1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repealed!

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by ninerbuff, Sep 20, 2011.

  1. Draka

    Draka Wonder Woman

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    19,120
    Ratings:
    +4,786
    Religion:
    Lasso of Truth
    Um, I don't know if you read one of my earlier posts, but I shared quarters with 3 guys once. One Navy man and 2 Air Force men. There are different kinds of barracks set up so there are all kinds of possibilities. I also don't understand the idea that military members aren't allowed to have sexual relations with each other. There are rules against public displays of affection while in uniform or on duty in general, but off duty is off duty. Where are people getting this idea? In fact, the military provides on base housing, actual little houses in little neighborhoods, right on the bases. If two members in a relationship/married want to, they can apply for a house together.

    I already mentioned sharing quarters with men. We each had our own bathrooms though. As I said before, the only time I ever shared or had group showers and whatnot was in bootcamp.
    I don't think anybody is expecting there not to be sexual relationships and issues in the military at all. But I don't understand the idea that homosexuals being out is going to suddenly change things. Honestly, I don't see the issue with mixed orientations being in close quarters because it's not as if people are out converting. That is to say, how many women do you see trying to bed known homosexual men? So why does anyone think that gay men are going to try to bed known straight men? Or lesbians bed straight women? Where's this idea of all this possible sexual harassment coming from? I think some people simply over-react to normal interest and advances really. If you think a guy is hot and interesting and you try to ask him out and turns out he's gay you drop the pursuit on the spot right? The gay guy probably hasn't taken any great offense to it and you won't bother anymore. Why should the reverse be any different? Showing interest isn't harassment, pursuit beyond being told "no" is. How many people bother pursuing once they learn that the object of the pursuit isn't even the corresponding orientation?

    Well, I'm not pretending anything, I just don't see the difference is all. :shrug:
     
  2. Oneatatime

    Oneatatime Huh?

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    774
    Ratings:
    +43
    I guess now it'll be 'Tell and be subject to homohobic discrimination until you leave or don't even bother staying long enough to pass selection'.
     
  3. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    15,708
    Ratings:
    +1,690
    Oneatatime - I don't see that as reality at all. The repeal of DADT is a step in a positive direction for gays in the military. You have to start somewhere, right?

    Notice that I have not one time stated or implied that DADT should have remained in place, or that gays in the military should be subjected to any sort of discrimination, or that discrimination should be accepted, tolerated, or encouraged. That's because I don't believe any of these options are acceptable.
     
  4. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    The truth of the matter is that while on base, unless you live in a house on base with your signifigant other, sexual relations are a no no.
    It happens, yes. Is it against policy? Ooooh yeah. They don't want the women in the military getting pregnant. And if someone has sex off base and contracts something, they don't want it spread all over either.
    So they try not to bunk those who may have relations together, but its just not efficient and has largely become uncommon practice.

    Either way, it is expected that a soldier will conduct themselves in a proper manner. If not they could face legal action.

    So really in light of this there shouldn't be too much of an issue.
     
  5. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    15,708
    Ratings:
    +1,690
    I hope that's the case.

    We'll see. A possible scenario is a male/female couple requesting a common dorm room and when that request is denied, pointing out that a gay couple shares a dorm room so why can't they?

    And it would be a legitimate question.
     
  6. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Riboflavin
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    55,023
    Ratings:
    +13,542
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    I'd say it stays the same or decreases.

    Repealing DADT doesn't bring new homosexual people into the military; it just means that homosexual service members don't have to stay in the closet.

    If it's going to affect sexual harrassment at all, I'd say that it'll allow a larger range of harrassment cases to be reported and acted upon, which will create a deterrent effect. In the past, there could be types of sexual harrassment where the victim would be afraid to report it because it would expose the fact that he or she is gay. Now, people will realize that these sorts of incidents can be reported, so hopefully they'll be less likely to happen in the first place.

    But if you do think that the repeal of DADT can increase the likelihood, maybe it would help me understand your concern if you describe a mechanism that could make this happen. What is it about this that you think it might be the case?
     
  7. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    15,708
    Ratings:
    +1,690
    I didn't say sexual harrassment will INCREASE. What I said is that the dynamics have changed, and different scenarios will arise. I think it's wise to think these things through and be prepared for a changed environment, rather than being reactive after the fact.
     
  8. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Riboflavin
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    55,023
    Ratings:
    +13,542
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Not explicitly, but I think you've been strongly hinting at it all through the thread.

    Yes, the dynamics have changed. As I alluded to, it'll be much more difficult now for someone engaging in sexual harrassment to rely on the victim's desire not to out himself/herself in the course of reporting harrassment. Servicemen and women can't be blackmailed just for being gay any more. I don't see how you can't recognize these changes as resulting in a net positive in preventing harrassment in the military.
     
  9. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Of course its a legitimate question. However the rules should be equal across the board. If you're openly gay, they shouldn't bunk you with another homosexual of the same sex. But still the military is huge. They can find a way to bunk people without risk of sexual relations being an issue.

    Personally I find the more pressing matter would be the rape of women in the military. It does still happen and, having a female friend in the marines, it is quite concerning that it is still an issue.
     
  10. turk179

    turk179 I smell something....

