OP. For example, many chaplains organize couples retreats, if a chaplain who's religion that does not accept the homosexual lifestyle is pressed by homosexual couples to go the same retreats the military cannot make him go against his religion.

You dumbass are arguing over mundane issues.

 

[mdn2000]

Why are you afraid of being called a homophobe?

I am not afraid of being called a homophobe, people should fear that which can give them AIDS.

People should also fear homosexual men that rape children then murder them.

The same as we should fear heterosexual individuals that can give them aids?
The same as we should fear heterosexual men that rape children and murder them?

I agree. But the difference between you and I is that I fear ALL people that have aids and dont admit it before sexual relations and I fear ALL people that rape and murder.

You seem to only fear the gay ones.

That makes you a homophobe.

Oh, sorry, I thought this was a thread about homosexuality.

We should not fear heterosexual sex as much as homosexual sex. First and foremost is that fact that much of men having homosexual sex is the insertion of the penis in the anus which is literally a door to let human excrement exit the body. To equate pushing a penis into the rectum used to excrete human waste with putting the penis in a vagina, which is meant to allow entry for reproduction is nonsense. But it does make me wonder if Gay Guys eat corn to enhance the sexual pleasure of the top.

Rape and Murder are brutal. All boys raped by men are raped by homosexual men.

What is relevant is for some reason Homosexuals are doing something that nature never intended, hence is an enigma, an abnormality, a behavior. Homosexuality is a defect, from the perspective of nature.

So many types of people can be Homosexual, it is impossible to stereotype a homosexual, hence those that play with guns and bombs to kill, must ensure that those enlisting are of sound mind. To state any homosexual despite the degree of defect in controlling sexual behavior be allowed to serve is pure bullshit.

It is not only Homosexuals that get kicked out for sexual behavior that is abnormal.

Even within the Homosexual community it is recognized that some homosexuals are deviant.

How about people who love scat sex and are proud to let everyone know, do they have a right to serve if they make sure co-workers and peers identify themselves as loving Scat-sex.

What about people into "pony-girls", should they openly serve.

Adulteress, should they come out, proclaim they will screw your wife, and serve openly based on their sexual behavior.

Libels will have us believe that fear of that which kills is wrong.

So all you fools, dont be afraid, suck dick, take it in the ass, allow homosexuals in your home, in your bedroom, you dont have to be afraid, yes you can die but that is nothing to fear, its no big deal. Dont fear the cost of medical attention to fix your Hemorrhoids after a good ass fucking, dont fear the extra attention the military doctors will have to spend on specific homosexual soldiers.

Next is Transsexual's, they will have the perceived right to serve in combat.

Fear nothing, nothing can kill you, nothing can hurt the military, honest, listen to the Marxists, they only want capitalism to have the ability to protect the USA.

Call me names, I dont care, I served in the USMC, four years, I only heard of one gay incident, seems someone decided to give a guy a blow job while the man was asleep, that is an example of a homosexual who cannot control his sexual desire and behavior. Of course, Jarhead's difference is he does not fear this, it okay, nothing is wrong.

I do know a person who died of AIDS, my brother. I wish my brother was a homophobe, I loved him but boy did I hate him, what an asshole, putting the family through the pain of watching him die a slow, painful death. Last time I saw my brother I was afraid to touch him, had a couple diseases ravishing his body, I was very afraid that being weak he was a petri dish of virus and disease, justified fear, for my brother was being attacked by many viruses. Extremely painful to see.

I know of no Heterosexual that has died of AIDS, not one, yet 90% of my friends are Heterosexual.

Another fear induced by the government, Heterosexual AIDS.