Obama to call for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal, adviser says

[CrimsonWhite]

I think this one will pretty much ensure he doesn't have a second term.

I agree. Personally, I'm not opposed to homosexuals serving openly. I am in a minority in that opinion though. That said, I do have a problem wth politicans using the Military as a vehicle for social change. The GOP won't even have to fling this back at him. If he mentions it tonight, the media will fling it for them.

A vehicle for social change? How about catching the military up with the rest of the country?

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

 

[Yurt]

A vehicle for social change? How about catching the military up with the rest of the country?

good point

may ask though, should the military always be caught up with the rest of the country?

I'm not sure where you are going with this ... you will have to be more specific.

its a simple question, even you can answer it

 

[Article 15]

I agree. Personally, I'm not opposed to homosexuals serving openly. I am in a minority in that opinion though. That said, I do have a problem wth politicans using the Military as a vehicle for social change. The GOP won't even have to fling this back at him. If he mentions it tonight, the media will fling it for them.

A vehicle for social change? How about catching the military up with the rest of the country?

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

 

[Article 15]

good point

may ask though, should the military always be caught up with the rest of the country?

I'm not sure where you are going with this ... you will have to be more specific.

its a simple question, even you can answer it

It's vague. Be more specific.

 

[Modbert]

It's vague. Be more specific.

He's playing the "intentionally obtuse" game today. Probably a bit bitter still.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

good point

may ask though, should the military always be caught up with the rest of the country?

Ask yourself the following:

Should blacks be allowed to serve in the military alongside whites? Your answer there will answer your original question.

Ask that question in 1948. We know now what the right answer is. However, Even African Amercans that served then will tell you that their servce was detrimental to the unit. The unit got over it, but it took a helluva long time to do so. How many generatons would it take for homosexuals to openly assimilate?

 

[uscitizen]

Resistance is futile you will be assimilated.

 

[Yurt]

I'm not sure where you are going with this ... you will have to be more specific.

its a simple question, even you can answer it

It's vague. Be more specific.

lol....tell me what is "vague" about always being caught up with the rest of the country?

do you not understand the definition of always? eg, in all things, always caught up.....there is absolutely nothing vague about my comment, your irrational fear in not answering it is strange.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

A vehicle for social change? How about catching the military up with the rest of the country?

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

Not every office in America is as progressive as yours.

 

[Yurt]

A vehicle for social change? How about catching the military up with the rest of the country?

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

you could also walk into numerous private jobs and announce you smoke weed without fear of losing your job....

 

[uscitizen]

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

Not every office in America is as progressive as yours.

Try telling your co workers you are an atheist here in the bible belt. A homo they could handle....

 

[Article 15]

its a simple question, even you can answer it

It's vague. Be more specific.

lol....tell me what is "vague" about always being caught up with the rest of the country?

do you not understand the definition of always? eg, in all things, always caught up.....there is absolutely nothing vague about my comment, your irrational fear in not answering it is strange.

I've know you well enough to know that no question is innocent and simple.

 

[Modbert]

Ask that question in 1948. We know now what the right answer is. However, Even African Amercans that served then will tell you that their servce was detrimental to the unit. The unit got over it, but it took a helluva long time to do so. How many generatons would it take for homosexuals to openly assimilate?

Conservative Estimate: Three, four at most. Depends how fast the younger generations overtake the older generations. Looking at any polls for the rights of Homosexuals, younger people are by far more in favor. It's not a matter of if as you even said, but when.

And yes, at first, things will be bumpy.

However, I'll pluck a quote from JFK (although he said these words on a different subject, they can apply here):

"My fellow citizens, let no one doubt that this is a difficult and dangerous effort in which we have set out. No one can foresee precisely what course it will take. --- But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing. The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are. However, it is the one most consistent with our character and commitment as as a nation and our commitments around the world."

 

[Article 15]

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

Not every office in America is as progressive as yours.

