Gays in the millitary?? No fair!!

[Flaylo]

You mean the hell that hasn't happened in every other military that lets gays serve openly?

The US military happens to be the best military in the world by a wide margin, if DADT id hurting the military as bad as you're making it to be we wouldn't be the best, but you're not satisfied with that are you? We don't need to do what every other military is doing because we are the best the military, the others needs to pick up their weapons and follow me, not the other way around. Ever heard of the slogan "Lead from the front"?

You going to hold their hand for everything? College kids can handle bunking with gays, I would hope soldiers would be able to handle it.

The military is not a college sorority nor a fraternity, we do a lot of things that colleges don't do so there is no comparison. The military is not make up of college kids and those who have been to college and now wear the uniform will tell you its a big difference. You are not serving and have never served so I don't expect you to have a clue about what separates colleg kids from soldiers.

How are you able to call it extra protection with a straight face? Straights can openly flaunt or mention their sexuality, you want to allow the gays the same thing and all of a sudden it's special treatment?

Its not a secret that some allegedly gay and gay soldiers have been beaten up and brutalized by other soldiers and we NCOs know the threat that openly gay soldiers would face if DADT was rescinded, your problem is that you are not looking at things from a NCO's perspective, please take off your homosexual activist blinders.

Get real.

A civilian who thinks college kids should be the example that soldiers should look to needs to get real.

 

[maineman]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hey.......Flayed Load, all NATO countries (i.e. our allies), allow gays to serve openly.

The only NATO country that doesn't? The US.

In the 20 years that I was in the Navy, I saw a lot of those NATO ships. None appeared to have problems with gays serving alongside them.

It's only antiquated idiots such as yourself that do.

 

[Flaylo]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

Simple question that requires only a simple answer, did those gay sailors openly proclaim their homosexuality? If they did and you were a commander like you said you are you neglected to enforce regulation, thats dereliction of duty and failure to obey regulation in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. One has to obey regulation whether they like it or not, what was your excuse?

 

[maineman]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

Simple question that requires only a simple answer, did those gay sailors openly proclaim their homosexuality? If they did and you were a commander like you said you are you neglected to enforce regulation, thats dereliction of duty and failure to obey regulation in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. One has to obey regulation whether they like it or not, what was your excuse?

what regulation did I neglect to enforce?

 

[Flaylo]

Hey.......Flayed Load, all NATO countries (i.e. our allies), allow gays to serve openly.

The only NATO country that doesn't? The US.

In the 20 years that I was in the Navy, I saw a lot of those NATO ships. None appeared to have problems with gays serving alongside them.

It's only antiquated idiots such as yourself that do.

Which country within NATO leads NATO? The US. We supply the bulk of the bodies and logistical support for most if not all NATO missions so we have no obligation to follow the other NATO members. Perhaps you were one of those substandard NCOs that believes in following and not leading from the front. I'm not antiquated, I lead and serve in the modern military and its rather odd that two retired sailors are pushing the homosexual one sided agenda, but the retired Army and Marines in the forum are not, you both wouldn't happen to those dedicated, patriotic sailors you were glorifying by any chance would you?

 

[Flaylo]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

You don't have to glorify your own acts to make a point.

what regulation did I neglect to enforce?

Article 92 of the UCMJ.

 

[maineman]

Hey.......Flayed Load, all NATO countries (i.e. our allies), allow gays to serve openly.

The only NATO country that doesn't? The US.

In the 20 years that I was in the Navy, I saw a lot of those NATO ships. None appeared to have problems with gays serving alongside them.

It's only antiquated idiots such as yourself that do.

Which country within NATO leads NATO? The US. We supply the bulk of the bodies and logistical support for most if not all NATO missions so we have no obligation to follow the other NATO members. Perhaps you were one of those substandard NCOs that believes in following and not leading from the front. I'm not antiquated, I lead and serve in the modern military and its rather odd that two retired sailors are pushing the homosexual one sided agenda, but the retired Army and Marines in the forum are not, you both wouldn't happen to those dedicated, patriotic sailors you were glorifying by any chance would you?

if you are implying that I am gay, you are wrong... but seeing you reduced to that sort of veiled personal attack is disappointing, though not unexpected.

 

[maineman]

I just stated the reason why, however, that was my opinion. The regulation is needed to maintain unit cohesion and espirit de corps in the military.

I had a different experience. 25 years in uniform... served with MANY gay sailors - officer AND enlisted. Nearly all were extraordinary professionals and did NOT negatively impact unit cohesion or esprit de corps.

You don't have to glorify your own acts to make a point.

what regulation did I neglect to enforce?

Article 92 of the UCMJ.

what lawful order or regulaton are you suggesting I failed to obey?

and how is stating my length of service "glorifying my own acts?

