Gays in the millitary?? No fair!!

[Father Time]

22 years on active duty US Army.
You don't know jack about taking orders.

>> Really? How do yo know? Making a lot of assumptions aren't you.

Fortunately I retired in 93 and didn't have to deal with DADT much.

And if you don't like the protection your rights have been provided you are more than welcome to use one of those rights and leave.

>> What "protection"? And I certainly have a right to question the way in which our military - paid for by US tax dollars - gets used when I feel that it reflects poorly on us. That's what I'm criticizing. For someone so gung ho to rep his own (questionable) service, you sure are sensitive.

You can have your opinion, but you don't have a right to tell soldiers how to run the Army

Bullshit, it's paid for by our taxes and the army is supposed to serve us not the other way around. I swear the DADT crowd here is getting more and desperate.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

22 years on active duty US Army.
You don't know jack about taking orders.

>> Really? How do yo know? Making a lot of assumptions aren't you.

Fortunately I retired in 93 and didn't have to deal with DADT much.

And if you don't like the protection your rights have been provided you are more than welcome to use one of those rights and leave.

>> What "protection"? And I certainly have a right to question the way in which our military - paid for by US tax dollars - gets used when I feel that it reflects poorly on us. That's what I'm criticizing. For someone so gung ho to rep his own (questionable) service, you sure are sensitive.

You can have your opinion, but you don't have a right to tell soldiers how to run the Army

Bullshit, it's paid for by our taxes and the army is supposed to serve us not the other way around. I swear the DADT crowd here is getting more and desperate.

You cleary have issues mate, your taxpayer dollars pay the salaries of politicians, even the ones you disagree with yet you don't dictate anything to them. Military service members do pay taxes too which means if paying taxes equals dictating policy service members are well within their rights to dictate their own policies. You are not in the military so you don't dictate anything to service members, you're supposed to shut up and let them do what they voluntarily signed up to do.

 

[Father Time]

Why do you need to fire them over being openly homosexual?

Why do they need to openly proclaim their homosexuality to do their jobs is the question you need to ponder.

No I don't, it's your stupid rules, you defend them. It's all ready been shown how this rule
forces the military to fire needed translators, so we've demonstrated harm in keeping it.

We who are already serving know the problems that people who are perceived to be homosexual cause, it creates a hostile work environment for both the perceived homosexual and those he has to work with.

Proof? Although I'm sure integrating blacks did the same thing.

Unless a soldier is caught engaging in homosexual acts and or admits he is gay we have no grounds to discharge a soldier under Chapter 15.

So you're OK with firing soldiers over something that happens in their private lives that has no bearing over workplace performance?

If anyone calls a soldier a homosexual and cannot back up their claims they run the risk of getting slammed for sexual harrassment and starting rumors in the workplace. The gay soldiers know this and some of them threaten other soldiers with charges of sexual harrassment if the alleged gay soldier has even the slightest impression that someone is mistreating them because of their perceived sexuality. This is how having homosexuals in the military workplace causes disruption and destroys unit cohesion.

No that would be an example of how people who file phoney sexual harassment charges disrupt cohesion. Although someone harassing someone because they're gay deserves discipline a hell of a lot more than being gay.

 

[Father Time]

You can have your opinion, but you don't have a right to tell soldiers how to run the Army

Bullshit, it's paid for by our taxes and the army is supposed to serve us not the other way around. I swear the DADT crowd here is getting more and desperate.

You cleary have issues mate, your taxpayer dollars pay the salaries of politicians, even the ones you disagree with yet you don't dictate anything to them. Military service members do pay taxes too which means if paying taxes equals dictating policy service members are well within their rights to dictate their own policies. You are not in the military so you don't dictate anything to service members, you're supposed to shut up and let them do what they voluntarily signed up to do.

I pay taxes therefore I get to complain about how the military is run.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

You damn gay loving liberals crack me up talking about taxpayer dollars and you "right" to dictate military policies, well guess what, there are many other taxpayers who are for DADT yet the reality is that neither of us have the right to tell the military how to conduct business, if you want to dictate it join the military otherwise shut your doggone traps about what you think your taxpayer dollars dictate.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Bullshit, it's paid for by our taxes and the army is supposed to serve us not the other way around. I swear the DADT crowd here is getting more and desperate.

You cleary have issues mate, your taxpayer dollars pay the salaries of politicians, even the ones you disagree with yet you don't dictate anything to them. Military service members do pay taxes too which means if paying taxes equals dictating policy service members are well within their rights to dictate their own policies. You are not in the military so you don't dictate anything to service members, you're supposed to shut up and let them do what they voluntarily signed up to do.

