Gays in the millitary?? No fair!!

[ABikerSailor]

Myself as well blu, myself as well.

That shattering sound you're gonna hear is their minds being broken into little bits.

If you hear a whizzing sound, followed by a "pop", you'll know that their little heads spun around so fast that they popped right off.

Either way, it would be good for some of these small minded assholes (like Chucking Ass) to have their blinders removed.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Homosexuality in the military is a POLICY. Not a regulation.

By the way.........where is the regulation in the UCMJ that states "don't be gay"?

Fucking ROTC Reservists..........

Damn it are you that damn stupid or do you just refuse to see the light and purposely keep your head in the sand? It is regulation that a person shall be separated from the military because of homosexuality you jackass squid, read again:

(b) Policy.— A member of the armed forces shall be separated from the armed forces under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense if one or more of the following findings is made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulations

Of course its regulation you retarded monkey.

 

[Father Time]

The Bass no longer will argue with a bunch of faggot loving liberal monkey who don't understand the military and wants to spread their gay activism to an organization where it has no place whatsoever.

Translation: I have no more arguments to support my cause so I will just hurl insults now.

 

[Father Time]

i cant wait for dadt to be repealed msotly just to see the reaction from the nutjob right and church groups.

Here's what will happen.

They will claim the end of the army, or other such doomsday scenarios.

It won't happen.

They'll pray that you won't remember that the next time they the claim that shit (like the retarded claim that gay marraige will destroy society).

 

[Bass v 2.0]

The Bass no longer will argue with a bunch of faggot loving liberal monkey who don't understand the military and wants to spread their gay activism to an organization where it has no place whatsoever.

Translation: I have no more arguments to support my cause so I will just hurl insults now.

You the one that has no arguments and on top of that you make stupid comparisons like the one about college students bunking up together and troops doing the same, when it has already been explained to you that the military and college life are two different entities, you'll use any nonsense to support your homosexual agenda.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

i cant wait for dadt to be repealed msotly just to see the reaction from the nutjob right and church groups.

Here's what will happen.

They will claim the end of the army, or other such doomsday scenarios.

It won't happen.

They'll pray that you won't remember that the next time they the claim that shit (like the retarded claim that gay marraige will destroy society).

If it is lifted and faggots start getting beat up and cohesion in the military units are in disarray the Bass predicts faggot liberals like yourself is going to blame homophobia and not the the lifting DADT as the reason for the problems. DADT is not going to get lifted anytime soon, there is much to evaluate and much that has to be done before it is lifted.

 

[Father Time]

The Bass no longer will argue with a bunch of faggot loving liberal monkey who don't understand the military and wants to spread their gay activism to an organization where it has no place whatsoever.

Translation: I have no more arguments to support my cause so I will just hurl insults now.

You the one that has no arguments and on top of that you make stupid comparisons like the one about college students bunking up together and troops doing the same, when it has already been explained to you that the military and college life are two different entities, you'll use any nonsense to support your homosexual agenda.

I'm still here you're the one who's running away.

You have absolutely no arguments, all you've done is moan that it isn't necessary. It wasn't necessary to integrate the military either.

College and the military may be different settings but your complaint was specifically on bunking with gays which is similar in both cases.

 

[Father Time]

i cant wait for dadt to be repealed msotly just to see the reaction from the nutjob right and church groups.

Here's what will happen.

They will claim the end of the army, or other such doomsday scenarios.

It won't happen.

They'll pray that you won't remember that the next time they the claim that shit (like the retarded claim that gay marraige will destroy society).

If it is lifted and faggots start getting beat up and cohesion in the military units are in disarray the Bass predicts faggot liberals like yourself is going to blame homophobia and not the the lifting DADT as the reason for the problems. DADT is not going to get lifted anytime soon, there is much to evaluate and much that has to be done before it is lifted.

What did I tell you, doomsday scenarios.

Oh and isn't it great how the Bass says that a lot of soldiers are brutes who can't help but assault their fellow troops just for being gay.

I however do not think so lowly of our troops, I would hope that most of them aren't asshole thugs.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Article 92 is the regulation you broke as post by Flaylo, its as clear as day, anyone who doesn't enforce a regulation is in dereliction of duty and disobedience to the regulation. You as a commander stated you knew of gay sailors under your command and you failed to act.

I "knew" they were gay, in that it was obvious by their demeanor, their dress on liberty, the sorts of non-sexual social activities they engaged in, but they did not commit any homosexual acts or openly state that they were gay. Now... I say AGAIN... what regulation did I break?

waiting

Awe, the poor baby Commander got his feelings hurt and negged me. Is that your cyber version of a Captains mast?

