Judge Bans Enforcement of Don't Ask Don't Tell

#76
#76
BigPapaVol said:
I don't disagree with this. Allowing flaunting of one's sexuality would certainly open the door for the same male / female issues that have been pointed out here. I think those issues are absurd, but I am 100% certain that there are a lot of soldiers out there who would make it an issue.
Click to expand...

I would have to imagine this is where the military leaders may have issue.

Serving in a combat era has its own challenges, Im not sure they want to add anymore, no matter how trivial.
 
#77
#77
BeecherVol said:
I would have to imagine this is where the military leaders may have issue.

Serving in a combat era has its own challenges, Im not sure they want to add anymore, no matter how trivial.
Click to expand...

good point. recruitment is already a problem. do we want to do anything that could potentially hurt that in morale during wartime?
 
#78
#78
I don't think anyone is arguing it wouldn't be better if if it was all live and let live. But the harsh reality is that is not the state we are in at the moment. I say defer to the commanders on this decision. If they think it is best to repeal it, then I say fine. If they say DADT is crucial to maintaining a cohesive fighting unit, then I am equally on board. If the top brass were to announce one day that there are legitimate reasons for chaning all uniforms to pink, then so be it. The military isn't a democracy.

I fail to see why this is so hard to grasp.
 
#79
#79
I think the military should be allowed to deal with this situation as it sees fit. I don't know how comfortable I would be in the showers in basic if I knew the guy next to me is gay.
 
#84
#84
VolBurgers said:
No not really. It worked in '"favor" of the gay community in the early 90s. Time to take the final step.
Click to expand...

How did it work in the 90's but not now? The rules made up are thought well out and the general public's opinion is not a factor. We don't live in your world.

Perhaps we should also do away with fraternization? That rule was put in place for unit cohesiveness not because anyone really gave a crap about whether a CO was banging some newly minted tail.
 
#89
#89
volinbham said:
so you are completely without prejudice?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Even if I wasn't, prejudice is a learned behavior, not human nature.
MontereyVol said:
How did it work in the 90's but not now?
Click to expand...
Baby steps, man. Baby steps.

MontereyVol said:
Perhaps we should also do away with fraternization? That rule was put in place for unit cohesiveness not because anyone really gave a crap about whether a CO was banging some newly minted tail.
Click to expand...
Nice strawman. Classic.
hohenfelsvol said:
He hates anyone "he" believes is homophobic.
Click to expand...
No, no I don't. I don't hate people I disagree with. Sorry if I came off that way, I thought we were having a friendly debate here.
 
#90
#90
If who you love is determined and not learned, who you hate can be the same way. If you're going to say preference is determined the foil has to be applied as well.
 
#94
#94
So if love cannot be determined hate cannot as well. Sounds like prejudice is not what you said it was.
 
#97
#97
You said prejudice is not human nature. If who we love is 'nature' who we hate can just as well be 'nature'.
 
#98
#98
"who we love" is not human nature. I haven't said that it was. In fact, I don't even understand the argument.


Do you think racists come out of the womb hating black people?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top