BeeR Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) No . . . your point does not make sense. There already have been gheys in the same barracks as hetero soldiers without incident. Why would there be a need for separate facilities simply due to a policy change of discrimination?Sorry but I can't believe this has to be spelled out - because now they would be ALLOWED to be in the military as gays. How can anyone not see how that's different?? In many ways, yes, gay men in the military presents many of the same concerns as women in the military. To treat gay men like heterosexual men across the board is blatantly asinine. Edited December 20, 2010 by BeeR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 because women already have their own barracks. this ruling is about sexuality, not about sex. Nice non-answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Can you expand on this topic? I see it as you cant be discharged if they find out you are ghey. I do not see it as changing camo for rainbow colored pantsuits . . . But that is just me . . . I just don't see how you can say "It's okay to be openly gay" in an organization full of heterosexuals and not expect any problems. In some ways, NOT knowing does make it better. Now, bushwacked and evil_gop_liars may enjoy showering with gay men and being stared at (from their previous comments above), but I can guarantee you that MOST men won't like that at all. Simply telling heterosexuals to "deal with it" is not the answer simply because it's policy. I think Beer said it right earlier when he said that in a lot of ways allowing them to be openly gay does present the same problems as women in the military. Would we expect our women to "deal with it"? No, we don't, so we put them in their own barracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Tosberg . . . you are assuming that tis will be the first time that gheys will ever be ALLOWED in the military. Is that correct? Are you saying that there is not, nor ever have been gheys in the military? That is why it is infinity different than the female comparision, and intellectually dishonest. There already are gheys in the military. To "pretend" there isnt is just stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tosberg34 Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Tosberg . . . you are assuming that tis will be the first time that gheys will ever be ALLOWED in the military. Is that correct? Are you saying that there is not, nor ever have been gheys in the military? That is why it is infinity different than the female comparision, and intellectually dishonest. There already are gheys in the military. To "pretend" there isnt is just stupid. No one is being intellectually dishonest or pretending gays aren't in the military. I would think that being openly gay in the military is infinitely more problematic than being in the closet. What I find unacceptable is pretending that being openly gay in the military somehow won't change anything. I really can't believe you are having a hard time understanding this. Again, just so some lefty parrot doesn't try to hijack what I'm saying, I never said gays shouldn't serve. All I'm saying is that I think it will be more problematic now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) So this is where it's at? I ask a simple question that you don't like somehow that makes me gay? Tell you what, let me ask my wife and two kids what they think. Really, dude? I expected better from at least you. Dude, settle down; I was making a joke. I would have put a in my post, but I was scared you might think I was hitting on you. Edited December 20, 2010 by wiegie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts