Obama to call for 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal, adviser says

[DiamondDave]

Ah yes....we women call that the "Potty Principal" and it was used against us for the longest time.

And you have increased rules and logistics behind the housing of women AND men in training, field deployments, etc... and when you throw another monkey wrench into the system such as homosexuals, you complicate things even MORE.... and as stated, the morale issue is MAJOR

What are you going to do, house gay men with lesbians? 4 separate areas of a barracks?

The plain and simple fact is that it is a logistical nightmare and there are good reasons why gays in the military are frowned upon... and it has nothing to do with whether they can fire a weapon or repair an engine on a Humvee

Aren't these the same arguments posed by bigots in the 1940s and 50s as the armed forced integrated?

I'll give you this: bigotry is amazingly consistent!

Umm.... then I guess it is bigotry to have men and women in separate living areas with separate bathroom facilities, etc???

This has nothing to do with skin color or religious affiliation... those have nothing to do with the billeting issues that are had when it comes down to living environment

Again... if you think that having open homosexuals in living quarters and the day-to-day logistics of habitation does not create problems, you are sadly mistaken...... whether you like it or not, it is a problem

 

[Nosmo King]

And you have increased rules and logistics behind the housing of women AND men in training, field deployments, etc... and when you throw another monkey wrench into the system such as homosexuals, you complicate things even MORE.... and as stated, the morale issue is MAJOR

What are you going to do, house gay men with lesbians? 4 separate areas of a barracks?

The plain and simple fact is that it is a logistical nightmare and there are good reasons why gays in the military are frowned upon... and it has nothing to do with whether they can fire a weapon or repair an engine on a Humvee

Aren't these the same arguments posed by bigots in the 1940s and 50s as the armed forced integrated?

I'll give you this: bigotry is amazingly consistent!

Umm.... then I guess it is bigotry to have men and women in separate living areas with separate bathroom facilities, etc???

This has nothing to do with skin color or religious affiliation... those have nothing to do with the billeting issues that are had when it comes down to living environment

Again... if you think that having open homosexuals in living quarters and the day-to-day logistics of habitation does not create problems, you are sadly mistaken...... whether you like it or not, it is a problem

Having separate facilities for men and women is not bigotry. Can't the women folk get pregnant and thus disrupt the daily killing and destruction we expect from the Armed Forces?

I can't see homosexuals getting pregnant.

But, I do understand a great many bigots would object to housing homosexuals with heterosexuals. I guess that fear factor is too great for such minds to overcome.

 

[uscitizen]

Aren't these the same arguments posed by bigots in the 1940s and 50s as the armed forced integrated?

I'll give you this: bigotry is amazingly consistent!

Umm.... then I guess it is bigotry to have men and women in separate living areas with separate bathroom facilities, etc???

This has nothing to do with skin color or religious affiliation... those have nothing to do with the billeting issues that are had when it comes down to living environment

Again... if you think that having open homosexuals in living quarters and the day-to-day logistics of habitation does not create problems, you are sadly mistaken...... whether you like it or not, it is a problem

Having separate facilities for men and women is not bigotry. Can't the women folk get pregnant and thus disrupt the daily killing and destruction we expect from the Armed Forces?

I can't see homosexuals getting pregnant.

But, I do understand a great many bigots would object to housing homosexuals with heterosexuals. I guess that fear factor is too great for such minds to overcome.

The homophobes greatest fear is that they will be corruped and have to try some of that....

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

I agree. Personally, I'm not opposed to homosexuals serving openly. I am in a minority in that opinion though. That said, I do have a problem wth politicans using the Military as a vehicle for social change. The GOP won't even have to fling this back at him. If he mentions it tonight, the media will fling it for them.

Integration came to the military world before it arrived in the civilian world.

