Gays in the millitary?? No fair!!

[maineman]

That's like claiming unless you have been a murder victim you cannot have an informed opinion about murder.

no it's not... it's like stating that, unless you are a brain surgeon, you really can't talk, with any level of understanding, about the nuances of brain surgery. NOBODY knows what it's like to be in the military until they've actually been there.

So if someone spent five years studying brain surgery, was tutored by brain surgeons, and watched many operations they wouldn't be abe to intelligently discuss brain surgery unless they physically did it? There is legitimacy to your empirical claim but it's not nearly as cut dry as being stated. People who have never served can make their contributions to how the military is run. Ask Dick Cheney.

the few exceptions prove the general rule, however. Everyone can have an opinion as to how the military will react if gays are allowed to serve openly, but those individuals who have served, have the most valid basis for their opinions.

I served. My opinion is that the military will be just fine if gays are allowed to serve openly. More importantly, however, I really think that it is the sole decision of the commander in chief and he ought not to worry even a little bit as to how the service members will respond to his decision. The military exists to do the bidding of the civilian command authority, not the other way around. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do our die." Soldier and sailors with less than professional attitudes about their service who somehow forget the relationship between those in uniform and those in suits are free to leave if they do not wish to serve under changed circumstances. I would suggest that they not let the door hit them in the ass on their way out.

 

[Flaylo]

Yes it would be a good thing. The military, like any corporation or large entity relies primarily on people. Not objects. Bigots resigning help improve the human quality of the Units and nobody has irreplaceable skills so let the bigots leave because they cause more discord than the existence of gays themselves. Soldiers relying on each other is not about sexual orientation but character and honor. Frankly, I'd be a lot less confident of being in a Unit with bigots because in a firefight they could fail to do their duty out of bigotry and while failing, allow and/or cause harm to other Troops.

Troop morale is not built around who is ******* who. It's built around Americans who understand defending the Constitution cannot be successfully done by promoting the very discrimination the Constitution was designed to eradicate.

You're an idiot if you think people leaving the military, good soldiers who do great work that is, is a good thing just so you can promote your gay agenda.

Yet somehow gays being driven out for no good reason is a good thing if it can promote your anti-gay agenda.

Besides as it is these hypothetical know that they might all ready be working with gays, so I doubt it bothers them THAT much.

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

 

[CurveLight]

no it's not... it's like stating that, unless you are a brain surgeon, you really can't talk, with any level of understanding, about the nuances of brain surgery. NOBODY knows what it's like to be in the military until they've actually been there.

So if someone spent five years studying brain surgery, was tutored by brain surgeons, and watched many operations they wouldn't be abe to intelligently discuss brain surgery unless they physically did it? There is legitimacy to your empirical claim but it's not nearly as cut dry as being stated. People who have never served can make their contributions to how the military is run. Ask Dick Cheney.

the few exceptions prove the general rule, however. Everyone can have an opinion as to how the military will react if gays are allowed to serve openly, but those individuals who have served, have the most valid basis for their opinions.

I served. My opinion is that the military will be just fine if gays are allowed to serve openly. More importantly, however, I really think that it is the sole decision of the commander in chief and he ought not to worry even a little bit as to how the service members will respond to his decision. The military exists to do the bidding of the civilian command authority, not the other way around. "Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do our die." Soldier and sailors with less than professional attitudes about their service who somehow forget the relationship between those in uniform and those in suits are free to leave if they do not wish to serve under changed circumstances. I would suggest that they not let the door hit them in the ass on their way out.

I just don't like seeing the claim the absence of service is the presence of justified forced silence. As I said, Serving does give empirical evidence so we agree there.

However, the "ours is..." cliche is pure bullshit and the Prez should never be elevated to dictatorship type levels. The UCMJ outright contradicts that cliche because by Oath, every Soldier has a duty to question the morality and legality of ever order issued. Many career Officers, after resigning of course, have admitted they failed in their duties by simply following orders and not questioning the legitimacy of invading iraq. Our Soldiers are our Americans. They are not stoopid. They do not need a muzzle to maintain discipline. Theirs is to question why lest they die without understanding why.

