Don't ask, Don't tell repealed

#51
#51
Vol_4_Life said:
I really don't care what I come off as. I care even less if I come off as homophobic.
Click to expand...

Count me on your side of the argument.

New Marine motto; "the few, the proud, the sexually twisted."

Maybe one of the numerous posters promoting the homosexual agenda can tell me how this new policy will be different from how it has been in the past?
 
Last edited:
#52
#52
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins issued the following statement following the vote:

"Today is a tragic day for our armed forces. The American military exists for only one purpose - to fight and win wars. Yet it has now been hijacked and turned into a tool for imposing on the country a radical social agenda. This may advance the cause of reshaping social attitudes regarding human sexuality, but it will only do harm to the military's ability to fulfill its mission.

"It is shameful that the Democratic leadership, aided by Republican Senators, has forced through such a radical change in a lame-duck session of Congress. The 1993 law which is to be repealed was adopted only after months of debate and at least a dozen Congressional hearings. The repeal has been forced through only eighteen days after the Pentagon released a massive report, which raised more questions than it answered on the impact the overturning of this policy will have on our nation's military.

"It is clear why this was done: not to enhance the military's ability to accomplish its mission or to enhance national security. Rather, it is a political payoff to a tiny, but loud and wealthy, part of the Democratic base. They knew that the Congress elected last month would never adopt such legislation - certainly not without a more thoughtful and deliberative process.

"We thank Senators John McCain, James Inhofe, Jeff Sessions and Jim DeMint, as well as all of those who voted to support our troops over advancing a liberal social agenda. These senators fought hard for our men and women in uniform, and their efforts will not be forgotten."

List of rinos in the equation:

Sens;
Scott Brown (R-Mass),
Susan Collins (R-Alaska),
Mark Kirk (R-Ill.),
Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska),
Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)
George Voinovich, (R-Ohio),
Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and
John Ensign (R-Nev.)

I'm a bit surprised that our Tennessee rinos, Alexander and Corker didn't vote for it but then their votes weren't needed, they certainly didn'tt stand up for America when their votes could have defeated the pedophile protection act.
 
#53
#53
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, which opposes the “gay” activist agenda, said today’s vote, potentially clearing the way for repealing the military ban, is the most important homosexuality-related congressional vote ever held: “If the lame-duck Congress succeeds in ‘gaying down’ our military this weekend, it will take a disastrous leap toward “mainstreaming” deviant, sinful homosexual conduct – not just in the military but in larger society — thus further propelling America’s moral downward spiral.

...

Americans are tired of religious phoneys like [Sen. Joseph] Lieberman – politicians who use their religion as a PR prop while actively undermining its moral dictates. Claiming to be an “observant” Jew, Lieberman wears his religion on his sleeve (perhaps he will walk, not drive, on the Jewish Sabbath Day today to cast his pro-homosexuality vote!). Stealing the moral authority of “civil rights” is the only way Lieberman can rationalize his role as a crusader for the ‘Gay’ Lobby on Capitol Hill — when His religion, a form of Orthodox Judaism, condemns homosexual acts as an “abomination”

...

Said Brian Camenker, founder of the pro-family group Mass Resistance, who attends an Orthodox synagogue in the Boston area:

“Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who has the incredible chutzpah to call himself an Orthodox Jew, will desecrate the holy Sabbath to go to work – the U.S. Senate – and vote to force the integration of homosexuality into the U.S. military. He is a shameful disgrace and an embarrassment to Orthodox Jews everywhere.”
 
#54
#54
clintonsdog.jpg
 
#57
#57
BearCat204 said:
Then GTFO, they have just as much of a right to be there that you do.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

So what is the difference between how it was vs how the homosexual lobby would have it be??

Mathew Staver, on behalf the Freedom Federation, made the following statement in response to the Senate’s vote to repeal Section 654, Title 10, U.S.C. (1993), which is usually mislabeled by the subsequent Executive policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT): "Our armed forces should take heart, because the American people will not turn its back on you. This vote happened because opportunistic Senators – only days before Christmas – put political interest groups above supporting our men and women in uniform."

Staver continued, "This action will be overturned in the next Congress because it breaks the bond of trust that must exist between the military and those who command in the Pentagon and Congress. Today’s vote will prove as costly to its proponents as ObamaCare was to its advocates. We promise a full mobilization of faith-based and policy organizations, veterans, and military families in the states of every Senator who voted for repeal of DADT against the advice of our service chiefs and during a time of war. Those Senators – and the Pentagon leaders responsible for this breach of trust – should understand that they will be the object of concerted political action against them."
 
#58
#58
gsvol said:
So what is the difference between how it was vs how the homosexual lobby would have it be??

Mathew Staver, on behalf the Freedom Federation, made the following statement in response to the Senate’s vote to repeal Section 654, Title 10, U.S.C. (1993), which is usually mislabeled by the subsequent Executive policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT): "Our armed forces should take heart, because the American people will not turn its back on you. This vote happened because opportunistic Senators – only days before Christmas – put political interest groups above supporting our men and women in uniform."

Staver continued, "This action will be overturned in the next Congress because it breaks the bond of trust that must exist between the military and those who command in the Pentagon and Congress. Today’s vote will prove as costly to its proponents as ObamaCare was to its advocates. We promise a full mobilization of faith-based and policy organizations, veterans, and military families in the states of every Senator who voted for repeal of DADT against the advice of our service chiefs and during a time of war. Those Senators – and the Pentagon leaders responsible for this breach of trust – should understand that they will be the object of concerted political action against them."
Click to expand...