I pay taxes therefore I get to complain about how the military is run.

You can complain all the hell you like just like anyone else, but you have no right to dictate what goes on in the military neither are you qualified to say whats best for the troops. Instead complaining about so called homophobic members and how bad DADT with your gay activism you need to appreciate the fact that they're sacrificing lives to protect all Americans, gay and straight.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Quick question..........is actionable intelligence as it concerns the enemy a good thing?

What if that same intel comes from a gay service member? Is it suspect then?

 

[SFC Ollie]

22 years on active duty US Army.
You don't know jack about taking orders.

>> Really? How do yo know? Making a lot of assumptions aren't you.

Fortunately I retired in 93 and didn't have to deal with DADT much.

And if you don't like the protection your rights have been provided you are more than welcome to use one of those rights and leave.

>> What "protection"? And I certainly have a right to question the way in which our military - paid for by US tax dollars - gets used when I feel that it reflects poorly on us. That's what I'm criticizing. For someone so gung ho to rep his own (questionable) service, you sure are sensitive.

Questionable service? You are a comedian now?

 

[SFC Ollie]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

So for 25 years you continually broke the regulations by allowing these gay sailors to serve?

 

[ACG22]

Explain to me how a policy that specifically forbids gays to openly flaunt their sexuality is blatantly discriminatory?

>> Well, it's easy if you understand what the words "blatant" and "discrimination" mean. It's really that simple. It's a policy that singles out a specific group and attempts to control their behavior. Ergo, discrimination.

I'd like to also know where the hate and hypocrisy lies.

>> The hate is evidenced in the policy itself, as hatred is a main catalyst for blatant discrimination. Do you know anyone who lovingly practices racism? And the hypocrisy comes in the form of the execution of the policy. But hypocrisy and discrimination tend to go hand-in-hand.

I am actually in uniform and currently serving, you haven't the slightest clkue what you're talking about.

>> How do you know? You don't know anything about me. Assume much?

If DADT is rescinded and gays are allowed to openly flaunt their sexuality whats going to be the next step, transexuals demanding the right to dress up and act like the opposite sex since their 'transexuality' has no bearing on their work performance and duties?

>> How is it that conservatives always jump to the most illogical conclusions in situations like this? It's like asking if legalizing gay marriage will lead to legal bestiality. Try understanding the basics and the principles at work.

I don't want a difunctional Army that morrors the depravity seen in society, we're discpline professionals, if someone wants to live like a dysfunctional civilian they don't need to join the Army.

First off, the Army already does mirror the depravity in society as it is comprised of that self-same society. In some cases it's actually worse. Further, your misguided notion of homosexuality as 'depravity' speaks volumes about the close-minded world you wish existed but thankfully does not.

DADT is a good-intentioned but ultimately wrongly thought out policy and should be rescinded. The military survived the integration of ethnic groups, and it will do the same with this minority. It's just a matter of time.

 

[Gadawg73]

Because you hate God and ignore His Laws He stated.Leviticus 18:22.GLBT are nothing but sick and perverted heathens who are equal to dogs and pigs who live on their vomit and feces.Deal with it.

Why do Christians get to pick and choose which Bible verses are relevant?

Try reading the rest of Leviticus *****... then come back and keep passing judgment on people who have no significant influence in your hypocritical and pathetic life.

Moses said this.Do not outsmart God's people.It is written,"Thou shall not lie next to a mankind as with a womankind.Tha's abomination against your God'.Lev.18:22.In New Testament,St Paul who is a prisoner of Lord Jesus Christ wrote more condemnations in The Book of Romans 1:26-32 and gays are reprobate perverts who deserve Hell.

You left out 99% of the other sins.
The Bible states you are going to hell for eating BBQ pork sandwiches and shell fish.
Show me where Jesus stated anything negative about homosexuals.
Look hard because it is no where.
Why is that?
Jesus was Jewish. The Old Testament is old Jewish law and Jesus rebeled against that. He was a radical for his time for a Jew.
Jesus taught that we need to be Christlike. Love thy neighbor and do not judge them.
Shed the shackles of Jewish Old Testament, come to Jesus and join the modern world friend. You will feel better getting rid of all that hate.

 

[ACG22]

Questionable service? You are a comedian now?

>> It's a message board, guy. You can claim to be Bigfoot if you like, but it doesn't mean diddly to me.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Why do Christians get to pick and choose which Bible verses are relevant?