 

[maineman]

You're an idiot if you think people leaving the military, good soldiers who do great work that is, is a good thing just so you can promote your gay agenda.

Yet somehow gays being driven out for no good reason is a good thing if it can promote your anti-gay agenda.

Besides as it is these hypothetical know that they might all ready be working with gays, so I doubt it bothers them THAT much.

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

you can't always get what you want...

if DADT is repealed, your nation expects you to salute and soldier on.

 

[CurveLight]

You're an idiot if you think people leaving the military, good soldiers who do great work that is, is a good thing just so you can promote your gay agenda.

Yet somehow gays being driven out for no good reason is a good thing if it can promote your anti-gay agenda.

Besides as it is these hypothetical know that they might all ready be working with gays, so I doubt it bothers them THAT much.

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

Why would it upset you?

 

[Flaylo]

the few exceptions prove the general rule, however. Everyone can have an opinion as to how the military will react if gays are allowed to serve openly, but those individuals who have served, have the most valid basis for their opinions.

I am currently serving in today's military and in the Army and I say rescinding DADT will hurt unit cohesion. I am now an NCO in the Aviation branch but for the first five years of my career I was a Forward Observer in Field Artillery Units, Cavalry Units and Infrantry Units and I can attest firsthand how homosexuality is looking down upon by the ground pounders who make the the bulk of the Army. maybe there were some gays in those units I served in, maybe not, but if there were you would never know and the entire unit prefered that. Having gays openly serve is going to dilute the espirit de corp and warrior attitude of the combat arms branches. When you think of the gallant infrantry or comabt arms soldier you don't think gay.

I served. My opinion is that the military will be just fine if gays are allowed to serve openly. More importantly, however, I really think that it is the sole decision of the commander in chief and he ought not to worry even a little bit as to how the service members will respond to his decision.

What military were you in? Lest you forget, you stated you served around men you knew to be gay and did nothing about it, so of course it would be fine with you, but you don't speak for the military. What works best for lonely sailors on a ship doesn't bode for the Army.

The military exists to do the bidding of the civilian command authority, not the other way around.

And if the military did the bidding of civilians and did those things that would lower recruitment and retention what good is that going to do?

"Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do our die."

That being your thinking I presume, why can't gays do the same thing with DADT? Why are you asking the proponents of DADT to do something you're not asking the opponents of DADT to do likewise? This isn't a one way avenue, it applies to all.

Soldier and sailors with less than professional attitudes about their service who somehow forget the relationship between those in uniform and those in suits are free to leave if they do not wish to serve under changed circumstances. I would suggest that they not let the door hit them in the ass on their way out.

Those servicemembers who are proponents of DADT are most certainly not "less than professional' just because your opinion isn't congruent with theirs. If those who you deem as less than professional really left the military in huge numbers and outnumbered the amount of those discharged under DADT, what are you to do? I know, instead of blaming a flawed decision to rescind DADT, you'd call all of those who left the military "unprofessional" homophobes.

 

[Flaylo]

Yet somehow gays being driven out for no good reason is a good thing if it can promote your anti-gay agenda.

Besides as it is these hypothetical know that they might all ready be working with gays, so I doubt it bothers them THAT much.

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

you can't always get what you want...

if DADT is repealed, your nation expects you to salute and soldier on.

What I want is for the military to increase cohesion and readiness, not promote and support one-sided homosexual activism just because some gays can't hack keeping their homosexuality to themselves while serving and want the entire military to know about it.

 

[Flaylo]

Yet somehow gays being driven out for no good reason is a good thing if it can promote your anti-gay agenda.

Besides as it is these hypothetical know that they might all ready be working with gays, so I doubt it bothers them THAT much.

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

Why would it upset you?

Anything immoral upsets me, no matter if its done by heterosexuals or homosexuals. I want the Army I serve in to be seen as the most professional and disciplined Army in the world where people put away selfishness and personal want in place of selfless service, scarifice and duty first.

