Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an effort by Democrats and the White House to lift the ban on gays serving openly in the military, voting unanimously against advancing a major defense policy bill that included the provision.
Do you feel that the military should keep the DADT policy, or do away with it and why?
My issue with DADT as it is now is that revealing yourself to be homosexual is grounds for discharge from military service. I find it discriminatory and a policy of fear-mongering and it is outdated and has no place in a free nation.
What kind of message do we send to the rest of the world by discharging people from service to their country based solely on their sexual preference? Or better yet, what kind of message are we sending to our own citizens? How can a nation take strides toward social equality for people of all races, religions, and sexual orientation when our military is allowed to openly discriminate?
Furthermore, I see no need to alter any current residency standards if we were to repeal DADT. Simply because your roommate prefers someone of the same sex does not imply that you are less safe with that person. We have situations in the field when men and women share close sleeping arrangements and that has yet, to my knowledge, cause an issue. So why would it change if it were only men, however some of those men were homosexual? Sexual orientation has never been shown to be related to sexual predation, even among homosexuals in a solely same-sex environment.
Furthermore, I see no need to alter any current residency standards if we were to repeal DADT. Simply because your roommate prefers someone of the same sex does not imply that you are less safe with that person. We have situations in the field when men and women share close sleeping arrangements and that has yet, to my knowledge, cause an issue. So why would it change if it were only men, however some of those men were homosexual? Sexual orientation has never been shown to be related to sexual predation, even among homosexuals in a solely same-sex environment.
Which is completely understood by me, but you have small minded people in the military still, and a small group will have a problem with it and may even act violently towards them. I have never ran into a situation in the field where men and women share sleeping arrangements, and I am forward deployed at the moment. Men and women are segregated in sleeping arrangements to detract from any possibility of sexual contact.
When a majority of troops told the Pentagon this summer they didnât care if gays were allowed to serve openly in the military, it was in sharp contrast to the time when Americaâs fighting forces voiced bitter opposition to accepting racial minorities and women in the services.
The survey, due out Tuesday, is expected to find pockets of resistance among combat troops to ending the ban on gays. But some 70 percent of respondents were expected to say that lifting the ban would have a positive or mixed effect, or none at all, according to officials familiar with the findings.
The study is expected to set the stage for a showdown in the Senate between advocates of repealing the 17-year-old "donât ask, donât tell" law and a small but powerful group of foes in the final days of the lame-duck Congress.
Repeal would mean that, for the first time in U.S. history, gays would be openly accepted by the military and could acknowledge their sexual orientation without fear of being kicked out.
U.S. troops havenât always been so accepting. Troop surveys conducted throughout the 1940s on blacks and Jews, and in the 1970s and 1980s on women, exposed deep rifts within a military that was dominated by white males but becoming increasingly reliant on minorities to help do its job.
In a study from July 1947, four of five enlisted men told the Army that they would oppose blacks serving in their units even if whites and blacks didnât share housing or food facilities.
The same study also revealed a deep resentment toward Jews. Most enlisted men said Jews had profited greatly from the war and many doubted that Jews had suffered under Adolf Hitler.
"Negro outfits should be maintained separately," an Army master sergeant from North Carolina told the Pentagon in 1947. "To do otherwise is to invite trouble and many complications. The equal rights plan should not be forced on the Army as an example to civilians."
Troops also offered dire predictions for what would happen if whites and black units were forced to serve together.
"For sure, all the GIs will quit the Army or buck like hell to get out," a 20-year-old Army private first class told the surveyors. The service members were quoted anonymously in the 1947 study.
Added another 19-year-old soldier: "If the Negro and the whites were mixed, there would be a civil war among the troops. There would be a lot of useless bloodshed if this happens."
But President Harry S. Truman issued a 1948 order on equal treatment of blacks in the services anyway - paving the way for integration during the Korean War. None of these doomsday scenarios came true.
Oh look it seems Americans don't learn from history. Back then "Blacks will cause riots in the military." Present day, "Gays will cause riots in the military." Well it didn't happen then and it won't happen now. Why must people be so ignorant?
