Study: Gays Don't Harm Unit Cohesion

[RangerX]

Not only should homosexuality be banned ....as a moral perversion

You write this as if it were some sort of lifestyle choice (which for some it is). However, please explain homosexual behavior in animals such as horses, dolphins & chimpanzees, all animals which have been observed practicing homosexuality, where there is no moral standard.

For those of us who no longer serve, it is a worthless exercise to debate, as it is really up to those currently in service as to whether gays should be allowed to serve. Their decision to allow this is not something that should be instilled by their service, but rather by their upbringing.

[Silverback]

Not only should homosexuality be banned ....as a moral perversion

You write this as if it were some sort of lifestyle choice (which for some it is). However, please explain homosexual behavior in animals such as horses, dolphins & chimpanzees, all animals which have been observed practicing homosexuality, where there is no moral standard.

For those of us who no longer serve, it is a worthless exercise to debate, as it is really up to those currently in service as to whether gays should be allowed to serve. Their decision to allow this is not something that should be instilled by their service, but rather by their upbringing.

I disagree, I think discussing current events is important. Regardless of the fray that ensues.

[RangerX]

I disagree, I think discussing current events is important. Regardless of the fray that ensues.

Once again, good point.

[Silverback]

I disagree, I think discussing current events is important. Regardless of the fray that ensues.

Once again, good point.

I do understand that it is not a discussion that will affect official policy, but it is a worthy discussion.

[Baseplate]

I wonder how many people who are for gays in the military acually serve or served in the military

[ANGRYCivilian]

I don't know if anyone has brought this up or not, but we (the American Armed Forces) have an image to uphold, as well as being combat effective. I think it's important for our enemies to think twice before they start something that we will finish. I think that, because our Military is so effective, it instills some amount of fear into those who would do us harm. That fear may be just enough to save some lives. Who knows? I also think that we have this general idea that homos are pussies. If some of us think that, there are others that think that as well. I don't want anyone thinking our Military is comprised of a bunch of pussies.

Our image is important. When people think about our Military, they need to see that we are honorable, will do the right thing, and fucking destroy our enemies.

[BruteForce]

I just watched an old DVR'd 60 minutes episode where a Marine, Army Medic, Navy Sub Tech discuss being openly gay and not being discharged.

I personally hated when "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was enacted by Clinton. While I understand that some homosexuals can be excellent soldiers, and also understand that the current generation find it more "acceptable" (and some even find it trendy), I don't agree that you can just bunch up flaming homo's with testosterone fueled Alpha-Males and not expect some ass-kicking to occur.

If the Brits and Dutch want to allow them to be openly flaming, more power to them - but we have been and should continue to be the ultimate ass-kickers and name-takers; that's hard to do if you're kissing your Ranger buddy or snuggling with your squad member. :?

[Lefty]

Not only should homosexuality be banned ....as a moral perversion

You write this as if it were some sort of lifestyle choice (which for some it is). However, please explain homosexual behavior in animals such as horses, dolphins & chimpanzees, all animals which have been observed practicing homosexuality, where there is no moral standard.

Interesting observation. Chimpanzees also practice murder, which could be a reason for banning someone from the military.

[RangerX]

Not only should homosexuality be banned ....as a moral perversion

You write this as if it were some sort of lifestyle choice (which for some it is). However, please explain homosexual behavior in animals such as horses, dolphins & chimpanzees, all animals which have been observed practicing homosexuality, where there is no moral standard.

Interesting observation. Chimpanzees also practice murder, which could be a reason for banning someone from the military.

Yes, but only gay murder.

[Silverback]

I don't agree that you can just bunch up flaming homo's with testosterone fueled Alpha-Males and not expect some ass-kicking to occur.

So by your reasoning, Homosexuals should be barred from service because someone might beat them up?

[PocketKings]

Our S-2 in 2-502 was gay. He was also a good officer, so nobody cared. At the time I was a PL and later XO for D/2-502 as a part of the replacement CoC after the Winchell murder, so our unit was both hypersensitive and on the radar.

As much as I personally disagree with homosexuality as a legitimate, natural act/lifestyle (not to mention my religious views), I don't think the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy or the non-inclusion of gays in the military are the way to handle the situation. We take a slippery slope when we disallow people from living open lives while in service to our country. This policy sets precedence against freedom which, while fine now (when the majority is in our favor) may not be so fine later (50,100, 200 years).

Remember when there was the big fight to put the Ten Commandments in a state courthouse? That sounds good, right? Well, what happens when the residents of Dearborn, MI want to put up a copy of Sharia law? All it takes is precedence and majority. They have the latter..or are close enough. We can't allow the former or the can of worms is opened.