 

[maineman]

I am currently serving in today's military and in the Army and I say rescinding DADT will hurt unit cohesion. I am now an NCO in the Aviation branch but for the first five years of my career I was a Forward Observer in Field Artillery Units, Cavalry Units and Infrantry Units and I can attest firsthand how homosexuality is looking down upon by the ground pounders who make the the bulk of the Army. maybe there were some gays in those units I served in, maybe not, but if there were you would never know and the entire unit prefered that. Having gays openly serve is going to dilute the espirit de corp and warrior attitude of the combat arms branches. When you think of the gallant infrantry or comabt arms soldier you don't think gay.

Again... it really has NOTHING to do with your opinion of what will happen to esprit de corps... the only question that is germane here is, will you salute and soldier on if DADT is repealed, or will you not? Will you do your best to implement the policies that are delineated by your chain of command, or will you be unprofessional and only pay them lip service?

What military were you in? Lest you forget, you stated you served around men you knew to be gay and did nothing about it, so of course it would be fine with you, but you don't speak for the military. What works best for lonely sailors on a ship doesn't bode for the Army.

I was in the United States Navy, but you already knew that, didn't you? Lest YOU forget, I did not break any regulations or fail to uphold ANY policies in place regarding gays in the military while I was on active duty. I never claimed to speak for the military, or even the Navy. You, however, do seem to be saying that YOU speak for all the groundpounders in the Army. A bit presumptious (and hypocritical), don't you think?

And if the military did the bidding of civilians and did those things that would lower recruitment and retention what good is that going to do?

That is none of your concern. If the civilian command authority told you that, starting tomorrow, you would walk around on your hands, the only two responses from you would be to either follow the directives of your chain of command like a professional, or leave the military. Take your choice.

That being your thinking I presume, why can't gays do the same thing with DADT? Why are you asking the proponents of DADT to do something you're not asking the opponents of DADT to do likewise? This isn't a one way avenue, it applies to all.

They do that today. Gay personnel serve in the closet now... and do so with bravery and professionalism. The decision to lift DADT is a civilian decision... you need to be ready to deal with it.

Those servicemembers who are proponents of DADT are most certainly not "less than professional' just because your opinion isn't congruent with theirs. If those who you deem as less than professional really left the military in huge numbers and outnumbered the amount of those discharged under DADT, what are you to do? I know, instead of blaming a flawed decision to rescind DADT, you'd call all of those who left the military "unprofessional" homophobes.

What would you have called those professionals in the military who left in 1947 rather than serve alongside blacks? You could have called them racists... I would have simply call them unprofessional, because that is undoubtedly what they were.

I have no doubt that the military will survive the removal of DADT, just like it survived racial integration a generation ago.

 

[maineman]

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

you can't always get what you want...

if DADT is repealed, your nation expects you to salute and soldier on.

What I want is for the military to increase cohesion and readiness, not promote and support one-sided homosexual activism just because some gays can't hack keeping their homosexuality to themselves while serving and want the entire military to know about it.

as I said... the only question is whether or not you will salute and soldier on if DADT is repealed. I am well aware of many people who do not want the policy repealed... their wants matter naught to me.

 

[Flaylo]

you can't always get what you want...

if DADT is repealed, your nation expects you to salute and soldier on.

What I want is for the military to increase cohesion and readiness, not promote and support one-sided homosexual activism just because some gays can't hack keeping their homosexuality to themselves while serving and want the entire military to know about it.

as I said... the only question is whether or not you will salute and soldier on if DADT is repealed. I am well aware of many people who do not want the policy repealed... their wants matter naught to me.

The wants of homosexuals is what matters to you, not the proponents of DADT and unit cohesion and readiness.

 

[Flaylo]

Again... it really has NOTHING to do with your opinion of what will happen to esprit de corps... the only question that is germane here is, will you salute and soldier on if DADT is repealed, or will you not? Will you do your best to implement the policies that are delineated by your chain of command, or will you be unprofessional and only pay them lip service?

I'm in the military and I'm telling that most of those whom I've spoken with do not like the idea of DADT being repealed, what kind of an affect you think thats going to have if it is repealed and people start walking around openly saying the gay? The one thats going to have to deal with the stress of managing that will be me because I'm a Senior NCO, not the gay activists who are going to blame everything on homophobia.

