Glory Days;608358 wrote:You already answered why it hasn’t been a problem to date in your third paragraph. The military has been forced to ignore it and the soldiers don’t say anything. However now, with people being allowed to be open about their sexuality, commanders will know who is gay and could know when 2 gay males are living in the same room.

This may already be happening, though (the two living in the same quarters). Is this a large problem already?

Glory Days;608358 wrote:Will military policy force them to be put in different rooms to be equal?

That's a great question, but as I have already said, the odds of this are incredibly slim, and it won't likely happen any more often than it does now.

Glory Days;608358 wrote:If so, will the military force people to state their sexuality when joining to avoid any problems? How is it fair that 2 gay soldiers be able to live together but a male and female cant? What if as a straight soldier, I know 2 gay soldiers are living together, but they havent been completely open about their sexuality to their command staff, can I report them without getting in trouble?

You shouldn't have any obligation to do so, nor should you have any reason to, so to answer your question, you can "report" them all you want, and you shouldn't get in trouble for doing so, but (a) there should be no reason to "report" it, and (b) it wouldn't be any more necessary than it is now.

Confused as to why this even has to be debated honestly. I really believe that the people who are against this believe that either these things will happen.

1. that a huge gay orgy is going to break out and that everyone will become gay.
2. that even though while our troops are fighting for our freedoms and trusting each other with their lives, that all that will change now that they may find out if their fellow soldier is gay.

It is amusing that it seems that people really think you can catch being gay like it was a disease or like a zombie movie where if a gay bites you, you will turn gay.

Also two of our biggest allies great britain and israel have both lifted this policy and from what I have read, there has been no sign of a decrease in ability or peformance. Some countries, Austrailia, England and some others even have studies that suggest increase in ability and performance. Hell even Russia and China allow gays to openly serve.

And we get lumped in with countries like Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela , Pakistan etc...

There is Zero evidence to suggest that repealing this ban will result in the collapse of our military. In my opinion it comes down to fear/ignorance/or religious beliefs. Although it seems that it is ok in Israel but in America where Christianity is the dominant religion that we can't accept this. Maybe they paid more attention to Jesus then we thought in Israel.

I am pretty much conservative/libertarian on almost all issues, while I do feel this has something to do with Individual rights , I just cannot see a valid basis for DADT to be a positive thing for America.

I'm sure there are plenty of female military that are gay that live together. Actually I know there are. But then again I would say the percentage of female gay/bi is extremely high compared to gay/bi men.

I had an experience last evening that I would like to share with you. I attended a performance of the 250-member Seattle Men's Chorus, a group of which I am a member but am currently LOA. Just before the encore at the end of the show, one of our members came forward and told the audience of 2500 that more than a dozen of our singers have been kicked out of the military for being gay. Then he added, "But because of this weekend, that will never happen again." That statement got a raucous standing ovation that lasted about ten minutes. I have never heard an audience carry on like that. I should also point out that the majority of the people in that concert hall were straight. To make the evening even better, Margarethe Cammermeyer was in the audience. She is the Army colonel who got thrown out in 1989 for being a lesbian and she is the person credited for starting the movement to get rid of DADT. When she was introduced, the applause was so loud the building nearly came down.

In sum, this has been one of the happiest times in the gay movement. I hope to see many more days like this in the future.

cbus4life;607728 wrote:I think Fairwood and ThinThick are the same person...

I have no idea why ?

GoChiefs;607530 wrote:Where do I behind with this train wreck??? LOL



You don't know what the hell 'openly' gay means? That's what the whole repeal was about. So you know nothing about what was going on, yet, started a thread about it???



Cogrigate? Huh? I think I get what you're saying, and I'm calling bullshit on that one. I've never heard of such a thing.



You think we have thousands of Taliban in our military???



What is up with you and putting prisoners on the front lines? What, if they kill an enemy, they get a pardon or something? I realize prisoners have been such model citizens and they would just make such excellent soldiers!

