For crying out loud.... Gays in the military.

[Midnight Marauder]

Just saw where they are considering having a one-star general review any case of a gay or lesbian being kicked out of the military. Is this silly or what?

Instead of making it simple, they introduce another level of bureaucracy and red tape for what? To appease everyone?

My take: I don't go to bed at night worrying that there might be homosexuals and/or bisexuals in our armed forces. They want to volunteer to serve? Volunteer to potentially take a bullet or a bomb for me? Volunteer to die serving this country? LET THEM! It doesn't make a red rat's ass what their sexual orientation is!

Just DROP the regulation which disallows service because of orientation. Simple.

What say you?

 

[Baruch Menachem]

From the time of Achilles gays have made good soldiers.

The problem is not gayness, but fear of abuse of subordinates.

Rather than banning, perhaps we should make sexual abuse of a subordinate a shooting offense?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

From the time of Achilles gays have made good soldiers.

The problem is not gayness, but fear of abuse of subordinates.

Rather than banning, perhaps we should make sexual abuse of a subordinate a shooting offense?

The UCMJ addresses abuse, subordinates or otherwise. The problem IS "gayness" otherwise gays wouldn't be singled out with a special ban.

 

[Article 15]

I say it's stupid, MM.

Just repeal the DADT and drop the hammer on anyone who tries anything on a gay soldier.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I say it's stupid, MM.

Just repeal the DADT and drop the hammer on anyone who tries anything on a gay soldier.

That makes alot more sense than what I heard today. If they just enforce the regs they have without regard to race, gender, national origin, or orientation and so on, what's the problem?

 

[Article 15]

I say it's stupid, MM.

Just repeal the DADT and drop the hammer on anyone who tries anything on a gay soldier.

That makes alot more sense than what I heard today. If they just enforce the regs they have without regard to race, gender, national origin, or orientation and so on, what's the problem?

They would have to drop the portion of the UCMJ that makes sodomy illegal but I'm with you ... there shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I say it's stupid, MM.

Just repeal the DADT and drop the hammer on anyone who tries anything on a gay soldier.

That makes alot more sense than what I heard today. If they just enforce the regs they have without regard to race, gender, national origin, or orientation and so on, what's the problem?

They would have to drop the portion of the UCMJ that makes sodomy illegal but I'm with you ... there shouldn't be a problem.

They wouldn't have to drop that, it's under the "damaging of govt property" part and that includes sunburns even. Sodomy can be hazardous and if you contract AIDS that way, or get rectal damage that way, or whatever, you have damaged government property. That would be the charge, not "sodomy" per se.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I say it's stupid, MM.

Just repeal the DADT and drop the hammer on anyone who tries anything on a gay soldier.

That makes alot more sense than what I heard today. If they just enforce the regs they have without regard to race, gender, national origin, or orientation and so on, what's the problem?

They would have to drop the portion of the UCMJ that makes sodomy illegal but I'm with you ... there shouldn't be a problem.

Actually, getting a bj is sodomy as well, and lemmie tell you.....if she won't gobble, I don't play.

But........you have to actually be caught in the act in order to be brought up on charges. I mean......did YOU prosecute some young dude because he was bragging about his first blowjob?

Shouldn't be a problem. Me? I've served from 1982 until 2002, and have noticed one thing about gay soldiers.

They pay attention to detail, and the military trains you to do that. Gays already have a bit of a head start, because if they didn't pay attention to detail growing up, they generally got hurt or ridiculed or worse.

Why does the military teach attention to detail? Because if you miss something, people die.

Let the gays serve openly. Not only would the straights be protected under the UCMJ, but the gays would also be protected if they were allowed to be open about their sexuality. If they're getting hassled because they're gay, it's like being hassled because you're a redneck, or black, or whatever.

Besides, during my 20 year career, I served with gays since my first command and never had a problem. Was propositioned by a gay servicemember ONCE, but when I told them I was straight, never had a problem after that.

If you think about it, it's kinda like some girl who you like, but not sexually walks up to you and asks. If you say no, you still remain friends.

Lot less hassle if you can be open about who you are when you're serving. And, if you're biologically a male, you wear male uniforms, if you're biologically a female, you wear female uniforms. No cross dressing.

Even though politicians like Guilliani do it......

 

[rdean]

From the time of Achilles gays have made good soldiers.

The problem is not gayness, but fear of abuse of subordinates.

Rather than banning, perhaps we should make sexual abuse of a subordinate a shooting offense?

They should do the same for those that harrass women, right?

 

[manu1959]

we should create an all gay brigade and advertise that if we catch any of them muslims they will be tea bagged....

 

[xotoxi]

Rather than banning, perhaps we should make sexual abuse of a subordinate a shooting offense?

There shouldn't be any sexual abuse in the military, subordinate or not. Gay or straight.