You, however, do seem to be saying that YOU speak for all the groundpounders in the Army. A bit presumptious (and hypocritical), don't you think?

I was a ground pounder and served in both 82nd Airborne and 101st Airborne Divisions, as well as 3rd ID, those are 3 of the most prestigious Army divisions and I was a Forward Observer in all of them, which is just as rough as being a ground pounder. I was in of course, all-male units and I'm telling you that any hint of homosexuality was looked down upon and not just from junior leaders but even at the top. I know what I'm talking about and don't speak from what is going to happen hypothetically.

That is none of your concern. If the civilian command authority told you that, starting tomorrow, you would walk around on your hands, the only two responses from you would be to either follow the directives of your chain of command like a professional, or leave the military. Take your choice.

Civilians don't run the everyday business of the Army and they make decisions based on the advice and suggestions of those in uniform because those that serve see what goes on everyday, civilians don't. The only civilians I take orders from are the Secretary of the Army and Secretary of Defense along with the President. If they're smart they will not do anything to ruin unit cohesion, morale and readiness.

What would you have called those professionals in the military who left in 1947 rather than serve alongside blacks? You could have called them racists... I would have simply call them unprofessional, because that is undoubtedly what they were.

I woud say they were racists, that simple. Resigning because of who somebody's skin color and resigning because of someone's actions are two different things.

 

[maineman]

I'm in the military and I'm telling that most of those whom I've spoken with do not like the idea of DADT being repealed, what kind of an affect you think thats going to have if it is repealed and people start walking around openly saying the gay? The one thats going to have to deal with the stress of managing that will be me because I'm a Senior NCO, not the gay activists who are going to blame everything on homophobia.

again... since when did CinC's poll the enlisted troops before deciding what policy to implement. No one really CARES whether you think it is a good idea or not. Follow orders, implement policy, or get out.

You, however, do seem to be saying that YOU speak for all the groundpounders in the Army. A bit presumptious (and hypocritical), don't you think?

I was a ground pounder and served in both 82nd Airborne and 101st Airborne Divisions, as well as 3rd ID, those are 3 of the most prestigious Army divisions and I was a Forward Observer in all of them, which is just as rough as being a ground pounder. I was in of course, all-male units and I'm telling you that any hint of homosexuality was looked down upon and not just from junior leaders but even at the top. I know what I'm talking about and don't speak from what is going to happen hypothetically.

again... why should anyone care? All levels of the chain of command have the option of being professionals or leaving... I can remember LOTS of policy decisions that I didn't particularly care for, but I only voiced my concerns to my superiors behind closed doors, and, after having done so, took ownership of the policies and implemented them enthusiastically. You nation expects you to do the same.

Civilians don't run the everyday business of the Army and they make decisions based on the advice and suggestions of those in uniform because those that serve see what goes on everyday, civilians don't. The only civilians I take orders from are the Secretary of the Army and Secretary of Defense along with the President. If they're smart they will not do anything to ruin unit cohesion, morale and readiness.

I never suggested that civilians run the everyday business of the military. They DO, however, run the military and the folks in uniform take their marching orders from them. If you are smart, you will not question the wisdom of your chain of command, especially in front of subordinates.

I woud say they were racists, that simple. Resigning because of who somebody's skin color and resigning because of someone's actions are two different things.

tell yourself whatever lies you need to in order to justify your lack of professionalism... the fact is: in 1947, there were a lot of professional soldiers and sailors who were dead set against intergrating the armed forces. They either adapted and maintained their professionalism or they didn't. Your choice... and my guess is: if you are true to your decision, and stick to it with professionalism and integrity, the Army will be better off either way.

 

[maineman]

What I want is for the military to increase cohesion and readiness, not promote and support one-sided homosexual activism just because some gays can't hack keeping their homosexuality to themselves while serving and want the entire military to know about it.

as I said... the only question is whether or not you will salute and soldier on if DADT is repealed. I am well aware of many people who do not want the policy repealed... their wants matter naught to me.