When I was talking about openly gay ..I mearly meant what would it pertain to in military life ...I still dont think two privates can go down the avenue holding hands ....no pun intended except fot gochiefs.....In other words I think the ruling is a technicle issue such as military application and you cant be witch hunted out of the military ....I do believe though that if you are caught having sex with a same sex member on a military instalation ,you may recieve an article 15 and be punished the same as if you were having sex with the opposite sex ,like a prostitute ..and yes boys I am sure many times little mishaps like this happen ...............The other stuff go chiefs is basically killing time ..i really dont give a shit about this stuff

I am not a moral nazi . I am tiredand bored of fox media and the moral nazi movement.
Look the more we progress as human beings the more liberal in our thinking we are going to become . It is a given look at history . look at each generation compare it to the next . Sure the right wing nazi movement tries and tries to slow progress down . It is a political standing that gains them favor through fear and what if's...............Whether you believe that being gay is a sin or should be illegal is your right and you have the right to vote for the congressmen of your choosing that has your same opinion. I feel that if you want to marry and share insurance policies for health care as well as estate issues with tax and things of that nature ,I find nothing wrong with it . If you are gay and want to fight for "The Great Satan" Be my guest ....Why are we so often taught that god is intolerable and that he has no compassion ? Isnt being kind to your fellow man no matter what his belief system more of the christian way? Why do media outlets like fox news spew so much rhetoric about what is morally correct . At the same time I dont want the ACLU coming into my school or team club house and telling me we cannot have a prayer . my thoughts on that are if you want to pray pray if not then dont . I dont think it is intimidation by the classroom or the team but do feel like it is communistic by the ACLU ... We have to find some common ground with respect to all Americans . As far as fighting for my country ..If you are American or if you want to become an American by all means help us out . I am sure most people can do more help than bad . There is a job for everybody .

As a retired soldier served in a combat situation the bottom line is simple:
Can you prepare the individual for a combat situation, are they mentality ready for the hardship of combat and can they follow orders, know their job, perform the task and not be a distraction to the unit or the mission.
In my time in the service I have taken the leadership roll in doing so I have seem the weak get stronger and the strong weaken …. The hardship of combat takes a heavy toll.

I think that some men that I have served with could have been gay I don’t know for sure and I don't really care to know. If any of them were gay I’m proud to call them soldier and friend. They served their country with pride, honor and bravery and that deserves respect.

With that being said .... In basic training there was a individual that was over the top gay ..really gay, to the point of being a distraction to others and a liability to himself and others. Within the first week he was a problem ..mentality, physical, emotional, morals, value and attitude.

If this individual would have been able to advance to the next level and move onto a combat unit …. He would have been ………… potentially fragged
Not because of being gay but because of being a liability to all around him.

We have to raise the bar of military standards ….. over the years that standard has dropped some what..IMO
It time to set new standard of achievement in the military training and those that achieve can serve those that can’t …. Get cut from the team and sent packing………

^^^^^^^ Great points .... The one thing I dont want to see is a gay person being so flamboyant that he or she is a distraction for theyre own cause .. ..Boot camp is not the place to make a political stance... I remember boot and I am pretty sure there was some gay men in our platoon ,but no major distraction so i didnt care .. Back when I was in though you had to answer before you went in if you were gay or not ,so if you lied on your application ,you would be subject no matter how far down the line of courtmartial and an other than honorable discharg.. All those men that Fairwood talked about in that choir lied on the entrance papers to the military .... I am not saying our laws are right but they lied and the government can be unbinding.....so this passage is a victory for liberal America .... I dont think it is a bad thing ...Lets keep our moral judgements out of the dirty little thing called war ,and that means serving this country .. If you can do the job without hurting your unit ,then fine ... Woman are next to be on the front lines ......Blacks fought in the revolutionary war ,the civil war ,but were not accepted into the mainstream military units until the Korean war ... Woman are just now being permitted to submarine duty .. We may have some fighter combat woman . Not real sure . i dont think the womans body could get them through special ops training ,but a regular infintry unit ,they may be able to handle .. Although you cant lower standards physically for a woman if she were to join because of safety issues ..She would have to be a very physically fit woman .. In Israel all serve and they are some very mean and nasty military people ..I would like the same for our military ...I dont care who is in as long as we win ....

