Senate PASSES repeal of DADT

[*winter*]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

I'm really looking forward to the increase in qualified people, particularly linguists, who can now serve openly. Perhaps people who had to hide who they are as well as those keeping a secret for people can now work better because they won't be scared and morale may go up for many, as well as increased productivity. Having people serve who are capable, well trained, and want to be there who don't have to have a second or secret life is going to make our military better.

A- freaking- MEN! One of my best friends quit ROTC in college because she didn't want to be in the closet. She was so dedicated and just a great cadet- everyone loved her, too- she would have had a great career as an officer.

I also have two friends who have gotten out of the military in the past 2 years because they couldn't take the hiding anymore. One was a decorated medic who served multiple tours in Iraq. The military is losing some amazing people by being so backward.

[sdtennisgal]

Originally Posted by *winter*

A- freaking- MEN! One of my best friends quit ROTC in college because she didn't want to be in the closet. She was so dedicated and just a great cadet- everyone loved her, too- she would have had a great career as an officer.

I also have two friends who have gotten out of the military in the past 2 years because they couldn't take the hiding anymore. One was a decorated medic who served multiple tours in Iraq. The military is losing some amazing people by being so backward.

Thank you. I think you just pointed out one of the most objective reasons for getting rid of DADT (and the ban that preceeded it): The loss of some brilliant and talented service members.

As a reserve officer (who is married to an active duty officer) I can attest that the U.S. military has lost some excellent folks either directly (thrown out) or indirectly (decided to get out) because of that ignorant policy. I can also attest that most officers I know wanted to see this policy gone. Yes, there are a couple of bigots out there still, but there are with every group.

Going back to what was said earlier by "Tradition": Yes, some people will be "uncomfortable." Guess what? Some people are still "uncomfortable" around blacks, asians, hispanics, jews, and members of the opposite sex. But guess what, you-as a soldier, sailor, marine, airman-are going to work and live around those people and treat them with respect.

I realize I am not saying anything that probably hasn't already been said in this post, but I wanted to put in my two cents.

[*winter*]

Originally Posted by sdtennisgal

Going back to what was said earlier by "Tradition": Yes, some people will be "uncomfortable." Guess what? Some people are still "uncomfortable" around blacks, asians, hispanics, jews, and members of the opposite sex. But guess what, you-as a soldier, sailor, marine, airman-are going to work and live around those people and treat them with respect.

Yeah...I was thinking the same thing about women. Fact is, there are still some people in the military who wish women weren't a part of it...but that's just too bad for them!

[VandalSquirrel]

Great article in the Advocate about Trans members of the military.

http://www.advocate.com/Politics/Mil...itary_Stories/

[The Tradition]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Yes you definitely cleared things up. We certainly didn't already know everything that you typed.



Newsflash: You all were always sharing showers and foxholes with homosexual men. They won't suddenly find you attractive now that DADT is repealed. If you didn't see an erect penis then, you won't see an erect penis now. If he didn't try to hump your ass in the shower then, he won't try to hump your ass in the show now just because DADT is repealed. Homosexuality isn't just about sex and physical attraction, just like heterosexuality isn't just about sex and physical attraction. You don't want every woman that you see and gay men don't want every man that they see.**

Many gay, lesbian, bisexual military people will still feel uncomfortable expressing their sexual orientation unless it is absolutely necessary. It takes a lot more than a repeal of DADT for GLB to feel comfortable and "normal" in the same way that heterosexuals in heterocentric nations have been allowed to feel comfortable and "normal."

**The interesting part of this is that it is the heterosexual men (those who claim to be heterosexual or are really heterosexual) who have beaten and raped men in prison and in the military as a sign of force and power. Or were they just horny and wanted sex? Nah....

I never said it would turn anyone gay, it's more of a "what you don't know won't hurt you (or in this case make you uncomfortable)" kind of thing.

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

I'm really looking forward to the increase in qualified people, particularly linguists, who can now serve openly. Perhaps people who had to hide who they are as well as those keeping a secret for people can now work better because they won't be scared and morale may go up for many, as well as increased productivity. Having people serve who are capable, well trained, and want to be there who don't have to have a second or secret life is going to make our military better.

I'm so tired of straight people, mainly straight men, thinking all of the gay men are out to butt hump them. Guess what, just like how not all women want you, not all men want you either. Stop flattering yourself and realize you probably aren't his type because a) you aren't a man who likes men b) he's professional and not going to combine work and romance c) you aren't all that.

Never said I was all that, but nice ad homenim. Also, I know a gay guy who I train with all the time, and I have no problem with him. This decision simply adds a whole new realm of open sexuality to the military that wasn't there before, and it may take a while to smooth things out.

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

If we're quoting statistics, how about the one that says 92 percent of troops who believed they had served with a gay person said they never saw an impact on their units' morale or effectiveness.

What does that say to you, The Tradition? Could be why people call you a bigot.