I don't see what is so difficult, you knew that you had sailors who were Gay, You were an Officer, and you did not follow up on regulations. You broke the regulations by allowing them to go unchallenged.

10 U.S.C. § 654, Policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces

DoD Directive 1332.14, Enlisted Administrative Separation

MILPERSMAN 1910-148 Separation by Reason of Homosexual Conduct

NAVADMIN 291/99, Continuing Guidance Concerning Proper Application of DoD Homosexual Conduct Policy

ADMIN 094/00 Homosexual Conduct Policy and Training Requirements


Take your pick SIR! (put a little slur n that sir, Nam grunts might understand it) And my bet is that you also knew this before DADT. God only knows how many regs were broken then.

Now pass some rep around and neg me again, You broke the fucking regs.

 

[SFC Ollie]

still waiting

And you can wait until hell freezes over for all I care, If you knew and did nothing, then you were wrong. It is not a foreign language, easy enough to understand. You supposedly were a professional Officer. Yet you act like you are ignorant of the regs. I don't teach commanders, they should already know.

US CODE: Title 10,654. Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces

Hey.......Army Bag Boy Ollie, did you mistakenly leave your brain behind with your last courier delivery? Sounds like......

What part of "have my suspicions" did you miss? Ever watch 2 and a Half Men? Alan looks like, acts like, and on occasion, cries like a gay man. He's straight, but, based on how he acts, people have their suspicions.

Next......what part of "don't ask" (you can't ask them, even if you have your suspicions), and "don't tell" (they can't tell you if they are or not, even if you have suspicions), do you keep missing?

You're a fucking 'tard of the first water. Weapons grade stupidity even.

Try again delivery boy.

Whatever you want to dream about desk jockey.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

What did I tell you, doomsday scenarios.

This is not a doomsday scenario, its reality, DADT was created in the first place to protect gays who were serving to keep them from getting beat up, but you fag loving liberals see DADT as the exact opposite of what is was intended

Oh and isn't it great how the Bass says that a lot of soldiers are brutes who can't help but assault their fellow troops just for being gay.

The troops are not brutes and no where did the Bass imply that, again its reality to anticipate that such things will happen which is why the heads are saying they don't want DADT to be lifted too quickly, but hey its no use telling an idiot who hasn't served one day in the military this. Fights are the least of the problems they have to worry about, lack of cohesion in the units is the biggest worry because not everyone shares your gay loving agenda and not many will be comfortable with sharing close quarters in showers and barracks with someone who is openly a faggot.

I however do not think so lowly of our troops, I would hope that most of them aren't asshole thugs.

You are the one who thinks lowly of troops here, anyone who support the gay agenda to rescind DADT you look down upon as homophobes.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Translation: I have no more arguments to support my cause so I will just hurl insults now.

You the one that has no arguments and on top of that you make stupid comparisons like the one about college students bunking up together and troops doing the same, when it has already been explained to you that the military and college life are two different entities, you'll use any nonsense to support your homosexual agenda.

I'm still here you're the one who's running away.

You have absolutely no arguments, all you've done is moan that it isn't necessary. It wasn't necessary to integrate the military either.

College and the military may be different settings but your complaint was specifically on bunking with gays which is similar in both cases.

Since you believe that military and college life are different why did you say that since college students bunk up together with faggots without a problem[which is not even universally true because there's even strong resistance in college dorms] troops should be able to do the same when you were confronted with the reality that a lot of troops would feel uncomfortable bunking up with and showering around people who are openly faggots?

 

[maineman]

I "knew" they were gay, in that it was obvious by their demeanor, their dress on liberty, the sorts of non-sexual social activities they engaged in, but they did not commit any homosexual acts or openly state that they were gay. Now... I say AGAIN... what regulation did I break?

waiting

Awe, the poor baby Commander got his feelings hurt and negged me. Is that your cyber version of a Captains mast?

I don't see what is so difficult, you knew that you had sailors who were Gay, You were an Officer, and you did not follow up on regulations. You broke the regulations by allowing them to go unchallenged.

10 U.S.C. § 654, Policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces

DoD Directive 1332.14, Enlisted Administrative Separation

MILPERSMAN 1910-148 Separation by Reason of Homosexual Conduct

NAVADMIN 291/99, Continuing Guidance Concerning Proper Application of DoD Homosexual Conduct Policy

ADMIN 094/00 Homosexual Conduct Policy and Training Requirements


Take your pick SIR! (put a little slur n that sir, Nam grunts might understand it) And my bet is that you also knew this before DADT. God only knows how many regs were broken then.