Anything that compares obamacare to dadt policy is ridiculous
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#59
#59
BearCat204 said:
Anything that compares obamacare to dadt policy is ridiculous
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

The fact of the matter is that there were likely a % of queers enlisted proportionate to the total population. The bumpkins who act as if things will change in the least are the same ones who miss segragated drinking fountains. Incurable bigots.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#62
#62
clintonsdog.jpg


"A chaplain asked God this week, 'why do you allow evil to grow in America, and open homosexuality to be forced upon our military?' To which God answered him from Psalm 92:7: 'When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is so that they shall be destroyed forever.'
 
#63
#63
so, homosexuals are wicked and should be destroyed. Izzat what you're saying, gs?
 
#64
#64
gsvol said:
Count me on your side of the argument.

New Marine motto; "the few, the proud, the sexually twisted."

Maybe one of the numerous posters promoting the homosexual agenda can tell me how this new policy will be different from how it has been in the past?
Click to expand...

That's more of a question for homophobic bumpkins like you to answer, don't ya think?

This is a free country, and restricting a certain sect of people from serving is un-American. If you want a country where the "unworthy" are filtered out of society, then build a time machine, learn to speak Dutch, and make yourself a part of the third reich.
 
#65
#65
MG1968 said:
so, homosexuals are wicked and should be destroyed. Izzat what you're saying, gs?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that's what the chaplin said.

The Bible does say such activity is an abomination before God.

The conservative legal group, Alliance Defense Fund, issued a statement after the vote saying "The Senate's cave-in to pressure from activists to impose homosexual behavior on our military will place our troops' religious liberties in unprecedented jeopardy. Indeed, the first official casualty of this hurried vote may well be the religious freedom of chaplains and Service members." ADF Litigation Counsel, Daniel Blomberg, went on to say " no Americans, and especially not our troops, should be forced to abandon their religious beliefs."






DinkinFlicka said:
That's more of a question for homophobic bumpkins like you to answer, don't ya think?

This is a free country, and restricting a certain sect of people from serving is un-American. If you want a country where the "unworthy" are filtered out of society, then build a time machine, learn to speak Dutch, and make yourself a part of the third reich.
Click to expand...

There is no shortage of heterophobe fruitcakes on the horizon either.

The question I keep asking is why is the change in policy needed??

There have always been homos around, as long as they kept their business to themselves there was no problem.

What are we going to do now, rewite the UCMJ??

After all one can be dismissed for adultery as spelled out in the UCMJ.

Oh, and BTW, the Third Reich was made of devients that were for the most part homosexuals.
 
#66
#66
how is this vote "imposing" homosexual behavior on the military? I can just about guarantee you that under DADT, homosexual military members were probably honest with their closest friends. The only people who are going to have a problem with this repeal are the people who probably also think that having a black Commander in Chief is a bad thing.

I know several homosexuals, none of whom are the flaming caricatures of the kind you see prancing around San Francisco. They are very serious and well-educated people who love their country. There is absolutely no reason why they should be denied the privilege of serving their country.
 
#67
#67
MG1968 said:
how is this vote "imposing" homosexual behavior on the military? I can just about guarantee you that under DADT, homosexual military members were probably honest with their closest friends. The only people who are going to have a problem with this repeal are the people who probably also think that having a black Commander in Chief is a bad thing.

I know several homosexuals, none of whom are the flaming caricatures of the kind you see prancing around San Francisco. They are very serious and well-educated people who love their country. There is absolutely no reason why they should be denied the privilege of serving their country.
Click to expand...

No, your wrong all homosexuals are terrible people and should be shot.......:censored: I swear some of you all on here would make hitler proud. I think some of you people on here acting all internet though guy on here are actually closet homosexuals, your over compensating because your not secure enough in your sexuality.
 
#68
#68
mreed90 said:
No, your wrong all homosexuals are terrible people and should be shot.......:censored: I swear some of you all on here would make hitler proud. I think some of you people on here acting all internet though guy on here are actually closet homosexuals, your over compensating because your not secure enough in your sexuality.
Click to expand...

lulz

go away, kid, you're bothering me
 
#69
#69
gsvol said:
There is no shortage of heterophobe fruitcakes on the horizon either.

The question I keep asking is why is the change in policy needed??

There have always been homos around, as long as they kept their business to themselves there was no problem.

What are we going to do now, rewite the UCMJ??

After all one can be dismissed for adultery as spelled out in the UCMJ.

Oh, and BTW, the Third Reich was made of devients that were for the most part homosexuals.
Click to expand...

"Heterophobe?" Seriously?

The change was needed because DADT contradicted with the open forum of ideas, lifestyles, and liberties that we, as Americans, are very proud to say we have.

As long as they kept their business to themselves, there were no problems? Are you being sarcastic, or are you just that dense?

Rewriting the UCMJ over this would be necessary if it said anything about homosexuality. It doesn't. As for adultery, how is that even relevant to this? Sounds as though you believe homosexuality simply means you can't stop thinking about butts all day... which, like many of your stances and reasons for taking them, is asinine.

Yeah, the exterminations that came with the third reich didn't include homosexuals, so there must be a reason for it.

Oh WAIT! Homosexuals were a specifically targeted group for extermination in Nazi Germany. What's next, you gonna say the African slave trade in the 1600's was orchestrated by the tribal chiefs?

Bunk, bunk, bunk, bunk. It's all you post.
 
#70
#70
mreed90 said:
No, your wrong all homosexuals are terrible people and should be shot.......:censored: I swear some of you all on here would make hitler proud. I think some of you people on here acting all internet though guy on here are actually closet homosexuals, your over compensating because your not secure enough in your sexuality.
Click to expand...

So... 90? Is this the year you were born in?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top