True but those other offices could not fire me if I were gay for that reason alone.

 

[Yurt]

It's vague. Be more specific.

lol....tell me what is "vague" about always being caught up with the rest of the country?

do you not understand the definition of always? eg, in all things, always caught up.....there is absolutely nothing vague about my comment, your irrational fear in not answering it is strange.

I've know you well enough to know that no question is innocent and simple.

bastard

so, does the military in all things, styles, customs, trends...need to always be caught up with the rest of the country. you made a good point, because i think the ban is silly. however, i've never served, so i have no idea what is good for morale, obedience etc....

you claimed that they should repeal the don't ask, don't tell...because the should be caught up with the rest of the country. so i am wondering at where you draw the line.

now answer the question ya basteeerd.....

 

[Article 15]

The military isn't behind. Homosexuals aren't considered full citizens in society. They do not have the same rights as heteros. There is no law denying miltary service to gays. The law was instituted to protect gays from discrminaton in the military. This sn't catching up the military, it is exploiting it. Of course there is a precedent. The military has been used as a vehicle for social change since its inception. ie. Women in uniform, African-Americans in uniform. Those changes haven't come easy for the service and in may ways led to lower morale. However, "the unit got over it." It would eventually get over this. That still doesn't make me hesitant. Those changes took a couple of generations to settle in. Thos one could take longer.

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

you could also walk into numerous private jobs and announce you smoke weed without fear of losing your job....

If I did at my office I would be fired.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Ask that question in 1948. We know now what the right answer is. However, Even African Amercans that served then will tell you that their servce was detrimental to the unit. The unit got over it, but it took a helluva long time to do so. How many generatons would it take for homosexuals to openly assimilate?

Conservative Estimate: Three, four at most. Depends how fast the younger generations overtake the older generations. Looking at any polls for the rights of Homosexuals, younger people are by far more in favor. It's not a matter of if as you even said, but when.

And yes, at first, things will be bumpy.

However, I'll pluck a quote from JFK (although he said these words on a different subject, they can apply here):

"My fellow citizens, let no one doubt that this is a difficult and dangerous effort in which we have set out. No one can foresee precisely what course it will take. --- But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing. The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are. However, it is the one most consistent with our character and commitment as as a nation and our commitments around the world."

Yep, gays in the military is the same as soviet missiles in Cuba.

I get your point your point though and I do not disagree. I am simply hesitant to pull the proverbial band aid.

 

[Yurt]

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

you could also walk into numerous private jobs and announce you smoke weed without fear of losing your job....

If I did at my office I would be fired.

if only obama would talk of repealing the prohibition of marijuana tonight

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I could walk into my office tonight and announce that I am gay without fear of losing my job. Not so much for our men and women in uniform.

Not every office in America is as progressive as yours.

True but those other offices could not fire me if I were gay for that reason alone.

You think that gays won't be drummed out on other shit once they are allowed to serve openly?

 

[Article 15]

lol....tell me what is "vague" about always being caught up with the rest of the country?

do you not understand the definition of always? eg, in all things, always caught up.....there is absolutely nothing vague about my comment, your irrational fear in not answering it is strange.

I've know you well enough to know that no question is innocent and simple.

bastard

so, does the military in all things, styles, customs, trends...need to always be caught up with the rest of the country. you made a good point, because i think the ban is silly. however, i've never served, so i have no idea what is good for morale, obedience etc....

you claimed that they should repeal the don't ask, don't tell...because the should be caught up with the rest of the country. so i am wondering at where you draw the line.

now answer the question ya basteeerd.....

In term of social progression ... thinks like integrated units, women's roles, and open gays serving ... yes as long as they are qualified and capable of doing the job then they shouldn't be exclude because of skin color, or because they have a vagina, or because they take it up the pooper.

But if suddenly the rest of the country decided it was A-OK to drink on the job or get high at work .. then no.

So, no.