The wants of homosexuals is what matters to you, not the proponents of DADT and unit cohesion and readiness.

the "wants" of homosexuals are of little concern to me... no more or less than the concern I have for YOUR "wants". I care a great deal about the United States and I care a great deal about the military. I served through a period of great change and, in retrospect, most all of it was for the better and, in every instance, the true professionals who loved their service did the right thing and were part of the implementation solutions for those changes.

the jury's out as to how you will act.

 

[CurveLight]

the few exceptions prove the general rule, however. Everyone can have an opinion as to how the military will react if gays are allowed to serve openly, but those individuals who have served, have the most valid basis for their opinions.

I am currently serving in today's military and in the Army and I say rescinding DADT will hurt unit cohesion. I am now an NCO in the Aviation branch but for the first five years of my career I was a Forward Observer in Field Artillery Units, Cavalry Units and Infrantry Units and I can attest firsthand how homosexuality is looking down upon by the ground pounders who make the the bulk of the Army. maybe there were some gays in those units I served in, maybe not, but if there were you would never know and the entire unit prefered that. Having gays openly serve is going to dilute the espirit de corp and warrior attitude of the combat arms branches. When you think of the gallant infrantry or comabt arms soldier you don't think gay.

I served. My opinion is that the military will be just fine if gays are allowed to serve openly. More importantly, however, I really think that it is the sole decision of the commander in chief and he ought not to worry even a little bit as to how the service members will respond to his decision.

What military were you in? Lest you forget, you stated you served around men you knew to be gay and did nothing about it, so of course it would be fine with you, but you don't speak for the military. What works best for lonely sailors on a ship doesn't bode for the Army.



And if the military did the bidding of civilians and did those things that would lower recruitment and retention what good is that going to do?

"Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do our die."

That being your thinking I presume, why can't gays do the same thing with DADT? Why are you asking the proponents of DADT to do something you're not asking the opponents of DADT to do likewise? This isn't a one way avenue, it applies to all.

Soldier and sailors with less than professional attitudes about their service who somehow forget the relationship between those in uniform and those in suits are free to leave if they do not wish to serve under changed circumstances. I would suggest that they not let the door hit them in the ass on their way out.

Those servicemembers who are proponents of DADT are most certainly not "less than professional' just because your opinion isn't congruent with theirs. If those who you deem as less than professional really left the military in huge numbers and outnumbered the amount of those discharged under DADT, what are you to do? I know, instead of blaming a flawed decision to rescind DADT, you'd call all of those who left the military "unprofessional" homophobes.

You're a ******* idiot. Stop parading your homophobia behind moldy terms like "unit cohesion" because it's embarrassing to watch and I fought in AirCav so don't try to pull any of that other nonsense.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well I, who am still in the military, would feel a whole lot better not knowing if someone is gay and I would like for the military to keep it that way. I don't want to know and don't need to know, if it isn't going to help the Army and enhance readiness it doesn't need to be known.

Why would it upset you?

Anything immoral upsets me, no matter if its done by heterosexuals or homosexuals. I want the Army I serve in to be seen as the most professional and disciplined Army in the world where people put away selfishness and personal want in place of selfless service, scarifice and duty first.

Okay.............I just bolded your words.........what part of keeping someone down because it makes you feel uncomfortable is "selfless" about YOU?

You're not a leader, your a bully prick that thinks the entire military should conform to their narrow world view.

Failed Load, you keep digging yourself in deeper. You know....put down the shovel of hatred and quit digging, and accept the hand that will pull you out of the hole of your own ignorance.

Even if it is attached to a homosexual.

Or.......to put it in your John Wayne language.......

You go out on a mission. The sniper assigned to keep your squad alive lets it slip that he's gay.

Do you refuse the mission, just because the guy covering your ass is homosexual? Don't you think he'd take good care of your tight ass just because he likes seeing it in the shower?

 

[amrchaos]

Why would it upset you?

Anything immoral upsets me, no matter if its done by heterosexuals or homosexuals. I want the Army I serve in to be seen as the most professional and disciplined Army in the world where people put away selfishness and personal want in place of selfless service, scarifice and duty first.

Okay.............I just bolded your words.........what part of keeping someone down because it makes you feel uncomfortable is "selfless" about YOU?