O-Trap;608632 wrote:This may already be happening, though (the two living in the same quarters). Is this a large problem already?

it may not be a large problem. But if it is supposed to be equal, it shouldn’t be happening.

That's a great question, but as I have already said, the odds of this are incredibly slim, and it won't likely happen any more often than it does now.

slim or not, in order to prevent any issues from happening, policy should be created like it is for every situation involing a male and female.

You shouldn't have any obligation to do so, nor should you have any reason to, so to answer your question, you can "report" them all you want, and you shouldn't get in trouble for doing so, but (a) there should be no reason to "report" it, and (b) it wouldn't be any more necessary than it is now.

I guess my point is, if a male and female were found to be living together in the barracks, there would be punishment. Would there be punishment if 2 gay men were found to be living together? And you wouldn’t be reporting them for being gay, you would be reporting them for living together just like if you found a male and female living together(if such a policy would be created etc).

And yes, these arent huge issues, but in my opinion they are technicalities that can lead to the same issues that come up between males and females. Just remember, the military was never forced to deal with gay issues before because of DADT, now they will be.

Thinthickbigred;609200All those men that Fairwood talked about in that choir lied on the entrance papers to the military [/QUOTE wrote:
Every gay man or lesbian who has ever come out of the closet past the age of twenty has lied about it to someone. I lied about it when I took my physical for ROTC. It has taken me many years to be as open about my own sexuality as I am. For five thousand years society has forced us to lie. Medieval Christians burnt us at the stake. Hitler threw us in his concentration camps. The Soviets sent us to the gulag. And Americans forced us to register ourselves with the police for many years and then threw us out of the military.

I'm fighting for the day when young gays and lesbians can be open and free and not face any discrimination from any source. That day is coming!

Yes Fairwood. The military has forced many people to stay in the closet and if they found out you were gay ,they would throw you out simply by lying on your application . It wasnt right and now that part is over . The far right wing conservitive nazi movement "fox news" will try to put fear and doubt into peoples minds and as usual they will cause more division ,but poeple dont have to lie about it anymore . A whole new set of discriminitory laws will have to be adjusted by the military and I suspect sensitivity training by some will be needed. I hope the trasition is smooth and our military moral does not waiver.
America is a mixed bag of everything ,we can either embrace this and it will make us stronger or we can divide and crumble ,as our enemies wish us to do . You know they execute gays in the middle eastern countries . Iran and Saudi Arabia are good examples and you know the Taliban would kill you ... Very barbaric..

Thinthickbigred;609736 wrote:The far right wing conservitive nazi movement "fox news" will try to put fear and doubt into peoples minds and as usual they will cause more division ,

I would have thought that you were wise enough that both R and D democrats in Washington, not to mention a President that mocks and taunts the people were to blame for the excessive amounts of divisivness instead of worrying about FOX news and Nazi's.
But there ya have it, I guess I'm wrong.

::: sigh :::

Thinthickbigred;609736 wrote:The far right wing conservitive nazi movement "fox news" will try to put fear and doubt into peoples minds and as usual they will cause more division ,but poeple dont have to lie about it anymore.

Give me a break and lay off the rhetoric. You do realize it was a D president that implemented DADT. You do realize that since DADT was insituted that congress was ran by Ds for all but a couple years.

If the Rs are so bad and the Ds are so good, then why didn't any Ds decide it was time to repeal DADT over the last 15 years?

As a minister, a former Navy Veteran (2000-2004), and a Chaplain's Assistant (Religious Program Specialist), I only have one thing to say about this.