With the Don't Ask Don't Tell thing, that can easily go further. Maybe next Wiccan's can't openly serve. Maybe people that disagree with the IRS tax code. Then we can keep out (or closet) those who have cheated on their wives (so they dont offend married people or women). How about keeping all religions closeted for the 'morale' of the troops so as not to violate any 'morals.' To what end?

Unless it is a performance thing (women in combat arms) than there is no leg to stand on. Morale? No way. Some dipshit who is banging a whore on the side while his wife and kids are on foodstamps at home offends my morale more than two dudes humping in their off time.

My endstate is that freedom includes those that we wholeheartedly disagree with being afforded equal treatment and rights. If we don't allow it now, the eventual day when we are in the minority will come and we will be the ones left out looking in. Look at the major evolutions this country has seen in 250 years and it's not too hard to extrapolate our potential future.

[testedone]

Ranger PocketKings,

Maybe I don't understand where you are coming from but in my life I have dealt with this argument before.

It goes something like this,

Argument

If we stop or allow this behavior or action XXX, then we have to stop or allow behavior or action YYY

So lets not put restrictions or rules on these of these natures (sodomy, religious intolerance etc..etc..)


My Counter

The problem with the view in the argument above is that we don't want to offend anyone or anything, so what happens is we open the flood gates to all things.

So we allow sodomites to practice openly in the service, then the NAMBLA boy lovers want their rights respected, then the dog F***ers, etc..etc..

You see we in the United States of America have a heritage we were founded upon and there is a moral standard, some may not like it, but it is a standard, the problem in America is we are trying to change America to fit everyone's whim and desire....This is America, look back through history at what we are founded upon.

But let's say someone does not buy the whole "we are founded upon etc..etc.."

It still comes down to having a standard, what is the standard....is the standard that we allow all things and anything to go? That's not a standard, that's chaos or what is being pushed now days relativism - if it doesn't hurt me then it's ok if you do it....

I am sure many of you have seen over the years how the military has declined becuase of the lowering of standards, enforcement is crazy with EO reps looking to bust someone because they say a harsh word (I was spoken to about a friggin cadence I called and some ladies where offended, and some "men" My girl ain't got no skin etc..etc..)


Have a standard, stick to it, enforce it and don't waver in it....[/b]

[PocketKings]

This isn't a matter of allowance, it is a matter of not disallowing. It's not acceptance, it's lack of persecution. There is a difference. The opposite of hate is not love. In the middle is tolerance, or acceptance, often despite feelings of the opposite. I tolerate a lot of retardation, it doesn't mean I want to make it illegal.

As for offending; that term never came out of my mouth. I could give two shits about offending people.

The NAMBLA and animal sex is a stretch that is pretty tough to make, since the 'recipeints' of both aren't able to make decisions in the matter. Homosexuals at least are both able to make decisions on the matter.

And you speak of standards and I counter with this: I prefer a standard of freedom verus one of morals because I do not ever want to be subjected to the morals of others. I say SUBJECTED, not merely putting up with or ignoring. Allow me the freedom to exist within the scope of my morals and allow others to do the same and prevent each of our morals from preventing the freedom of the other.

This isn't an all or nothing, zero sum, black or white arguement. The polarizing sides of the debate would lead you to think so.

[Silverback]

Ranger PocketKings,

Maybe I don't understand where you are coming from but in my life I have dealt with this argument before.

It goes something like this,

Argument

If we stop or allow this behavior or action XXX, then we have to stop or allow behavior or action YYY

So lets not put restrictions or rules on these of these natures (sodomy, religious intolerance etc..etc..)


My Counter

The problem with the view in the argument above is that we don't want to offend anyone or anything, so what happens is we open the flood gates to all things.

So we allow sodomites to practice openly in the service, then the NAMBLA boy lovers want their rights respected, then the dog F***ers, etc..etc..

You see we in the United States of America have a heritage we were founded upon and there is a moral standard, some may not like it, but it is a standard, the problem in America is we are trying to change America to fit everyone's whim and desire....This is America, look back through history at what we are founded upon.

But let's say someone does not buy the whole "we are founded upon etc..etc.."

It still comes down to having a standard, what is the standard....is the standard that we allow all things and anything to go? That's not a standard, that's chaos or what is being pushed now days relativism - if it doesn't hurt me then it's ok if you do it....

I am sure many of you have seen over the years how the military has declined becuase of the lowering of standards, enforcement is crazy with EO reps looking to bust someone because they say a harsh word (I was spoken to about a friggin cadence I called and some ladies where offended, and some "men" My girl ain't got no skin etc..etc..)


Have a standard, stick to it, enforce it and don't waver in it....[/b]

Hey bud,
You should look up the definition of Sodomy before you call someone a Sodomite! Because chances are you have participated in acts of Sodomy.