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"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repealed!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

    Bware I'm the Jugganaut!!

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    273
    Ratings:
    +14
    Hence the reasons that don't ask don't tell was created in the first place. It was to avoid problems like this and to protect the gay members. Let's face it, there are a lot of homophobic members in the military, it's wrong, but I guarantee you that the gay members will be treated poorly by other members who are uncomfortable around them. It's human nature, it's wrong, but it WILL happen. Another reason that don't ask don't tell should not be repealed is the relationship aspect. Part of the reason that men and women are not allowed to co-habitate when we get deployed is that the military doesn't want you to have romantic relationships with other members when deployed. If my wife were getting shot at, I would put myself in danger to protect her, no matter how capable she is (she's a way better shot than me...shhh).

    Before I get flamed for this, let me say that I am not in anyway anti gay, my father in law is gay and I have two other gay friends. I have told them all the exact same thing. Don't ask don't tell was put in place to protect gay and straight members alike.
     
  2. Draka

    Draka Wonder Woman

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Messages:
    19,120
    Ratings:
    +4,786
    Religion:
    Lasso of Truth
    "butthurt"??? So if a person argues a faulty point of yours they are "butthurt"? I wasn't taking anything sexist or anything, it's just that your points were a bit on the absurd side and I was trying to point that out. Your points weren't offensive, just misinformed. Your "butthurt" comment is, though, a bit offensive. If that's what you were shooting for, you've got it. If you were shooting for looking like an *** enough that no one would want to bother with debating with you anymore, you have that as well. At least from me. Out.
     
  3. Bware

    Bware I'm the Jugganaut!!

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    273
    Ratings:
    +14
    And put yourself in danger in the process...
     
  4. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Friends in the marines, I followed my father and stuck with army. Thus branches that see combat first hand. As I understand it from friends in Navy and Airforce, they aren't as strict on the subject because they don't usually see active combat unless the job focuses on it, such as a navy seal.

    That being said, that is based on hearsay and assumptions. But logic would state that if you are going into combat, you don't want a baby on board as that's unethical. If you're working on base in the US fixing planes or working in a lab or something, its not quite the same issue.
     
  5. Songbird

    Songbird She rules her life like a bird in flight

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    5,439
    Ratings:
    +558
    I've never heard that it was enacted to protect homosexuals. Seems like a powerful distraction from the real issues.

    Edit: I should revise that to say, I've heard people claim it protects homosexuals. I've never heard that as the impetus for its introduction as a policy.
     
    #85 Songbird, Sep 23, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2011
  6. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    I was giving a preemptive disclaimer. If you are offended by a term such as that I'm sorry but its a little overly sensitive considering everyone attacks various things including people's intelligence on a regular basis with terms much worse than butthurt.

    Either way, I hope to have cleared up some of this misconceptions. As I said, I'm not trying to or have any intention of debating the point, whether you wanted to or not. I made a statement to respond to one person's concerns and that's it.
    I have been respectful in all arguments presented by me, or at least I am fairly certain of that.
    It did seem to be implied by your questioning of me attributing pregnancy to damage, that you were going down the path of me being accused of being sexist which is far from the case.
    It was not a personal attack in the least. If you are offended I am, as I said, sorry. But I do also restate that all things considered, it is a little oversensitive since I never named you specifically. It was a general statement and disclaimer in general that you and personal experience on how things explode on this forum go.

    Think what you want, makes no difference to me. But I am not planning on being the bad guy or attacking anyone at all.
     
  7. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Very true in some cases.
     
  8. turk179

    turk179 I smell something....

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,718
    Ratings:
    +394
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Unless the U.C.M.J. has been updated since I was in, your point stands in regards to homosexuals being bunked together due to article 125. But your point does not stand in regards to relations between men and women. There really are no articles or paragraphs that "frown upon" men and women relationships in service. I can understand you not wanting to debate this topic any further because we are going slightly off topic anyways.
     
  9. Songbird

    Songbird She rules her life like a bird in flight

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    5,439
    Ratings:
    +558
    Which cases? Are there enough cases to warrant a policy similar to Don't Ask, Don't Tell, for heterosexuals for their protection in combat?
     
  10. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    It's more of the off topic. Either way, whether an actual rule or not they generally don't ask, though its not really a supported action. I haven't seen anyone actually punished unless they were an officer. However I HAVE seen people reassigned to different bunkmates.

    Either way the original point was that I believe the military will handle homosexuals being banked together in the same way they handle males and females banked together. Obviously this depends on branch as well as other factors that I honestly don't know. Then again small details are usually not something I'm overly concerned with and as I said before are largely based on HEARSAY AND ASSUMPTION as well as personal observations.
     
  11. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    This is personal experience and has nothing to do with the military at all. If I'm in a fight to defend myself I act in a logical and calm manner.
    If I'm protecting my wife I'm more likely to throw concern for myself out the window and can make mistakes.

    Therefore I agree that fighting harder when defending a lover in combat would be obvious, but that you may be likely to put yourself in more danger while thinking of them that's all. But that was completely off topic and has nothing to do with legislation.
     
  12. Songbird

    Songbird She rules her life like a bird in flight

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    Messages:
    5,439
    Ratings:
    +558
    Ah, okay. I had wondered if that was used as a step in reasoning to support DADT.
     
  13. darkstar

    darkstar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    191
    Ratings:
    +23
    Oh heck no, I celebrated the repeal of DADT.

    Thus the disclaimers, I didn't want too many people to get the wrong idea about me or my position on DADT
     
  14. IsmailaGodHasHeard

    IsmailaGodHasHeard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,712
    Ratings:
    +50
    Alexander the Great was bisexual and he was a kick *** warrior. People who support DADT are ignorant. I am ashamed to say that I used to support DADT. People helped me see the truth that GLBT soldiers were outed against their will. That is a violation of the right to privacy for a GLBT person of any profession to be outed against their will. I love all of the troops who have fought for my Constitutional rights.
     
  15. waitasec

    waitasec Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    21,038
    Ratings:
    +475
  16. IsmailaGodHasHeard

    IsmailaGodHasHeard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,712
    Ratings:
    +50
    Thank you for not hating me.
     
  17. -Peacemaker-

    -Peacemaker- .45 Cal

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,710
    Ratings:
    +166
    Religion:
    Evangelicalism
    The thing that amazes me when it comes to the transgender part of LGBT is that the army seems more focused on giving them rights then giving them adequate health care. Our culture has officially lost it's mind when they can't see that someone who's living as a transgender needs serious psychiatric help.
     
  18. IsmailaGodHasHeard

    IsmailaGodHasHeard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    1,712
    Ratings:
    +50
    I might agree with you, but I know that gays and bisexuals have the right to serve openly.
     
  19. waitasec

    waitasec Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    21,038
    Ratings:
    +475
    :confused:

    my post was about the repeal.
     
  20. Oneatatime

    Oneatatime Huh?

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    774
    Ratings:
    +43
    I am all for people being able to be who they are without having to suffer discimination so please don't think that I believe that homosexuals should just keep quiet about ther sexuality. I only meant to point out that those who are open about thier sexuality will likely suffer discrimination.

    Homosexuals are screwed whatever they do which is a terrible shame. I just don't understand why people can't just accept other people for who they are but for the moment this is just the they way things are I guess.

    Hopefully this change will result in the eventual acceptance of open sexuality (That is if they wish to make their sexuality known) in the armed forces as it has elsewhere.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...