Repeal of DADT

By all means, open my eyes.

 

Not even ALL "men" have the same libidos. Many of them are less interested in sex, than the stereotypes tend to support.

So, what the hell are you actually talking about?

 

Doesn't work that way. You have to open them yourself.

 

And then, which way do I look? My eyes are usually rather open, and I see beauty in both sexes, and I see no reason why I can't love anyone I choose to love. What stands in my way? What stands in anyone's way?

What evidence do you have that one love is less than another?

I'm sorry... I'm not very intuitive. I have an actual standard of evidence, and that standard includes the necessity of more substantive evidence than Matrix-esque witticisms can provide.

 

One thing at a time.

That's because you've allowed others to teach you how and what to think.

Cling to it if you must, but it's worthless.

 

I have enough patience that surprises even myself.

What course of action do you believe I should pursue to "open my eyes" and what do you expect will happen when I do, Morpheus?

I hope that counts as one thing and not two.

 

None. Just stop chasing after lies and the truth will catch up with you.

You'll see whatever it is you need to see. If you hate what you see, you'll be worse off than before.

 

Interesting because there have always been gays and lesbians in the US military. I served with gays in Vietnam even though many were drafted and could have been exempted from military service by simply stating that they were gay.

Of course during the Vietnam War the US military really didn't want to know is someone was a gay or lesbian. The military was predominately concerned with "headcount" because they needed warm bodies to send to the killing fields of SE Asia.

It wasn't until the draft was ended that the US military began the "witch-hunt" for gays and lesbian in the military. It was the witch-hunt that eventually lead to DADT.

Of course the fact that gays and lesbians would join the US military as a career only to be thrown out if their private lives were revealed is anything but merely complaining or protesting for the sake of protesting or complaining. They had a valid reason to complain and protest as their rights as individuals were being violated. What a person does in their private life really has little or nothing to do with their duties as a US soldier.

What we have seen is that all of the arguments against ending DADT have basically fallen by the wayside. Ending DADT has not adversely effected moral or operational effectiveness. The transistion has been smooth and soon the whole matter will be nothing but a historical footnote similar to racial segregation in the US military. We will look back and wonder how such discrimination was ever allowed to exist in the first place.

 

Yes, as you correctly conclude, as a 30+ year military veteran presently serving in the Air Force... I've known MANY homosexual men and women. We've operated smoothly, effectively in spite of the prejudices and fears which many tend to express concerning homosexual people.

What some people don't realize, is that if over 14,000 homosexual people were removed from military service over the course of DADT... then that is merely the tip of the iceberg where actual numbers of gays in the military are concerned. So yes, the military functions WELL with homosexual people in it; just as it always has and as ALL other NATO nations (and others) have literally proven.

Many in America, look/grasp for ANY reason they can, to promote their continued irrational animus toward homosexual people. I'll never forget that ignorant and hate-filled display of that Conservative audience BOOING an active-duty military officer, just because he was "homosexual"; and also the OBVIOUS lack of IMMEDIATE (timely) support (from the Presidential candidates that were debating LIVE) for that man presently serving in harm's way in the Middle East.

As a military man who has served under every President since the late 70's and contributed to every war-effort since then... I'm not the least bit tolerant of those who attack our military people for such petty and hateful BS. To say that they don't likely deserve the ultimate sacrifices many (gay/straight) have made for this nation... would probably be too KIND.

 

How many more homosexuals do you expect to suddenly start enlisting in the military now as a result of this, Shiva? Honestly.

 

Who knows... it's possible that many are attracted to the new job security. Is it a negative if there's an influx?

 

I really don't know but we do have some conflicting information on the percentage of gays and lesbians in society.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/6961/What-Percentage-Population-Gay.aspx

Whatever the actual percentage I would expect that to be represented in the US military as well. Whether a person is a homosexual or not has virtually no bearing on their possible decision to join the US military. I can't find any reason for their sexuality to be related to a decision to join the US military so long as discrimination against them does not exist in the military. I could see it discrimination discouraging many from joining in the past but with the elimination of the discrimination there is no reason for them to consider that as a factor.

In any case I will thank them for the personal sacrifice they make to serve our country. Shouldn't everyone thank them for that?

 

I am thankful for everyone who is brave enough to risk their lives to defend the freedoms that I enjoy everyday and that so many of us take for granted. They have my complete and total respect. But I spit on the people who would think nothing of senselessly putting those people's lives in jeopardy for the sake of political correctness.

 

I heard tons of celebrating from many friends.

It's interesting that you are a gay conservative. Do you hold other traditionally conservative beliefs? I know that Dick Cheney is an example of a very conservative politician that strongly supports gay rights.

 

You don't have too many people to spit on, then.

 

How does homosexuality put troops in danger?