And you don't think it's uncomfortable for homosexual soldiers to always have to be on guard about what they say and do?

Glad to see people are so catty in here right now. Did I go about my post in a derogatory way? No, I didn't. I was simply educating some members who didn't understand the issue fully, and provided my personal insight and opinion. And your statistic is fine, but it doesn't make mine less true. I understand that we have civillians control the military for a reason, but I think that in cases like this, Congress should've listened a bit more to the people who have been in that line of work for their whole lives. It's like trusting a mechanic over a doctor for medical advice, you should be listening to the people who specialize in the field.

Originally Posted by sdtennisgal

Thank you. I think you just pointed out one of the most objective reasons for getting rid of DADT (and the ban that preceeded it): The loss of some brilliant and talented service members.

As a reserve officer (who is married to an active duty officer) I can attest that the U.S. military has lost some excellent folks either directly (thrown out) or indirectly (decided to get out) because of that ignorant policy. I can also attest that most officers I know wanted to see this policy gone. Yes, there are a couple of bigots out there still, but there are with every group.

Going back to what was said earlier by "Tradition": Yes, some people will be "uncomfortable." Guess what? Some people are still "uncomfortable" around blacks, asians, hispanics, jews, and members of the opposite sex. But guess what, you-as a soldier, sailor, marine, airman-are going to work and live around those people and treat them with respect.

I realize I am not saying anything that probably hasn't already been said in this post, but I wanted to put in my two cents.

I agree with you, there were plenty of good people lost, and I know individuals who have had to keep their sexuality under wraps due to DADT. I'm simply saying that I will be a bit uncomfortable about it at first, but it will not effect my performance. Being uncomfortable and spouting hate speech are two different things, and I think since humans are naturally uncomfortable with change that it's ok to be a bit uncomfortable with the decision as long as it doesn't personally hurt your dedication to duty (not saying the same for others of course).

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by The Tradition

I was simply educating some members who didn't understand the issue fully, and provided my personal insight and opinion.

No, you were simply stating the obvious and offering your opinion.

And your statistic is fine, but it doesn't make mine less true.

Right, so the bottom line is that many heterosexual soldiers hold bigoted ideas until they serve with homosexual soldiers at which point they overwhelmingly realize their mistaken beliefs.

Sounds like the repeal of DADT truly is for the best.

Being uncomfortable and spouting hate speech are two different things, and I think since humans are naturally uncomfortable with change that it's ok to be a bit uncomfortable with the decision as long as it doesn't personally hurt your dedication to duty (not saying the same for others of course).

Ok, so what was the point of your post?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by The Tradition

This decision simply adds a whole new realm of open sexuality to the military that wasn't there before, and it may take a while to smooth things out.

Open sexuality and sexual orientation have always been a part of the military:

Examples:

1. http://military.discovery.com/histor...nups-vote.html

2. The common knowledge that military men were having sex with women (and other men) domestically and abroad.

3. Then when women were able to join the military, some heterosexual military men were thrilled to be able to have sex with some of the heterosexual military women.

4. Heterosexual military men talk to each other about their wives, girlfriends, and other women.

5. Heterosexual military women talk to each other about their husbands and boyfriends, and other men.

"Open sexuality" is only noticed when it isn't heterosexuality. That's what heterocentrism does. I don't think getting rid of DADT will make the sexuality and sexual orientation any more open than it has always been.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by The Tradition

Never said I was all that, but nice ad homenim. Also, I know a gay guy who I train with all the time, and I have no problem with him. This decision simply adds a whole new realm of open sexuality to the military that wasn't there before, and it may take a while to smooth things out.

Ad hominem doesn't mean what you think it means here. But well played on making it clear you think I'm including you when I was being general about attitudes of people thinking that someone being just as open about who they are and their life magically makes them a bullet point on the Gay Agenda.

Maybe the new realm of open sexuality is now people can't be persecuted, harassed, and dishonorably discharged by people for being gay & lesbian anymore? People who went after other based on their own ignorance, fears, prejudice, whatever, now can't use DADT and need to accept reality or look into another career.

[The Tradition]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

No, you were simply stating the obvious and offering your opinion.



Right, so the bottom line is that many heterosexual soldiers hold bigoted ideas until they serve with homosexual soldiers at which point they overwhelmingly realize their mistaken beliefs.

Sounds like the repeal of DADT truly is for the best.



Ok, so what was the point of your post?

To inform a previous poster on why the repeal was controversial, as I've said multiple times before.

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

Ad hominem d
oesn't mean what you think it means here. But well played on making it clear you think I'm including you when I was being general about attitudes of people thinking that someone being just as open about who they are and their life magically makes them a bullet point on the Gay Agenda.

Actually it does mean what I think it does. You were assuming I was egotistical, and that that had an impact on what my views on the issue are. You made an assumption about my character as part of your argument. Textbook ad homenim.