On 26 July 1948, President Harry S Truman signed Executive Order 9981, establishing the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services. It was accompanied by Executive Order 9980, which created a Fair Employment Board to eliminate racial discrimination in federal employment. ​

Segregation in the military services did not officially end until the Secretary of Defense announced on 30 September 1954 that the last all-black unit had been abolished. However, the president’s directive put the armed forces (albeit reluctantly) at the forefront of the growing movement to win a fully participatory social role for the nation’s African-American citizens. ​

The true fulfillment of the entire scope of Executive Order 9981—equality of treatment and opportunity—actually required an additional change in Defense Department policy. This occurred with the publication of Department of Defense Directive 5120.36 on 26 July 1963, 15 years to the day after Truman signed the original order. This major about-face in policy issued by Secretary of Defense Robert J. McNamara expanded the military’s responsibility to include the elimination of off-base discrimination detrimental to the military effectiveness of black servicemen.LINK​

IMO this was effective, as it was within a more controlled environment, and over the course of time educated many who had previously had no contact, either socially or in jobs, that proximity of the various cultural/ethnic groups would not bring on the end of the world! ​

As for the general idea, I cannot figure out why straights are so fearful, unless they have been playing "on the downlow" all along, and since this eventually relates to the marriage thing, I cannot get why so many straights seem to be worried that if gays marry each other it will reduce the straight's prospects for finding a partner. Do all that many straights really WANT to marry gays? Why?​

This is the perfect way to get this whole issue moved to non-issue status.​

I don't completely disagree with you. However, EO 9981 came during a time of peace when the military was in a time a transition, no matter how short it turned out to be. The military today is in no such transition. It is fighting a shooting war on two fronts and leading the fight in the war against terror. I'm not saying that "Don't ask, don't tell" should not be repealed. I am simply advocating a little restraint. Wait until we are out of Iraq and Afghan. Then do it.

Riiiiight, wait, take some time, we aren't ready, give people time to ajust and get used to it......... Where have we heard that before!

I am getting an inkling that you think we will never be out of Iraq and Afghanistan...

As for the argument that if you let gays in pretty soon dogs and cats will want to enlist - clue here, doggies, porpoises, and seals and horseys are already there, and cats will only deploy if the food is right and they can get sufficient nap time......

As for the rest of it, Alexander the Great had this rather amazing Bi, Gay, and Straight Army, and look what he managed, including taking on the Middle East and Central Asia, going beyond Bactria.

 

[Father Time]

Nothing wrong with gays in the military...anybody who thinks there is is nothing more than a bigot...

Then you try and deal with the issues in billeting, morale, and daily life living in places such as combat zones and training environment...

To think that there are not serious problems caused by such situations, then you are simply deluding yourself for the sake of partisanship or you are just plain ignorant

Why do you think so lowly of our troops?

Surely they can handle a few gays.

 

[Father Time]

Then you try and deal with the issues in billeting, morale, and daily life living in places such as combat zones and training environment...

To think that there are not serious problems caused by such situations, then you are simply deluding yourself for the sake of partisanship or you are just plain ignorant

Ah yes....we women call that the "Potty Principal" and it was used against us for the longest time.

And you have increased rules and logistics behind the housing of women AND men in training, field deployments, etc... and when you throw another monkey wrench into the system such as homosexuals, you complicate things even MORE.... and as stated, the morale issue is MAJOR

What are you going to do, house gay men with lesbians? 4 separate areas of a barracks?

The plain and simple fact is that it is a logistical nightmare and there are good reasons why gays in the military are frowned upon... and it has nothing to do with whether they can fire a weapon or repair an engine on a Humvee

Name some then.

 

[uscitizen]

If your commander says you will put up with gays and you cannot, well you are no longer fit for military duty.

If you cannot adhere to the rules you should be out.

 

[uscitizen]

I think the younger set in the military might have a little different view of homos in the military than the old con farts on here do.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Nothing wrong with gays in the military...anybody who thinks there is is nothing more than a bigot...

Then you try and deal with the issues in billeting, morale, and daily life living in places such as combat zones and training environment...

