Gays in the millitary?? No fair!!

[Gadawg73]

None are so blind as those who will not see.


It is not simply about service and stupid situational questions mean nothing.

The heads of each branch of Service have now advised Congress to go slow on any decisions to rescind DADT. They each expect to have problems if congress simply does this.

I'll wait to see what happens.

Before the Service heads spoke Ollie both Mullen and Gates stated this would be a one year study.

All of a sudden we hear from you that it is not about "stupid situational questions" when a situation is unfavorable to your claims and position in the matter. However, when there were dozens of situational questions raised here IN OPPOSITION to any change, such as the shower and rooming situational questions, YOU AGREED WITH THEM.

You use a double standard Ollie.
Open your eyes and you will see.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Ollie, if you were pinned down in a fox hole and a battallion of NVA regulars were coming towards you and there was a tank moving towards the NVA and a fast mover coming in with nape to coat the gooks would you have radioed to the tank and the fast mover "If you are gay I do not want your help"?

stupid situational question /\

Never going to happen

And you don't understand the difference. Oh well.

 

[maineman]

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".

that is not accurate in the least. Like I said... if you could provide me with the wording from one regulation I had violated, you would have done so. I had no evidence of homosexual acts... I had no admission of homosexuality. Again.... either show me what regulation I violated, or show that your testicles are bigger than peas and man up and retract your lie. Take your pick..."sarge".

 

[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".

that is not accurate in the least. Like I said... if you could provide me with the wording from one regulation I had violated, you would have done so. I had no evidence of homosexual acts... I had no admission of homosexuality. Again.... either show me what regulation I violated, or show that your testicles are bigger than peas and man up and retract your lie. Take your pick..."sarge".

First off keep your gay loving mind off my testicles.

2nd I do not do research for a supposedly Professional Officer. I am not going to waste my time looking for the exact words of a regulation in the Navy that you should already know. I say you broke or at least ignored the regulations. that's fact. And that destroys your professionalism. My belief is not a lie. I honestly believe that you are Guilty as charged.

 

[maineman]

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".

that is not accurate in the least. Like I said... if you could provide me with the wording from one regulation I had violated, you would have done so. I had no evidence of homosexual acts... I had no admission of homosexuality. Again.... either show me what regulation I violated, or show that your testicles are bigger than peas and man up and retract your lie. Take your pick..."sarge".

First off keep your gay loving mind off my testicles.

2nd I do not do research for a supposedly Professional Officer. I am not going to waste my time looking for the exact words of a regulation in the Navy that you should already know. I say you broke or at least ignored the regulations. that's fact. And that destroys your professionalism. My belief is not a lie. I honestly believe that you are Guilty as charged.

you SAY I broke regulations, and I've called you on it. Either show exactly where in the regulations I am in violation, or retract you statement. Simple as that. YOu want to accuse ME of violating MY oath of office, you'd better damned well prove your slander, kid.

 

[Father Time]

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.

It is when it only applies to homosexuals.

 

[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.

It is when it only applies to homosexuals.

It applies to all, no one is asked their sexual preference neither are they allowed to tell it. Faggots openly saying they're faggots is not a "right" to fight for, its a waste of time, the same with your trolling, they don't have to join the military to openly proclaim the faggotry.

 

[Father Time]

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.

It is when it only applies to homosexuals.

It applies to all, no one is asked their sexual preference neither are they allowed to tell it. Faggots openly saying they're faggots is not a "right" to fight for, its a waste of time, the same with your trolling, they don't have to join the military to openly proclaim the faggotry.

Post evidence that straights are not allowed to talk about their sexual preferences, or else admit it's discriminatory.

Also if you honestly think I'm trolling you don't know what the term means.

 

[amrchaos]

I understand what the gays are fighting for.

Let say they come out to their unit. Then they could smile, make a little happy dance and then go about their business as a soldier with the unit ecognizing to excessively gay bash can tear the unit apart. In a sense, the gay soldier gains buddies that accept him for what sexual preference loser he or she is. Also of the same sex so it is a two for one with advertisement!!

Everybody wants to be accepted for who they are--this includes natures own sex deviants.