 

[Flaylo]

Hey.......Flayed Load, all NATO countries (i.e. our allies), allow gays to serve openly.

The only NATO country that doesn't? The US.

In the 20 years that I was in the Navy, I saw a lot of those NATO ships. None appeared to have problems with gays serving alongside them.

It's only antiquated idiots such as yourself that do.

Which country within NATO leads NATO? The US. We supply the bulk of the bodies and logistical support for most if not all NATO missions so we have no obligation to follow the other NATO members. Perhaps you were one of those substandard NCOs that believes in following and not leading from the front. I'm not antiquated, I lead and serve in the modern military and its rather odd that two retired sailors are pushing the homosexual one sided agenda, but the retired Army and Marines in the forum are not, you both wouldn't happen to those dedicated, patriotic sailors you were glorifying by any chance would you?

if you are implying that I am gay, you are wrong... but seeing you reduced to that sort of veiled personal attack is disappointing, though not unexpected.

I didn't imply you were gay, I just thought it was odd that two retired sailors are fighting the hardest against DADT, perhaps you have a guilty conscience.

 

[maineman]

I didn't imply you were gay.

of course you did... you just aren't man enough to admit it. I think we're done here.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Which country within NATO leads NATO? The US. We supply the bulk of the bodies and logistical support for most if not all NATO missions so we have no obligation to follow the other NATO members. Perhaps you were one of those substandard NCOs that believes in following and not leading from the front. I'm not antiquated, I lead and serve in the modern military and its rather odd that two retired sailors are pushing the homosexual one sided agenda, but the retired Army and Marines in the forum are not, you both wouldn't happen to those dedicated, patriotic sailors you were glorifying by any chance would you?

if you are implying that I am gay, you are wrong... but seeing you reduced to that sort of veiled personal attack is disappointing, though not unexpected.

I didn't imply you were gay, I just thought it was odd that two retired sailors are fighting the hardest against DADT, perhaps you have a guilty conscience.

If you're not implying anything, then what the fuck was the last sentence of your post?

No, for the record, I'm not gay. Very hetero with stellar references and 3 boys. As far as being a dirtbag NCO? My rate was 120 percent manned when I retired in 02. Most times it never dropped below 110 percent, so it was fucking hard to make rank.

When I made First? I was the only one of my rate/paygrade that made it in 4 districts.

I also have 3 NAM's, all of which were awarded by no less than an Admiral EACH.

However........I will state that when I reported onboard my first ship in '82, there was a DP3 by the name of John L. He was as queer as a 3 dollar bill, everyone knew it, yet nobody messed with him, and if anyone else screwed with him, we'd all defend him. Also knew another one named Paul (same ship). Macho as hell when in uniform, and a total flamer away from the base, but still a really decent guy.

During my time from 82 - 02, I saw many gay servicemembers. Matter of fact, lived with 2 lesbians in Norfolk from '98 to 99.

No, I haven't seen any problems except those that came from close minded redneck Christian conservative assholes that thought gay could be "cured".

Fuck off Flayed Load, you ain't shit.

By the way you sperm burping gutter skank, what's your service, what's your quals? We've showed ours, now tell us what your level of experience is.

I'm betting you made your service record from wiki.

 

[Flaylo]

A person's sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter and is not a bar to entry or continued service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. Homosexual conduct is grounds for separation from the Army. “Homosexual conduct” is a homosexual act, a statement by a soldier that demonstrates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts, the solicitation of another to engage in homosexual act or acts, or a homosexual marriage or attempted marriage.

Only a soldier's commander is authorized to initiate fact-finding inquiries involving homosexual conduct. A commander may initiate a factfinding inquiry only when he has received credible information that there is a basis for discharge. Commanders are accountable for ensuring that inquiries are conducted properly and that no abuse of authority occurs. It is the commander’s responsibility alone to investigate and take action in cases of alleged homosexual conduct. Other soldiers must not engage in behavior that may injure unit cohesion and team integrity, such as repeating rumors or harassing a soldier they believe has a different sexual orientation.


Homosexual Conduct (ArmyStudyGuide.com)

 

[ABikerSailor]

A person's sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter and is not a bar to entry or continued service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. Homosexual conduct is grounds for separation from the Army. “Homosexual conduct” is a homosexual act, a statement by a soldier that demonstrates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts, the solicitation of another to engage in homosexual act or acts, or a homosexual marriage or attempted marriage.

Only a soldier's commander is authorized to initiate fact-finding inquiries involving homosexual conduct. A commander may initiate a factfinding inquiry only when he has received credible information that there is a basis for discharge. Commanders are accountable for ensuring that inquiries are conducted properly and that no abuse of authority occurs. It is the commander’s responsibility alone to investigate and take action in cases of alleged homosexual conduct. Other soldiers must not engage in behavior that may injure unit cohesion and team integrity, such as repeating rumors or harassing a soldier they believe has a different sexual orientation.


Homosexual Conduct (ArmyStudyGuide.com)

Listed Fucked Load, you might wanna unload your bullshit crap on someone else, because you're just cherry picking.

ALL cases that I've heard of or seen, have ALL resulted in discharge. The longest that I'd ever seen someone stay in after it being discovered (usually from a rumor), was 1 year.

Nope.........once it's out, they are as well. Try again you penis puffing colon jousting pillowbiter.

 

[Flaylo]

[
If you're not implying anything, then what the fuck was the last sentence of your post?

Did I strike a nerve because it sounds as if you're about to lose it.

No, for the record, I'm not gay. Very hetero with stellar references and 3 boys. As far as being a dirtbag NCO? My rate was 120 percent manned when I retired in 02. Most times it never dropped below 110 percent, so it was fucking hard to make rank.

I'm a SFC E-7 and I made that rank after with 11 years in and I started off as a Forward Observer, MOS 13F before reclassifying into Aviation. At the rate I'm fast tracking I'm looking at making SGM before 20 years. Advancement in the Senior NCO ranks is based solely on performance and for the last 7 years I've been manning nothing but leadership positions, from squad leader, platoon sergeant, on the trail as a drill sergeant and even a little acting 1SG duties. My performace and experience speaks for itself.

Fuck off Flayed Load, you ain't shit.

By the way you sperm burping gutter skank, what's your service, what's your quals? We've showed ours, now tell us what your level of experience is.

I'm betting you made your service record from wiki.

You strike me as the type of NCO that advanced by doing and saying whatever the boss wanted to hear instead of taking charge and leading from the front. You don't strike me as leadership material bud and I'm not impressed by your insults because I used to dish it out when I was on the trail.

 

[Flaylo]

A person's sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter and is not a bar to entry or continued service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. Homosexual conduct is grounds for separation from the Army. “Homosexual conduct” is a homosexual act, a statement by a soldier that demonstrates a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts, the solicitation of another to engage in homosexual act or acts, or a homosexual marriage or attempted marriage.

Only a soldier's commander is authorized to initiate fact-finding inquiries involving homosexual conduct. A commander may initiate a factfinding inquiry only when he has received credible information that there is a basis for discharge. Commanders are accountable for ensuring that inquiries are conducted properly and that no abuse of authority occurs. It is the commander’s responsibility alone to investigate and take action in cases of alleged homosexual conduct. Other soldiers must not engage in behavior that may injure unit cohesion and team integrity, such as repeating rumors or harassing a soldier they believe has a different sexual orientation.


Homosexual Conduct (ArmyStudyGuide.com)

Listed Fucked Load, you might wanna unload your bullshit crap on someone else, because you're just cherry picking.

ALL cases that I've heard of or seen, have ALL resulted in discharge. The longest that I'd ever seen someone stay in after it being discovered (usually from a rumor), was 1 year.

Nope.........once it's out, they are as well. Try again you penis puffing colon jousting pillowbiter.

If a soldier gets administratively separated from the Army under a Chapter 15 it is due to his or her own undoing because their sexual orientation is a personal and private matter, the minute they're caught publicly engaging in homosexual behavior, conduct and or state they're homosexual they must and will be separated because they failed to keep the matter private. Thats the regulation and as an NCO especially a Senior NCO I must and will enforce that regulation.

 

[Flaylo]

Nope.........once it's out, they are as well. Try again you penis puffing colon jousting pillowbiter.

Those good gay sailors you served with would be offended by those insults because you're making fun of what they do sexually.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I can't help but laugh everytime i see gaybikerboy brags about his 3 attaboys.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

When ABikerFaggot start hurling nasty homosexual laced insults its a good sign he's getting his tail handed to him.

 

[Father Time]

It's a blatantly discriminatory policy and should eventually be eliminated (probably a bad idea from its inception, actually), but giving them a chance to figure out the ramifications and how best to remove the policy is probably not a bad idea. Still, the transparent hatred within the policy and the hypocrisy that follows it is just mind numbing.

Explain to me how a policy that specifically forbids gays to openly flaunt their sexuality is blatantly discriminatory?

Because no such punishment exists against anyone else for flaunting their sexuality (and once again flaunting is not necessary just the mere mention will get you thrown out).

IIf DADT is rescinded and gays are allowed to openly flaunt their sexuality whats going to be the next step, transexuals demanding the right to dress up and act like the opposite sex since their 'transexuality' has no bearing on their work performance and duties?

Oh goody the slippery slope crap. Listen bud there's no reason why anything would be next.