Gays in Militiary

It doesn't matter who is aiming the rifle, as long as it is pointed in the right direction.

<a href="***********casualdate****.au/" rel="dofollow">dating sites</a>

Also I think its important to say that those who choose to serve have the freedom to choose not to sign up if they are worried about being around "gays" where those who are gay are not given that same freedom of choice. Either serve and hope your sexuality isn't discovered or don't serve. The repeal of DADT gives MORE freedom to brave men and women who want to help protect our country!

Mark

Your ramblings on this subject don't help you any in making your point. Once you went off the deep end with your opposition to the repeal of DADT you lost a lot of credibility. It's obvious you dissaprove of others rights to live as they are when the lifestyle they live you ditest so much. The measurement of our country is by the people who define it, the measurement of our military should be by the people they fight to protect and serve. In that case we as Americans who pride ourselves with the noble idea of "Freedom" should have armed service personel who embody that as well. What is the purpose of our military fighting for our freedom (or someone elses) when we don't allow our own citizens the freedom to serve and protect our country?

It's time that women be FULLY integrated into the military. Right now it's just 'separate but equal' at best. Assign gals to the same units, the same barracks, showers, toilets, etc. as the men. Anything less is DISCRIMINATION, the greatest of evils. Any gals who object are just testosterophobic - they need to be re-educated or sent to GITMO. Guys who object, if any, are just misogynists. Who cares what they think. Their opinions are NULL AND VOID, so Uncle Sam will say "screw you" just like Obama did today to our soliders.

Do the math. Per the survey, 30% think it will be a proble. If repeal causes just one-third of that 30% to not re-enlist, then that's a 10% drop in forces. It won't be made up by the 2% of homosexuals unless they enlist disproportionately, which is very unlikely.

I suppose every word in Webster's was made up at one time. Doh! However, the word has nothing to do with a clinical psychological condition like acrophobia or veritaphobia. The word was chosen to marginalize those who hold an opinion contrary to the zeitgist. It is an Orwellian polemical slur, nothing more. Just like calling someone a Nazi for being for law and order. The refuge of the lazy and ignorant. Re: your incorrect diagnosis of my motives. For the record, I believe that homosexually inclined persons have served and do serve well in the armed forces. But coming out and acting out, which will follow for some, is something that will be disruptive to our forces. Many respected generals, now and thru the ages, agree. Are they homophobes too? Is that all you can muster?

WOW Mark, you continue to amaze me with your rhetoric! Marriam-Webster Dictionary has the word "Homophobia, Homophobic and Homophobe" in it. So I take it if a word wasn't coined back when Jesus walked the earth it has no value or merit? In fact the word "Homophobe" is in just about every dictionary so you can stop trying to say it is a "made up" word. "Computer" was a made up word not long before "homophobia" too...but guess what a homophobe is using to respond to me?

Your opinion about "Gays in the Military" has nothing to do with the soldiers saftey or effectivness based on who would be serving along side them. Your personal oppinion is soley based on the fact that you dissaprove of homosexuals so your entire topic is NULL AND VOID!

On the other hand, being "light in the loafers" might come in handy for those 20 mile marches.

Besides, how can you properly aim your weapon with a limp wrist.

***********lyberty****/dict/homophobia.htm"Specifically, the word 'homophobia' was first coined by psychologist George Weinberg in his book 'Society and the Healthy Homosexual' in 1972." You see?It's a word made up to advance a cause. Nothing to do with an actual phobia as psychologists define it. 'Homophobe' is a political word created by the libertine left to marginalize those who argue against the mainstreaming of the homosexual lifestyle. Literally it means an irrational fear of homosexuals. While there may exist those who have such a phobia, the label is used only to maginalize a point of view by those who have no valid counter-arguments. Your use and defense of the word shows that you are just a sheep following the newspeak of the politically correct class. It is you who are naive (note the correct spelling). I have friends who are homosexual and they know what I think. However, I am only addressing the effect of 2% of the population imposing it's will on the mi

Mark, really? Made up word "homophobe"? Are you really serious Mark or are you just playing with me? At first I thought you were just ignorant and possibly a little nieve. Now however I know you are neither, you are an intollerant gay basher who hides his true feelings in cryptic text hoping to throw off the scent of his severe homophobic beliefs. You never offered any challenges, you only offered highly implausible scenarios only a homophobe would be concerned about and as you guessed it the majority of men and women serving doNOT have your same homophobic feelings towards those "evil" gays in the military!

Dregun has no answer to my challenges, so he spins my words to say something that they do not. Dregun also uses the made-up label of "homophobe" because he has no answers. These are symptoms of a lazy mind, but that was already evident in his blind acceptance of gays in the military.

Wow Mark, I thought I was a homophobe; but you actually tried to make the argument that a women getting raped has it better then a guy possibly being checked out by another in the shower! Bravo, bravo

Actually that "Poll" otherwise known as survey, was sent to over 400,000 military members and according to the findings that i found in teh washington times, over seventy percent said that they really didnt care if the ban was lifted. In effect it wont really matter if they do lift it. The same people said the same things about women and blacks serving.

Saw a CNN special about women in military who had been sexually harrassed, propositioned, and raped. They didn't report it or were harrasedd if they did. As terrible as that is, at least they could go back to their quarters for a hopefully-hot shower and a bunk without someone trying to get into their pants. It is disrepsectful to our soldiers to deny them that - an opportunity to be secure from gay harrasment while they serve their country. It does the gays no good either. If I was 19 yrs old, put in close quarters with the opposite sex in prime physical condition, I think my head would explode.

Why must our politicians and their misguided surrogates like Steve insist on scoring political points at the expense of our soldiers?

..... but will be one of many stupid Army decisions that makes their life harder.

Oh, and the UCC is fine and good, but the reality is that lots of hetero hanky-panky goes on already. Will be worse when gays come out of the closet and into the barracks.

Steve. The polls show that the combat soldiers OPPOSE the repeal. Margin of error means nothing in polls when the likelihood of answering correlates with the kind of answers given. The passion of the issue can affect who answers, also the apathy of that age group, and whether they believe it's anonymous. Then there's the wording of the questions. Very foolish to actually believe polls & quote margins of error. Anyone who understands polling knows this. I am in constant contact with 2 young men in Afghanistan - have known them since birth. "Professional soldiers fighting for our country" - well it's not quite that simple - leave the jingoism to Sarah Palin & co.. And they will be the first to admit that. They enlist for lots of reasons, and they stay or leave for lots of reasons. They love and hate the army. My friends see DADT as one of a number of stupid decisions that comes from up on high. They believe repeal alone will not necessarily be a dealbreaker, but wi

...we wouln't have integrated the military under Truman.

If the soldiers say this won't be an issue for them, I for one am not going to tell them they're wrong and aren't professional enough to handle it.

MarkInDaUP, you seriously have very little respect for our members of our military. They're not some 13 year old gossiping or love struck girls. They're professional soldiers, take notice on the word "professional". They won't need to be brainwashed in "re-education classes" or deny instances of sexual advances since they'll still be forced to follow the uniform code of coduct.

The survey they took is valid as well. If "only" 25% took the survey (it was 115,052 to be exact) that still makes it a extremely precise in terms of margin of error. Most wider public opinion surveys ask only a few thousand people and have a margin of error of under 3%. This survey is far, far more precise. Also, the question of "would they be able to deal the repeal" is a far more significant question than asking them if its right or wrong since the military future without DADT is what the issue about. Besides, if we still based military decisions on military surveys