But this does not address the very peculiar case that DADT turns the gay soldier into an 1001 atta boy achieving super soldier. Why mess up the military just to make the gays even gaier??

 

[Flaylo]

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.

It is when it only applies to homosexuals.

Are you knowledgable about the Army and how we operate? Are you knowledgable about military regulations and policy other than your homosexual one-sided agenda crusade against DADT? A soldier's sexual orientation is a personal and private matter, not a matter that everyone in the unit must know and not something that a soldier needs to divulge. Its not discrimination to tell a soldier to keep the details of his sex life and activities to themselves and thats all the Army expects out of all. Point out to me where it states in the regulation that only homosexuals are supposed to keep their sex lives to themselves.


I'm in the Army, a highly disciplined and professional fighting force, not a democratic college dorm.

 

[Flaylo]

It is when it only applies to homosexuals.

It applies to all, no one is asked their sexual preference neither are they allowed to tell it. Faggots openly saying they're faggots is not a "right" to fight for, its a waste of time, the same with your trolling, they don't have to join the military to openly proclaim the faggotry.

Post evidence that straights are not allowed to talk about their sexual preferences, or else admit it's discriminatory.

Also if you honestly think I'm trolling you don't know what the term means.

Post evidence that the regulation applies only to gays.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I have one problem with Gays in the military. It goes as follows.

Say that I am a soldier. I am straight and therefore when I take a shower, It is like showering iwth a bunch of ugly gorillas.

On the other hand, let a gay male take a shower with the rest of the soldiers--it is like parting at a strip club every night--for free--the government is paying him.


See the problem. Homosexuals will have R&R while a straight grunt linke me will not. That is totally unfair. We straights want eye candy as well, so why not make the barracks co-ed??


That is right!! mixed sex barracks, mixed sex showers and mixed sex training!! Why not? Are you sexist! A prude. It is only fair--what do you think?

The idea that most women or gay men would even get in a shower with you is hilarious.

keep IT coming. oops! poor choice of words.

this belongs in the Lame Zone

 

[Flaylo]

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.

What is your personal experience with soldiers? If my soldiers object to the idea of sharing showers and barracks rooms with someone who is gay because they can't trust that the person maybe eyeing them they're bad homophobes for feeling that way. Don't ever refer to my soldiers as thugs because you don't my soldiers or any soldiers at all for that matter. Until you put on the uniform you will never understand why forbidding gays from serving openly in the right thing to do, at least for their sakes. and the sake of unit cohesion.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

I have yet to hear the answer to my question, would you rather WONDER about who is checking you out in the shower or KNOW who is gay so you can avoid showing them you package?



STILL no answer to this question. Oh and for all you "straights" out there who think that gay men are just SALIVATING at the chance to "hit" on you, GET OVER YOURSELVES!!! I have gone to "gay" bars (dance clubs) with both girlfriends and female friends because THEY don't want to get pawed at and HIT ON by guys all night and guess what, despite the fact that I'm a good looking guy I never got hit on ONCE because gay men have a pretty good idea of who is and is NOT gay. If you are so fucking freaked out about it then just make sure those around you know you are NOT interested in men and you will NEVER be "hit on" by a gay man I GUARENFUCKINGTEE IT!!!



I think the REAL problem is these HOMOPHOBES assume that gay men will have the same type of LECHEROUS personality that THEY do so they ASSUME a gay man wouldn't be able to go a day without hitting on EVERY MAN on post which is, OF COURSE, total BULLSHIT!

Really "The Bass" I ASSURE you you don't have to worry about a gay man hitting on you, I PROMISE!!! And even IF one does just explain that you like PUSSY and you will NEVER have to tell another gay man again because it will be KNOWN that you are a "straight". See how EASY that is? So simple a CAVEMAN like YOU can do it.




And here we have this INSANE quote from Flaylo


Quote: Originally Posted by Flaylo
We who are already serving know the problems that people who are perceived to be homosexual cause, it creates a hostile work environment for both the perceived homosexual and those he has to work with.




HOLY SHIT!!!!!! PERCEIVED homosexuals!!!?? So I guess you are advocating DESTROYING a man's CAREER because he is PERCEIVED to be HOMOSEXUAL!!! Now you REALLY understand why DADT is such a HORRIBLE policy. Well I'm sure YOU don't understand but the REST of us DO!