To think that there are not serious problems caused by such situations, then you are simply deluding yourself for the sake of partisanship or you are just plain ignorant

Why do you think so lowly of our troops?

Surely they can handle a few gays.

You tryin' ta be funny, there, Pops ? ? ? ? ? ?

 

[DiamondDave]

Ah yes....we women call that the "Potty Principal" and it was used against us for the longest time.

And you have increased rules and logistics behind the housing of women AND men in training, field deployments, etc... and when you throw another monkey wrench into the system such as homosexuals, you complicate things even MORE.... and as stated, the morale issue is MAJOR

What are you going to do, house gay men with lesbians? 4 separate areas of a barracks?

The plain and simple fact is that it is a logistical nightmare and there are good reasons why gays in the military are frowned upon... and it has nothing to do with whether they can fire a weapon or repair an engine on a Humvee

Name some then.

Housing and rooming situations. Additional facilities for personal care and hygene
Revamping and remodeling of buildings to accommodate changes
Completely redoing deployment plans to accommodate


You want even more??

You are a fucking buffoon... this is a logistical nightmare and a hindrance to morale... whether it is PC to say so or not

 

[jillian]

Then you try and deal with the issues in billeting, morale, and daily life living in places such as combat zones and training environment...

To think that there are not serious problems caused by such situations, then you are simply deluding yourself for the sake of partisanship or you are just plain ignorant

DD, those are the same bogus arguments made when they wanted to de-segregate the military. From all indications, the military is now one of the most color-blind organizations around. (notwithstanding the odd disgusting racist pretend former military dude or so who slither around here). The same will be true after gays can exist openly. The reality is, there already are gays in the military. They have served admirably and bravely as any other soldier. And I'd wager that every person in their unit already knows they're gay.

It just dishonors their service to shove them into closets.

 

[DiamondDave]

Aren't these the same arguments posed by bigots in the 1940s and 50s as the armed forced integrated?

I'll give you this: bigotry is amazingly consistent!

Umm.... then I guess it is bigotry to have men and women in separate living areas with separate bathroom facilities, etc???

This has nothing to do with skin color or religious affiliation... those have nothing to do with the billeting issues that are had when it comes down to living environment

Again... if you think that having open homosexuals in living quarters and the day-to-day logistics of habitation does not create problems, you are sadly mistaken...... whether you like it or not, it is a problem

Having separate facilities for men and women is not bigotry. Can't the women folk get pregnant and thus disrupt the daily killing and destruction we expect from the Armed Forces?

I can't see homosexuals getting pregnant.

But, I do understand a great many bigots would object to housing homosexuals with heterosexuals. I guess that fear factor is too great for such minds to overcome.

If you think it is only about pregnancy, you are more of an idiot than we first thought you to be

 

[DiamondDave]

Then you try and deal with the issues in billeting, morale, and daily life living in places such as combat zones and training environment...

To think that there are not serious problems caused by such situations, then you are simply deluding yourself for the sake of partisanship or you are just plain ignorant

DD, those are the same bogus arguments made when they wanted to de-segregate the military. From all indications, because of that, the military is one of the most color-blind organizations around. (notwithstanding the odd disgusting racist pretend former military dude or so who slither around here). The same will be true after gays can exist openly. The reality is, there already are gays in the military. They have served admirably and bravely as any other soldier. And I'd wager that every person in their unit already knows they're gay.

It just dishonors their service to shove them into closets.

No..... it is not... do you, political correctness aside, see the logistical issues that come with billeting and hygiene issues between men and women and the problems that took a LOT to overcome in the military... now add in all the additional issues you add with homosexual men, lesbians, straight men, straight women, bi-sexual men, and bi-sexual women, when it comes to the billeting and morale?? It is indeed a logistical nightmare and nothing along the lines of race integration in the military

 

[Nosmo King]

And you have increased rules and logistics behind the housing of women AND men in training, field deployments, etc... and when you throw another monkey wrench into the system such as homosexuals, you complicate things even MORE.... and as stated, the morale issue is MAJOR

What are you going to do, house gay men with lesbians? 4 separate areas of a barracks?