Gays used their "status" to "get out of the military" under the DADT policy. They didn't use it for any other reason. I never heard of anyone get thrown in prison for saying they were gay. They were only kicked out.

Fairwood King, I would venture that out of that group of 250 singers, the ones who were "kicked" out were because they wanted to be. If they didn't want to be, they wouldn't have told someone they were gay.

Now, at the same point, I am in favor of this repeal. I think today's society doesn't care who is gay, etc. In fact, that issue doesn't concern most of our youth nowadays. The bottom line is that ALL should be accepted, loved and treated equally, whether we agree with their actions or not, whether we believe it is sin or not, or whether God condones it or not.

President signed it this morning. It will will take the DoD a few months to fully overturn the ruling. Once that happens, there will be some initial issues probably, but will pass by the end of next year I believe.

areyoukiddingme;609931 wrote:As a minister, a former Navy Veteran (2000-2004), and a Chaplain's Assistant (Religious Program Specialist), I only have one thing to say about this.

Gays used their "status" to "get out of the military" under the DADT policy. They didn't use it for any other reason. I never heard of anyone get thrown in prison for saying they were gay. They were only kicked out.

Fairwood King, I would venture that out of that group of 250 singers, the ones who were "kicked" out were because they wanted to be. If they didn't want to be, they wouldn't have told someone they were gay.

Now, at the same point, I am in favor of this repeal. I think today's society doesn't care who is gay, etc. In fact, that issue doesn't concern most of our youth nowadays. The bottom line is that ALL should be accepted, loved and treated equally, whether we agree with their actions or not, whether we believe it is sin or not, or whether God condones it or not.

I agree with this 100%.

I am in favore of the repeal, but you are right. I have many friends and family who have served, and while all of them said they could care less if their buddies were gay, they ALL said that the few who said they were gay, were doing so to get kicked out of the military on purpose.

ptown_trojans_1;610047 wrote:President signed it this morning. It will will take the DoD a few months to fully overturn the ruling. Once that happens, there will be some initial issues probably, but will pass by the end of next year I believe.

One positive I get from all of this hoo-hah is that the Legislative/Executive Branches have taken back control of the military from the Judicial Branch. Yes, there are 3 branches and they serve as checks and balances...I know. I find it outrageous, however, that the judiciary felt compelled to get involved in something that really doesn't concern them. After all...isn't the military about blowing up personal property, destroying buildings, maiming, murder and mayhem? I find it incongruous that they want to dictate military policy when the overriding military policies are crimes in and of themselves, should they not occur on a battlefield. The Constitution ordains a Commander In Chief, not a judiciary oversight committee.

BGFalcons82;610162 wrote:One positive I get from all of this hoo-hah is that the Legislative/Executive Branches have taken back control of the military from the Judicial Branch. Yes, there are 3 branches and they serve as checks and balances...I know. I find it outrageous, however, that the judiciary felt compelled to get involved in something that really doesn't concern them. After all...isn't the military about blowing up personal property, destroying buildings, maiming, murder and mayhem? I find it incongruous that they want to dictate military policy when the overriding military policies are crimes in and of themselves, should they not occur on a battlefield. The Constitution ordains a Commander In Chief, not a judiciary oversight committee.

Agreed. The adminsitration was never a fan of the courts ruling on the measures, largely at the outrage of the gay community.

areyoukiddingme;609931 wrote:As a minister, a former Navy Veteran (2000-2004), and a Chaplain's Assistant (Religious Program Specialist), I only have one thing to say about this.

Gays used their "status" to "get out of the military" under the DADT policy. They didn't use it for any other reason. I never heard of anyone get thrown in prison for saying they were gay. They were only kicked out.

Fairwood King, I would venture that out of that group of 250 singers, the ones who were "kicked" out were because they wanted to be. If they didn't want to be, they wouldn't have told someone they were gay.