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,718
    Ratings:
    +394
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Do you have any policy numbers to go by? In my job field we had to know the U.C.M.J. fairly well and the only articles that address this issues that I can recall was article 134 on fraternization (which only applies to officers) and article 92 on unprofessional relations which only applies to your chain of command. Other than that, if you are consenting adults and not in uniform and in your quarters then have at it. If I am wrong then refresh my memory because it's been a while since I had to enforce those articles and the M.C.M.
     
  11. turk179

    turk179 I smell something....

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,718
    Ratings:
    +394
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I think the U.C.M.J. as it is written is more than capable of handling any scenarios that will arise. In one of your previous posts you said you had specific questions. Without having to search through the 70 some odd posts, is there anything you would like to ask me that I could help you with?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    15,708
    Ratings:
    +1,690
    I'm a blunt person. If I mean something, I won't allude to it - I'll just say it.

    I never said it was a negative development or change. In fact, I've stated repeatedly throughout this thread, and any other on the topic, that I think DADT was RIDICULOUS policy and I support the rights of gays to serve openly in the military.
     
  13. Kathryn

    Kathryn Most Spoiled Woman Ever

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    15,708
    Ratings:
    +1,690
    Well, no thank you. I've already asked them several times, including in the last couple of pages of posts. Honestly, I'm getting bored with the topic because I'm just repeating myself at this point.

    But once again, thanks anyway.
     
  14. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    When you sign that contract you have signed away much of your personal freedom while on base and on active duty. If a female in the service gets pregnant, how is she going to fulfill her duties or be deployed with her squad to a combat zone?

    If you willingly engage in any action causing damage to yourself or decreasing performance and combat effectiveness due to negligence or otherwise knowingly engage in any action leading to this outcome you can be in serious trouble.

    When you sign that contract, you effectively become government property. You can't say "I don't want to go to a combat zone. I don't want to be shot at" well too bad. You go or face charges.
    Same thing, if you damage yourself to the point that the military can't use you for whatever reason for any period of time they could effectively charge you with destruction of government property. Or an equally bad, but differently worded charge to the same effect.
     
  15. Draka

    Draka Wonder Woman

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    19,120
    Ratings:
    +4,786
    Religion:
    Lasso of Truth
    As a woman who did go through a pregnancy while in the military I can say I handled my duties quite well thank you. There are varying jobs in the military and various positions to be filled. At the time I was pregnant I was working within a specific command division and I was simply taken off a job that would require me to work with certain chemicals and into a job where I was actually responsible for a lot more work, just a different kind. In fact, after I had my baby and was medically cleared for any kind of work, my division chief didn't want to release me from the job I was doing as I did it so well.

    The military has plenty of great rules and steps in place to accommodate for pregnancy. Much better than most civilian employers. Do you actually consider getting pregnant causing "damage" to oneself? It's not like they chastise pregnant women. What of military women who have civilian husbands? Do you expect them never to have a family? But military men getting their civilian wives pregnant is okie dokie?
     
  16. turk179

    turk179 I smell something....

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,718
    Ratings:
    +394
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    When you were in service did you ever see a pregnant enlisted person? I did. I saw plenty of them. Every enlisted person and officers actions are held accountable by the U.C.M.J. Again, I ask you to refresh my memory and tell me what article or paragraph you are referring to?
     
  17. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Depends on what job you have in the military. Besides, the damage to oneself was not in reference to pregnancy but other things including STDs or even a horrendous sunburn that makes wearing your uniform and marching an impossiblility.
    Also there is a major difference between "uh oh... I appear to be pregnant" and "I'm in the military but I'm TRYING to get pregnant."

    Even still, my friend is a combat photographer and expert marksman. The likelihood that she will be stationed in an area that she may be shot at is pretty good. Being pregnant with such a job is not a good idea.

    However sexual relations between spouses etc isn't able to be regulated and shouldn't be, I am talking about sex between soldiers. It is frowned upon.

    However it is interesting to point out that the Romans and Greeks had homosexuals in their armies. And logic says that if you're fighting to protect a lover you will likely fight harder.
     
  18. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Lol don't have the codes handy, and I'm on my phone so I will not be fighting to find and link them until I have a working computer handy to do so.
     
  19. Draka

    Draka Wonder Woman

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    19,120
    Ratings:
    +4,786
    Religion:
    Lasso of Truth
    "Frowned upon"? Never come across that thought or ideal while I was in. A lot of military personnel actually met and started relationships while stationed together before marrying. Matter of fact, I can't say I recall ever being involved with a civilian at all while I was in the Navy. Nope, not a one. Every relationship I had was with another service-member. There were no issues and no reprimands. Nothing.

    What branch were you in anyway?
     
  20. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Also understand that these examples for reasons are explanations I have heard or assume. So if you plan on trying to make me out to be sexist or something, don't waste your time. It's a dead wrong assumption and you're reading too much into things or allowing yourself to see correlations between words where there are none, and none meant.

    I only brought up pregnancy as something that would be a direct consequence of sex between a male and female soldier that would rather be avoided if both could see combat.

    Either way my original point still stands that the military frowns on relations between soldiers while on base. It still happens of course but they don't condone such.

    Therefore their stance on homosexuals being bunked together should and probably will be the same as a man and woman together for the same reasoning. This was a response to a specific question posed by Kathryn and served its purpose. People reading too much into other aspects or trying to imply me meaning anything derogatory is purely imagined or misunderstood.
    I will not be debating this further, if anyone remains butthurt after this disclaimer then the fault lies with you.
     
    #80 darkstar, Sep 23, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2011
Loading...