The plain and simple fact is that it is a logistical nightmare and there are good reasons why gays in the military are frowned upon... and it has nothing to do with whether they can fire a weapon or repair an engine on a Humvee

Name some then.

Housing and rooming situations. Additional facilities for personal care and hygene
Revamping and remodeling of buildings to accommodate changes
Completely redoing deployment plans to accommodate


You want even more??

You are a fucking buffoon... this is a logistical nightmare and a hindrance to morale... whether it is PC to say so or not

Do you suppose there have already been homosexuals serving in the armed forces? Not only today, but throughout our history?

 

[jillian]

No..... it is not... do you, political correctness aside, see the logistical issues that come with billeting and hygiene issues between men and women and the problems that took a LOT to overcome in the military... now add in all the additional issues you add with homosexual men, lesbians, straight men, straight women, bi-sexual men, and bi-sexual women, when it comes to the billeting and morale?? It is indeed a logistical nightmare and nothing along the lines of race integration in the military

That argument might hold if there weren't already gays being billeted with heterosexuals.
I don't believe in being PC for the sake of PC. I believe in treating people with dignity and respect and without bigotry

 

[DiamondDave]

Name some then.

Housing and rooming situations. Additional facilities for personal care and hygene
Revamping and remodeling of buildings to accommodate changes
Completely redoing deployment plans to accommodate


You want even more??

You are a fucking buffoon... this is a logistical nightmare and a hindrance to morale... whether it is PC to say so or not

Do you suppose there have already been homosexuals serving in the armed forces? Not only today, but throughout our history?

Do you suppose the problems that have arisen when they have been discovered in a living environment?? Do you suppose the problems of how you house a bi-sexual? Do you house them all separate as to not offend, not act sexually, etc, around other soldiers in that living environment? Do you not see the inherent logistical and morale problems simply because of your leftist touchy-feely political correctness goggles??

 

[DiamondDave]

No..... it is not... do you, political correctness aside, see the logistical issues that come with billeting and hygiene issues between men and women and the problems that took a LOT to overcome in the military... now add in all the additional issues you add with homosexual men, lesbians, straight men, straight women, bi-sexual men, and bi-sexual women, when it comes to the billeting and morale?? It is indeed a logistical nightmare and nothing along the lines of race integration in the military

That argument might hold if there weren't already gays being billeted with heterosexuals.
I don't believe in being PC for the sake of PC. I believe in treating people with dignity and respect and without bigotry

And when discovered, do you not know of the inherent issues that have amassed because of those situations??

Jill... don't be this naive

I believe in dignity and respect as well.. but not all things are for every person... just as you do not have a no legged person qualifying for the military, even though they want to serve... just as a person with a mental disorder, though normally OK a majority of the time, does not belong in the military... it has nothing to do about respect, but how a military unit MUST function... the homosexuals and bi-sexuals are indeed a hindrance to the military, all political correctness and touchy-feely bullshit aside

 

[jillian]

And when discovered, do you not know of the inherent issues that have amassed because of those situations??

Jill... don't be this naive

I believe in dignity and respect as well.. but not all things are for every person... just as you do not have a no legged person qualifying for the military, even though they want to serve... just as a person with a mental disorder, though normally OK a majority of the time, does not belong in the military... it has nothing to do about respect, but how a military unit MUST function... the homosexuals and bi-sexuals are indeed a hindrance to the military, all political correctness and touchy-feely bullshit aside

Dan Choi said his troops had zero problem with him being gay.