Now pass some rep around and neg me again, You broke the fucking regs.

again... rather than merely post the titles to some military regulations, why not show me how what I did was in violation of any of them. Quote the passage that says that, in absence of any knowledge on my part of an overt homosexual sex act, or an admission of homosexuality by someone in my command, or evidence of their attempt to marry someone of the same gender, that I had a duty to discharge someone for being a homosexual.

And since we both know you cannot do that... after you hem and haw and bullshit, maybe you can get around to retracting your lie.

chickenshit.

 

[Qball]

again... rather than merely post the titles to some military regulations, why not show me how what I did was in violation of any of them. Quote the passage that says that, in absence of any knowledge on my part of an overt homosexual sex act, or an admission of homosexuality by someone in my command, or evidence of their attempt to marry someone of the same gender, that I had a duty to discharge someone for being a homosexual.

And since we both know you cannot do that... after you hem and haw and bullshit, maybe you can get around to retracting your lie.

chickenshit.

If they did nothing overtly alluding to their homosexuality, then your claim that you "knew" they were gay is mostly speculative.

 

[Father Time]

What did I tell you, doomsday scenarios.

This is not a doomsday scenario, its reality, DADT was created in the first place to protect gays who were serving to keep them from getting beat up, but you fag loving liberals see DADT as the exact opposite of what is was intended

I'm not a liberal but I can see the unintended consequences, the discrimination and the general stupidity that is DADT.

Also if they're getting beat up the proper response would be to discipline the soldiers that assault them not to go to the other troops and say 'well you shouldn't have pissed them off'.

Oh and isn't it great how the Bass says that a lot of soldiers are brutes who can't help but assault their fellow troops just for being gay.

The troops are not brutes

I was referring to those that would beat someone up just for being gay. If you think that it would be a big problem then my guess is you think a lot of soldiers are brutes.

I however do not think so lowly of our troops, I would hope that most of them aren't asshole thugs.

You are the one who thinks lowly of troops here, anyone who support the gay agenda to rescind DADT you look down upon as homophobes.

Not really.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

I'm not a liberal but I can see the unintended consequences, the discrimination and the general stupidity that is DADT.

There is no discrimination with a policy that tells homosexuals to keep their sexual life a personal and private matter, especially a policy that allows them to serve. Their sexual lives don't need to be known for them to serve and serving in the military is not a right.

 

[JW Frogen]

Gays should be freely allowed in the military simply because the military already has regulations for sexual tension.

No one can have sex with people in the same unit or organisation unless married. And married people are rarely, if ever, assigned together.

And the military has some of the most rigorous sexual harassment regulations in the world.

So what are the homophobes afraid of?

Other than their own sexuality.

 

[maineman]

again... rather than merely post the titles to some military regulations, why not show me how what I did was in violation of any of them. Quote the passage that says that, in absence of any knowledge on my part of an overt homosexual sex act, or an admission of homosexuality by someone in my command, or evidence of their attempt to marry someone of the same gender, that I had a duty to discharge someone for being a homosexual.

And since we both know you cannot do that... after you hem and haw and bullshit, maybe you can get around to retracting your lie.

chickenshit.

If they did nothing overtly alluding to their homosexuality, then your claim that you "knew" they were gay is mostly speculative.

mannerisms, dress, social friends, interests... you may call it speculation, but if you were in my shoes, you would "know" just like I did. don't kid yourself.

 

[SFC Ollie]

As a person in a command position, If you know that someone has broken the regulations yet do not pursue the issue, then you are breaking the regulations. As a Platoon Sergeant if I "knew" one of my troops had been sleeping on guard duty and did not question it, have i failed to perform my duty? YES! There is no difference. You may attempt to Bullshit around it all you like but fact is fact. The Baby Commander failed to perform. As did the gaybikersailor, and anyone else who "knew" and did not report what they "knew".

 

[Bass v 2.0]

again... rather than merely post the titles to some military regulations, why not show me how what I did was in violation of any of them. Quote the passage that says that, in absence of any knowledge on my part of an overt homosexual sex act, or an admission of homosexuality by someone in my command, or evidence of their attempt to marry someone of the same gender, that I had a duty to discharge someone for being a homosexual.

And since we both know you cannot do that... after you hem and haw and bullshit, maybe you can get around to retracting your lie.

chickenshit.

If they did nothing overtly alluding to their homosexuality, then your claim that you "knew" they were gay is mostly speculative.

mannerisms, dress, social friends, interests... you may call it speculation, but if you were in my shoes, you would "know" just like I did. don't kid yourself.

You know if this is correct you're still wrong because either you didn't act when you knew they were gay or either you spread false rumors of their homosexuality, which means you're prejudging, what kind of commander were you? You have at least counseled them and made them aware of DoD policy on homosexuality.