Try reading the rest of Leviticus *****... then come back and keep passing judgment on people who have no significant influence in your hypocritical and pathetic life.

Moses said this.Do not outsmart God's people.It is written,"Thou shall not lie next to a mankind as with a womankind.Tha's abomination against your God'.Lev.18:22.In New Testament,St Paul who is a prisoner of Lord Jesus Christ wrote more condemnations in The Book of Romans 1:26-32 and gays are reprobate perverts who deserve Hell.

You left out 99% of the other sins.
The Bible states you are going to hell for eating BBQ pork sandwiches and shell fish.
Show me where Jesus stated anything negative about homosexuals.
Look hard because it is no where.
Why is that?
Jesus was Jewish. The Old Testament is old Jewish law and Jesus rebeled against that. He was a radical for his time for a Jew.
Jesus taught that we need to be Christlike. Love thy neighbor and do not judge them.
Shed the shackles of Jewish Old Testament, come to Jesus and join the modern world friend. You will feel better getting rid of all that hate.

Yep. What they said.

Know what I find most interesting about "Christians"? One of their main points to beat others over the head with is the book of Leviticus.

Book of Leviticus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Leviticus)

Leviticus (Greek: Λευιτικός, "relating to the Levites") or Vayikra (Hebrew: ויקרא‎, literally "and He called") is the third book of the Hebrew Bible, and the third of five books of the Torah/Pentateuch.

Leviticus contains laws and priestly rituals, but in a wider sense is about the working out of God's covenant with Israel set out in Genesis and Exodus – what is seen in the Torah as the consequences of entering into a special relationship with God (specifically, Yahweh). These consequences are set out in terms of community relationships and behaviour.

The first 16 chapters and the last chapter make up the Priestly Code, with rules for ritual cleanliness, sin-offerings, and the Day of Atonement, including Chapter 12 which mandates male circumcision. Chapters 17-26 contain the Holiness Code, including the injunction in chapter 19 to "love one's neighbor as oneself" (the Great Commandment). The book is largely concerned with "abominations", largely dietary and sexual restrictions. The rules are generally addressed to the Israelites, except for several prohibitions which are applied equally to "the strangers that sojourn in Israel."

According to tradition, Moses authored Leviticus[1] as well as the other four books of the Torah.[2] However, modern biblical scholars believe Leviticus to be almost entirely from the priestly source (P), marked by emphasis on priestly concerns, composed c 550-400 BC, and incorporated into the Torah c 400 BC.[3]

Now, basically that means that Leviticus is a manual for the High Priests of Israel. Now, if you're a Protestant, are you going to use Catholic masses and rituals in your church services? No. Why? You believe a different dogma. So do the Christians when it comes to Levitical laws.

And......then there is this from a place on the 'net called "Sacred Texts Archive", which is a scholarly site (much like other college sites where scholars put their work online) dedicated to almost every belief system on the planet.

Here's what it states about gays.....

* Of 32,000 verses in the Bible, only five directly mention homosexuality.
* The Qur'an only directly mentions homosexuality once.
* Leviticus, the book of the Bible which stipulates death for homosexuality, requires the same punishment for adultery, pre-marital sex, disobedient children and blasphemy.
* The Biblical Jesus does not condemn homosexuality.
* The destruction of the Biblical city of Sodom was due to their mistreatment of strangers.
* The Bible never condemns same sex marriage.
* The Biblical David and Jonathan had a formal same-sex union.
* 'Traditional marriage' in the Bible includes polygamy.
* No known sacred text forbids same sex marriage.
* Very few sacred texts even mention homosexuality.
* Hindu and other far eastern sacred texts do not condemn homosexuality.
* Homosexuality is not unnatural, it is practised by hundreds of species of animals.

LGBT Texts

The New Testament

However, in at least one passage in the NT, marriage is defined as monogamous. In Mark 10:2-12), Jesus is quoted as saying:

10:2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.

10:3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?

10:4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.

10:5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.

10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

10:7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

10:8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

10:9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

10:10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.

10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.

10:12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

One reader commented that this passage proves that Jesus "hated [gays]". but I'm not sure how he came away with that conclusion. If you take this at face value, it says that remarriage after divorce is equivalent to adultery. The passage 10:6-9 is just a restatement of the passage from Genesis, leading up to the conclusion 'let no man put asunder'. In 10:10-12, Jesus explains the concept again, just in case we missed the point the first time around. As usual, the language attributed to Jesus is very specific and transparent.