Well, before I post I'll just say that absolutely [/b]EV-ER-Y-THING[b] in life is completely poinion no matter what. Okay, my personal experience with gay's is being mostly scared. 1st time: I was at my friend's birthday party and their nieghbor's gay, so he came over and stayed the time. He got drunk and was just generally scary. If you want to know "just how was he 'scary'" if you were in my shoes you would be freaked-out. 2nd time: This kid in my school is gay, so he says, "I'm gay, you gotta problem with that?" Of course I said yeah, cause that's my opinion, and he says, "Well you gonna do somethin' about it?" I said no (he's kinda scary and I think he might have some problems at home) and he said, "That's right!" Thrusting his chest at me all the while. Well, as you can see, I might have an impaired vision of gays because of my expeeriences. I think gays shouldn't be kicked out of the military for telling that they were gay, but I agree with samy that it people shouldn't be encouraged to run around screaming to the world, "I'M GAY AND I'M PROUD OF IT!!!", I mean that's just stupid and annoying.
If gay people were treated equal to straight people then there wouldn't be a need for the whole "I'm gay and I'm proud of it." thing. You want to get rid of that? Then change your opinion and stop being a homophobe. Don't think they're different from you and they wont be.
DADT should be repealed no questions asked. Good service people with stellar military records have been discharged from the military for being gay and it makes no sense at all. I can only imagine the number of willing, able, and intelligent young individuals we don't have in our voluntary service due to this possible persecution. This of course limits the candidacy for our military based on some farcical belief by megalomaniac, homophobic, and often unthinking christian individuals, that these people would somehow hinder their processes within the military.
The truth is anyone who doesn't perform their job in the military well, will be reprimanded and eventually discharged. Not to mention the strict code of conduct in the military referencing things like sexual harassment. If you were a service person, and another service person of the same sex was coming on to you, you would have the same recourse as any other individual getting unwanted sexual advances from anyone else.
not to be anti gay but as a straight individual i wouldnt want a gay guy to be sleeping in the same tent as i am plus if youve ever been hit on by a gay guy it is quite unerving so just imagine a homosexual sleeping neer you
Sk8brder246 - I have experienced a gay guy hitting on me many times before. I told him I wasn't interested and that was it. No problems.
As for you not wanting to sleep in the same room this fear has multiple layers of bigotry to it.
The first being the assumption that because you're male and they are gay they will try and have sex with you. Now if you were in a room with a bunch of straight women you wouldn't be scared to sleep even if you didn't want to **** any of them. You're assuming all gays are probably sex fiends with no standards. The second problem here is that you're also implying that homosexuals are probably rapists too.
The other thing is that you started with the apologetic statement "not to be anti gay but [insert bigotry here]" If you have to ever start with any statement like that then your argument isn't formed well enough.
if youve ever been hit on by a gay guy it is quite unerving
Hmm.. personally I'm flattered when someone 'hits on me'. I figure if someone, of any sex, finds me attractive enough to initiate flirtation then it's a compliment, not something to be put off by. Furthermore I have slept in the same room with homosexual males and been perfectly comfortable. There is no difference between sleeping in a room with a homosexual male than a heterosexual female, except perhaps your personal preference of one sex or the other. All of these comments about being awkward or put off by close contact with homosexuals of your sex are based on bigotry, misinformation, or serious gullibility to the ultra-conservative fear-mongering that is, unfortunately, far to prevalent in our society.
I think it shouldn't be repealed because for any reason if a soldier is uncomfortable with his comrades this could greatly affect the effectiveness of the squad.
I think it shouldn't be repealed because for any reason if a soldier is uncomfortable with his comrades this could greatly affect the effectiveness of the squad.
In cases where it has been publicly known this hasn't been a problem. There are still people who would be uncomfortable to serve along side women or black people, Should there also be special laws dealing with that discomfort as well, or should the person taking issue just deal with it or get over it and serve his duty?
I love the term 'homophobe'... The fear of homosexuals. Just because one doesn't support homosexuality does not mean he is a 'homophobe'. I don't condemn gay people and I tolerate them, hell I even have a friend who is gay. But I don't in the least bit support the homosexual community. Doesn't mean I'm scared of homosexuals. That's like you saying you don't support christianity. I'm not gonna go spew "THIESTPHOBE" at you, because in all honesty that's just absolutely ridiculous.
Down to the topic of DADT. I absolutely think it was ridiculous that it was repealed. When people think of gay people they may think of "oh it's, just love" or maybe shopping and fashion... but when it comes down to it gay soldiers like penis and they like **** sex. That's being blunt. So you can say it's going to be great for the armed forces and it's not going to affect soldiers in the least... until you have been in a barracks showers when you know a man is homosexual who is standing across from you staring at you.... that has absolute physcological effects and that distress will play out in the battlefield.