 

[Flaylo]

I have one problem with Gays in the military. It goes as follows.

Say that I am a soldier. I am straight and therefore when I take a shower, It is like showering iwth a bunch of ugly gorillas.

On the other hand, let a gay male take a shower with the rest of the soldiers--it is like parting at a strip club every night--for free--the government is paying him.


See the problem. Homosexuals will have R&R while a straight grunt linke me will not. That is totally unfair. We straights want eye candy as well, so why not make the barracks co-ed??


That is right!! mixed sex barracks, mixed sex showers and mixed sex training!! Why not? Are you sexist! A prude. It is only fair--what do you think?

The idea that most women or gay men would even get in a shower with you is hilarious.

keep IT coming. oops! poor choice of words.

this belongs in the Lame Zone

If gays do openly serve they will be in showers with straights, they may not have a problem being around straight men but straight men would sure as damn hell have a problem with it, you can count me as one of them.

 

[Flaylo]

I have yet to hear the answer to my question, would you rather WONDER about who is checking you out in the shower or KNOW who is gay so you can avoid showing them you package?

If DADT is rescinded people will worry, the current policy removes that worry that a homosexual maybe checking them out.

HOLY SHIT!!!!!! PERCEIVED homosexuals!!!?? So I guess you are advocating DESTROYING a man's CAREER because he is PERCEIVED to be HOMOSEXUAL!!! Now you REALLY understand why DADT is such a HORRIBLE policy. Well I'm sure YOU don't understand but the REST of us DO!

People who are perceived to be gay by virtue of their behvior are a nuisance in the unit and though I have no proof, the ones I've worked around that do display that behavior I pulled them to the side and remind them that they're in the military and that discipline and professionalism must be maintain at all times. I don't only do that to gays, I do it to all soldiers who's conduct is unbecoming, all soldiers E-6 and below are my soldiers and I can issue on the spot corrections to any of them.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Yeah I am SURE you want to run out all those that you PERCEIVE to be homosexual. You are a REAL piece of work.

 

[Flaylo]

Yeah I am SURE you want to run out all those that you PERCEIVE to be homosexual. You are a REAL piece of work.

I don't want to know who's gay, don't you think that maybe thats what I was trying to point out when I said gays have a reason why their sexual orientation should be known and why I am against being forced to know? If its substantiated that a soldier is gay I will support chaptering them out 110% to the fullest extent of the regulation because its my duty abide by and enforce the regulation. If I catch someone doing homosexual acts or overhear them saying that they're gay I will report it, but I'm not going to witchunt for gays.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

BULLSHIT!!! You HATE gays so OF COURSE you are going to try to run them out.

 

[ABikerSailor]

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.

The first one, is a POLICY that states if you have absolute physical proof that someone has committed homosexual acts, then you have to discharge them. However, if you have SUSPICIONS that the individual is gay, you cannot ask, and they cannot tell you, until AFTER there is physical proof (i.e. photographs or eyewitnesses).

MILPERSMAN? Ollie, do you realize what that book is? It's the Military Personnel Manual, which lays out the procedures for ALL discharges. That one just happens to discuss what the procedures are after proof has been retrieved. It tells you what to put on the DD214.

The other ones are re-iterating what the policies are. You can discharge if you have physical proof, but if it's only suspicion, then you can't ask and they don't have to tell.

Incidentally, one of the things that is required prior to being separated? You have to be interviewed by a shrink to determine if you really are gay.

Way to go Army Bag Girl Ollie......you've shown yet again what a pompous ass you are.

Incidentally, what the fuck is some ground pounding delivery boy gonna really know about the Navy anyway? You stated the deck of a carrier isn't dangerous because you landed on one ONCE in a Blackhawk. There was where I first knew you were dumber than a bag of bricks.

This thread? Just keeps polishing that fucked up image. BTW Olliver Pissed, does the Army think it's okay for someone who is retired (and thereby still in), to disrespect a retired CDR?

I guess the Army has no discipline or military bearing if you're the poster boy for them here.

Glad I didn't join your fucked up service.........respect for my superiors is something I've had since I was a kid.

Apparently you missed that class........