Also of interest is 1 Timothy 4:1:

4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

4:3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth

4:4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

4:5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

Here Paul disapproves of the prohibition of marriage, as well as the practise of vegetarianism. This is probably a reference to a Gnostic group, some of whom were vegetarians. A few Gnostics and early Christians were opposed to marriage in any form (including monogamous, heterosexual marriage). Marriage was considered a grave sin by some of the early Church fathers, and the only way into the kingdom of heaven to be the lifelong mortification of the flesh. This passage by Paul from the Epistles weighs in against this particular concept. On the other hand, some Gnostics and early Christians practiced group marriage, taking 'holding all things in common' to the extreme.

One wonders about Paul's condemnation of vegetarians. Will some future US President float a constitutional ammendment mandating that vegetarians eat meat? Will conservative Christians organize abusive demonstrations at health food stores? Does God hate tofu?

The sanctioned form of marriage in Judaism and Christianity has continued to evolve over the centuries. Policies on divorce have varied widely. There was a liturgy for same sex unions in one branch of the Eastern Orthodox church. During the Middle Ages and well into the renaissance, the vast majority of European marriages were 'common-law,' and had no religious sanction: church weddings were far too expensive for most people. Mormons originally practised polygamy, although they ceased that as a condition for Utah statehood. Today, same sex unions are consecrated in some liberal Jewish and Christian denominations.

In general, society has changed the definition of marriage widely, and religion has followed by sanctioning it.

Some interpret the passages above to imply condemnation of gay marriage, or to justify their prejudices against LGBT people. The reader is encouraged to look at the entire context and make up their own mind.

LGBT Texts

So yeah......tell us all again how much Yeshua hated gays.

 

[ACG22]

Hey, quit using logic and their own words against them, ABS; they hate that!

 

[maineman]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

So for 25 years you continually broke the regulations by allowing these gay sailors to serve?

they never flaunted their sexuality, and I never made a point of directly asking them.... sometimes, things are tacitly understood.

I broke NO regulations, sarge.

 

[maineman]

You damn gay loving liberals crack me up talking about taxpayer dollars and you "right" to dictate military policies, well guess what, there are many other taxpayers who are for DADT yet the reality is that neither of us have the right to tell the military how to conduct business, if you want to dictate it join the military otherwise shut your doggone traps about what you think your taxpayer dollars dictate.

the constitution is pretty explicit about civilian control of the military. civilians dictate military policies ALL the time.

 

[SFC Ollie]

If you knew and did not report it you broke the regulations.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I have yet to hear the answer to my question, would you rather WONDER about who is checking you out in the shower or KNOW who is gay so you can avoid showing them you package?



STILL no answer to this question. Oh and for all you "straights" out there who think that gay men are just SALIVATING at the chance to "hit" on you, GET OVER YOURSELVES!!! I have gone to "gay" bars (dance clubs) with both girlfriends and female friends because THEY don't want to get pawed at and HIT ON by guys all night and guess what, despite the fact that I'm a good looking guy I never got hit on ONCE because gay men have a pretty good idea of who is and is NOT gay. If you are so ******* freaked out about it then just make sure those around you know you are NOT interested in men and you will NEVER be "hit on" by a gay man I GUARENFUCKINGTEE IT!!!



I think the REAL problem is these HOMOPHOBES assume that gay men will have the same type of LECHEROUS personality that THEY do so they ASSUME a gay man wouldn't be able to go a day without hitting on EVERY MAN on post which is, OF COURSE, total BULLSHIT!

Really "The Bass" I ASSURE you you don't have to worry about a gay man hitting on you, I PROMISE!!! And even IF one does just explain that you like ***** and you will NEVER have to tell another gay man again because it will be KNOWN that you are a "straight". See how EASY that is? So simple a CAVEMAN like YOU can do it.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Quote: Originally Posted by Flaylo
We who are already serving know the problems that people who are perceived to be homosexual cause, it creates a hostile work environment for both the perceived homosexual and those he has to work with.




HOLY SHIT!!!!!! PERCEIVED homosexuals!!!?? So I guess you are advocating DESTROYING a man's CAREER because he is PERCEIVED to be HOMOSEXUAL!!! Now you REALLY understand why DADT is such a HORRIBLE policy. Well I'm sure YOU don't understand but the REST of us DO!

 

[maineman]

If you knew and did not report it you broke the regulations.

"knew" it? what the **** does that mean? If it is apparent yet there is no homosexual acts committed, and no one has admitted anything, what regulation did I break?

I'll wait.