You're not a leader, your a bully prick that thinks the entire military should conform to their narrow world view.

Failed Load, you keep digging yourself in deeper. You know....put down the shovel of hatred and quit digging, and accept the hand that will pull you out of the hole of your own ignorance.

Even if it is attached to a homosexual.

Or.......to put it in your John Wayne language.......

You go out on a mission. The sniper assigned to keep your squad alive lets it slip that he's gay.

Do you refuse the mission, just because the guy covering your ass is homosexual? Don't you think he'd take good care of your tight ass just because he likes seeing it in the shower?

OK

We get it

You are gay and you are upset about a policy that discriminates against you.

NOW TELL US
Why should we get rid of a policy that turned you into a super soldier?

Our military needs the best performing soldiers it can get--and all you can think about is your damn feelings!!

What you are doing is not called selflessness, Biker!!
What you are doing is called Bitching and whining!!

What We need is another reason to hold onto. To push through that pink stuff in our heads we like to call a brain to justify, to ourselves, removing DADT.

Or else we are going to claim that we did it to shut the damn queers up. Get it??

 

[ABikerSailor]

Anything immoral upsets me, no matter if its done by heterosexuals or homosexuals. I want the Army I serve in to be seen as the most professional and disciplined Army in the world where people put away selfishness and personal want in place of selfless service, scarifice and duty first.

Okay.............I just bolded your words.........what part of keeping someone down because it makes you feel uncomfortable is "selfless" about YOU?

You're not a leader, your a bully prick that thinks the entire military should conform to their narrow world view.

Failed Load, you keep digging yourself in deeper. You know....put down the shovel of hatred and quit digging, and accept the hand that will pull you out of the hole of your own ignorance.

Even if it is attached to a homosexual.

Or.......to put it in your John Wayne language.......

You go out on a mission. The sniper assigned to keep your squad alive lets it slip that he's gay.

Do you refuse the mission, just because the guy covering your ass is homosexual? Don't you think he'd take good care of your tight ass just because he likes seeing it in the shower?

OK

We get it

You are gay and you are upset about a policy that discriminates against you.

NOW TELL US
Why should we get rid of a policy that turned you into a super soldier?

Our military needs the best performing soldiers it can get--and all you can think about is your damn feelings!!

What you are doing is not called selflessness, Biker!!
What you are doing is called Bitching and whining!!

What We need is another reason to hold onto. To push through that pink stuff in our heads we like to call a brain to justify, to ourselves, removing DADT.

Or else we are going to claim that we did it to shut the damn queers up. Get it??

Actually, I'm heterosexual and retired from the Navy.

However.........I did see the effects of DADT when it was put in. One of the best computer techs that I ever knew was a man named John L. EVERYONE on the ship knew he was gay, but didn't **** with him. Why? He was a valuable asset to the ship, and never "acted out" in front of the crew.

Also knew several others.........2 of which were lesbians when I was stationed in Norfolk. Lived with 'em for 2 years, and because I lived there, everyone thought I was doing them regularly like Three's Company.

Actually, all I did was rent a room and live with them. Both were in what is known as CREO Group 1, which means they were in undermanned fields.

Know what is really unfair about it? Those 2 women had lived with each other for over 10 years, had a house they'd bought together, and were probably more "married" than most couples I know.

They were also ineligible for being at the bedside of the other one if something happened.

Now.......quick question........if YOUR significant other was hurt because of an accident, wouldn't you want to be able to go to their bedside and be with them?

Gay military members can't do that.

Incidentally, have you ever had someone important to you in the hospital? If so, how was your days during that time, were you able to concentrate fully on your job, or did things slip?

THAT is why they need to get rid of DADT.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Flaylo is in the army serving to protect faggots and ****** lovers and you all do is personally and verbally attack him. You guys can't disagree without personal attacks and calling people homophobes.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

What Bikerfaggot fails to realize is that being a good troop in the military is not just about doing one's job well, its about also maintaining discipline, exemplary conduct and being and being a good example off and on duty. You join the military, whatever branch, because you want to serve, not to make a social statement that your gay and proud to screw people of the same sex up the anus while serving.