Now, at the same point, I am in favor of this repeal. I think today's society doesn't care who is gay, etc. In fact, that issue doesn't concern most of our youth nowadays. The bottom line is that ALL should be accepted, loved and treated equally, whether we agree with their actions or not, whether we believe it is sin or not, or whether God condones it or not.

I believe you and thank you for your input , I also agree with your opinions.

jmog;609908 wrote:Give me a break and lay off the rhetoric. You do realize it was a D president that implemented DADT. You do realize that since DADT was insituted that congress was ran by Ds for all but a couple years.

If the Rs are so bad and the Ds are so good, then why didn't any Ds decide it was time to repeal DADT over the last 15 years?

I admitt I say alot of things with anger . It is me venting nothing else. I used to be a republican and I grew up in a republican house. I am an independant I did vote for Obamma though . Bush was a disaster . I really started having contempt for the republican party when Bush invaded Iraq under false pretenses.. But the republicans want to spend millions of dollars impeaching Clinton over an affair ...He had the economy all the way in the black until that disaster got into office and used our military for his personnal vendetta against Sadaam for him going after his father ...sick man King Bush should have been thrown out ... I cant stand the morrally correct right wing they make me sick

areyoukiddingme;609931 wrote:As a minister, a former Navy Veteran (2000-2004), and a Chaplain's Assistant (Religious Program Specialist), I only have one thing to say about this.

Gays used their "status" to "get out of the military" under the DADT policy. They didn't use it for any other reason. I never heard of anyone get thrown in prison for saying they were gay. They were only kicked out.

Fairwood King, I would venture that out of that group of 250 singers, the ones who were "kicked" out were because they wanted to be. If they didn't want to be, they wouldn't have told someone they were gay.

Now, at the same point, I am in favor of this repeal. I think today's society doesn't care who is gay, etc. In fact, that issue doesn't concern most of our youth nowadays. The bottom line is that ALL should be accepted, loved and treated equally, whether we agree with their actions or not, whether we believe it is sin or not, or whether God condones it or not.

You're crazy. I know most of these former military men from the chorus and I know for a fact that not one of them wanted to be kicked out.

You're making up a story that has no substantiation.

areyoukiddingme;609931 wrote:As a minister, a former Navy Veteran (2000-2004), and a Chaplain's Assistant (Religious Program Specialist), I only have one thing to say about this.

Gays used their "status" to "get out of the military" under the DADT policy. They didn't use it for any other reason. I never heard of anyone get thrown in prison for saying they were gay. They were only kicked out.

Fairwood King, I would venture that out of that group of 250 singers, the ones who were "kicked" out were because they wanted to be. If they didn't want to be, they wouldn't have told someone they were gay.

Now, at the same point, I am in favor of this repeal. I think today's society doesn't care who is gay, etc. In fact, that issue doesn't concern most of our youth nowadays. The bottom line is that ALL should be accepted, loved and treated equally, whether we agree with their actions or not, whether we believe it is sin or not, or whether God condones it or not.

I agree with most of your post, but I do think you are being naive in stating that gays used their "status" to get kicked out on purpose. While SOME may have done that, I doubt all gays kicked out did it on purpose. Some were just caught with revealing e-mails, letters, photos, etc.

I don't doubt some gays may have used DADT for their benefit (if they wanted out), but to insinuate that all did is a false accusation.

FairwoodKing;610540 wrote:You're crazy. I know most of these former military men from the chorus and I know for a fact that not one of them wanted to be kicked out.

You're making up a story that has no substantiation.

He probably is talking just from his prospective . Maybe both of you are correct from your own standpoints. He may have known gays to use the DADT status ,its concievable that some would .

FairwoodKing;610540 wrote:You're crazy. I know most of these former military men from the chorus and I know for a fact that not one of them wanted to be kicked out.

You're making up a story that has no substantiation.

That is hilariously ironic coming from you. Nearly every "story" you give is heresay, no links, and stretched to try to prove something.