Dan Choi Explains 'Why I Cannot Stay Quiet' - ABC News

Biography

Choi graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 2003 with degrees in Arabic and environmental engineering.[3] Choi served as an infantry officer in Iraq in 2006 and 2007. In June 2008, he transferred from active duty Army to the New York National Guard. Choi serves as a National Guardsman with the 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry, based in Manhattan.[3]

Choi received a discharge letter following his coming out on the The Rachel Maddow Show. In response, Choi penned an open letter to U.S. President Barack Obama and the United States Congress.[4] In the letter, Choi challenged the morality and wisdom of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, writing that the policy is "a slap in the face to me. It is a slap in the face to my soldiers, peers and leaders who have demonstrated that an infantry unit can be professional enough to accept diversity, to accept capable leaders, to accept skilled soldiers."
Despite his appeal and a Courage Campaign petition signed by almost 162,000 people, on June 30, 2009, a panel of New York National Guard officers recommended that Choi be discharged from the military.[5] The final decision, to be made by the commander of First Army and the chief of the National Guard Bureau, is still pending.

Choi is among 59 gay Arabic linguists, along with 9 gay Farsi linguists, who have faced a discharge from the U.S. military from Don't Ask Don't Tell's inception until June 2009.[6]


Gay rights activism
Since Choi's coming out, 38 West Point alumni also came out and announced the formation of Knights Out, an organization of West Point alumni who support the rights of LGBT soldiers to serve openly. Choi was one of the founding members and is the spokesperson for the group.[7]. The organization offers "to help their alma mater educate future Army leaders on the need to accept and honor the sacrifices of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender troops."[7][8]

Choi has also spoken at numerous gay rights events, including a march in Los Angeles following the California Supreme Court's affirmation of Proposition 8. On May 27, 2009, he addressed a demonstration of gay activists outside the Beverly Hilton Hotel, where President Barack Obama was speaking at a Democratic National Committee fund raising event[9]. In addition, Choi spoke at the 2009 Pride Rally in New York City and served as a Grand Marshal alongside Knights Out in San Francisco's 2009 Gay Pride Parade.[10]

On July 16, 2009 Choi was in Culver City, California to introduce the premiere of Abe Forman-Greenwald's documentary called Silent Partners.[11] The documentary is the fourth episode in the In Their Boots series, with the episode focusing on the partners of LGBT soldiers deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. In the episode, Choi criticizes the U.S. military's neglect of the partners of service members.[11]

http://www.bing.com/reference/semhtml/Daniel_Choi?src=abop&fwd=1&q=dan+choi&qpvt=dan+choi

Tell me this man doesn't honor his uniform:

Rachel Maddow: Lt. Colonel Victor Fehrenbach Discharged For Being Gay - Video - YouTube

 

[Nosmo King]

Housing and rooming situations. Additional facilities for personal care and hygene
Revamping and remodeling of buildings to accommodate changes
Completely redoing deployment plans to accommodate


You want even more??

You are a fucking buffoon... this is a logistical nightmare and a hindrance to morale... whether it is PC to say so or not

Do you suppose there have already been homosexuals serving in the armed forces? Not only today, but throughout our history?

Do you suppose the problems that have arisen when they have been discovered in a living environment?? Do you suppose the problems of how you house a bi-sexual? Do you house them all separate as to not offend, not act sexually, etc, around other soldiers in that living environment? Do you not see the inherent logistical and morale problems simply because of your leftist touchy-feely political correctness goggles??

Do you suppose those gay service men and women served effectively?

The problems that occur when they are outed...are those exclusively problems started by the gay service men and women, or the heterosexual service men and women who merely took offense?

My point is: if service to one's country is an honorable pursuit, than shouldn't any one physically and mentally qualified to serve be given that chance?

The homophobic views of previous administrations have purged the services of valuable members (translators immediately come to mind) simply because those homophobes couldn't handle the situation. I wonder then what other critical situations they could not handle?

 

[Queen]

Wow, he's really putting himself out on a limb in an attempt to keep at least one of his promises.

I think this one will pretty much ensure he doesn't have a second term.

LOL!!! Because it's an American value to deny certain citizens the rights the rest of us enjoy?

Maybe it's a right wing value to be bigotted and prejudiced, but most Americans are not that way.