As a very healthy and normal heterosexual man, If I were sleeping in a dormitory full of beautiful women, my mind would only be able to think of one thing. If I knew that another man was thinking of me that way, I may want to hurt him very badly. If I am a homophobia person, I don’t want to change.
Paul
I know Isreal and England alows gays to serve...wonder about others ?
Amerlegnvet - 14 years ago
Obvious insurmountable problems: Battlefield transfusions, sharing showers & latrine facilities; sodomy is still a court-martial offense (UCMJ), cross-dressing, "transsexualism," and the like, STD's; retention of career heterosexual soldiers, recruitment problems, homosexual "marriage," homosexual "couples" courting on military installations, showerroom brawls galore over homosexual ogling and "trailing." Endless court-martial-worthy complaints from heterosexuals due to relentless homosexual harassment and flirting. Sharing 2-men "pup" tents during training, field duty and bivouac. What about AIDS tests with the AIDS "WINDOW" period? Should homosexuals be AIDS-tested after every pass or leave? (Yes!). But this means that heterosexuals will have to have similar AIDS tests or the homosexuals will complain re uneven treatment. Hetero- homosexual fistfights with no witnesses where one soldier is badly beaten up. Who gets blamed with no witnesses? The hetero will claim self-defense; the homosexual will say he was unjustly attacked. And the band play on ... Is it all worth it to accommodate sexual deviants as the miltary wages two wars? The answer is an unqualified no because it will never work.
Andrew - 14 years ago
Henry, if you're worried about a gay man ogling you, just open your mouth and I guarantee they'll pretend you don't exist. You're a worthless bigot.
davewtf - 14 years ago
Henry, you are ignorant. As I said, I served with men and women who I knew to be gay. Both in the field and in the barracks. If you truly think that every gay male has a hard-on for you, you give yourself WAY too much credit.
All that matters is if they can do their job, plain and simple.
Henry - 14 years ago
How many of you have served in the military. But not some pogue (people other then grunts) unit like a desk jockey or whatever. Well you know what not everyone in the military gets to have a private shower, bathroom or even a private place to get dressed. In the infantry we live in close quarters that require us to undress or do things other things in front of soldiers of the same sex that would not be allowed if we were a unit made up of women and men.
So now myself as a straight male who is a majority of the population has to be told to do these things in front of a man who finds other men attractive in a sexual way. If I were a woman and you told me to take a shower or go to the bathroom in front of men in the open how many complaints of a sexual nature would you have on your hands. And how comfortable would you feel if you were that woman? Probably not to comfortable. Now you are forcing me to do this because of some MINORITY GROUP (opposite of majority, just a reminder) wants to feel warm and cuddlely inside, no offense KISS IT you idiots. You have no idea what you are talking about, to say that it would not affect unit morale in that situation, come on you can't be serious.
I am not anti-gay nor do I care what you do in your bedroom or life. But this would defienatly affect how I perform my job. If I look over at some guy with a hard-on giving me a look over while I'm getting dressed, now what if that man is your boss who is the one that decides who gets promoted or has a say in your promotion.
I have made friends with openly gay males and females and have no problem with gay marriage. But what I have a problem with is you are forcing a majority of the military population into a unfair position involving possible sexual harassment situations that will never be voiced since most males sexually harassed by another male will never be reported for fear of being considered weak. Also tell me that I have to accept it just because some one had their feelings hurt well mine are hurt too. And for justifiable reasons that are just as good as theirs. But since I am a majority in this country I don't matter anymore since it seems the minority rules majority over and over nowadays.
StvEide - 14 years ago
Obama despises the military and this is a way of undermining it indirectly.
Obama sets some pretty odd priorities; go easy on terrorists and screw the military. Our enemies must be laughing at the empty suit that IS Obama.
nuiloa - 14 years ago
69% of Americans now support the repeal of DADT. Even a majority of conservatives do: http://www.gallup.com/poll/120764/Conservatives-Shift-Favor-Openly-Gay-Service-Members.aspx
Russell E. Findley - 14 years ago
As a Vietnam vet I can tell you that when the bullets start flying that no one is busy looking his buddy's ass. At that time you do not care what their sexual orientation is, sex, race or creed ( they could be lime green with purple dots) as long as they hold up their end of the stick.
.
Exit - 14 years ago
If they repeal the "dont ask dont tell" policy, it should only be to go back to "absolutely no gays in the military'' as it was when I signed on the dotted line 20 years ago. I am still in the Corps, and there is no place for a gay or lesbian on the battlefield. We already have to make huge adjustments in the field for females, and exactly who do I put an openly gay man with? The males or the females? I do not know one active duty serviceman that supports allowing openly gays in the military.
davewtf - 14 years ago
There were plenty of gays serving in the military back when I was in from 85 - 89. Mature, non-prejudiced soldiers knew who they were and didn't care, as long as they did their job. I would much rather work with a hard-working homosexual than a lazy heterosexual any day (and I did while serving in the military). Let's end the policy and let all who want to serve their country do so.
onegunfu - 14 years ago
I would only support the repeal of this policy if it is in concert with the military abandoning their "stoploss policy" and offering an immediate honorable dischage to personell that would prefer to serve in a "gay free environment" this would also have the effect of protecting gays from physical harm from "training accidents" to "friendly fire" incidents.
Hal - 14 years ago
Who cares if your gay ?I repect what people desire in the bedroom,however,when is it a TOPIC of conversation on the battlefield ? I understand the fact that your PROUD to be Gay,understand the fact that alot of people are NOT gay,so,When I go for a promotion,and my GAY military supervisor will pass my promo. up for someone who is GAY can i sue ? The problem with todays gay movement is,the MAJORITY of AMERICANS dont give a shit. Example ST PATRICKS DAY NYC. why gays cannot march ? well,because its the st. patrics day parade,not,the lesbian /gay parade? duh?So stop making it about your sexuality,we are happy for you,but respect non gays please.............
Mark - 14 years ago
Adam, please read more carefully.
Notice the big "don't ask, don't tell" at the top of the poll? This has nothing to do with NCLB. However, it is still disappointing that all of Limbaugh's fans swarm the site every day and ruin poll results like this. Also, for the "ruining moral" argument - this is from a 2006 Zogby poll courtesy Wiki.
66% of military respondents who had experience with gays or lesbians in their unit said that the presence of gay or lesbian unit members had either no impact or a positive impact on their personal morale, while 64% said as much for overall unit morale. Of those respondents uncertain whether they had served with gay or lesbian personnel, 51% thought that such unit members would have a neutral or positive effect on personal morale, while 48% thought that they would have a negative effect on unit morale. 73% of respondents said that they felt comfortable in the presence of gay and lesbian personnel.
Adam - 14 years ago
I also can't figure out why anyone would want to have a law that takes all personal responsibility away from the student and the parents and places it on the teacher. Our teachers get paid CRAP. IT"S AWFUL. I left being a teacher because I found out I could make more money working 9-5 as a shipper/receiver for a medical device company. A job that didn't require a college degree and, most importantly, didn't require all the outside work of being a teacher. No dealing with kids, no correcting papers, no dealing with parents.
If you want to help our schools, increase all teacher pay by 25%. They need a salary that is competitive with the private sector. 40-50k per year starting, Not 25-30k per year. You can make more than that selling TVs at Bestbuy. If you want the best people you have to pay the best salary. Why would anyone want to be a math/science teacher when they can make double the money working in the private sector? It's a no brainer of a question. If the problem is bad teachers then the problem can be solved by giving them the money they deserve for putting up with your annoying children all day. THINK ABOUT IT AMERICA! PAY YOUR TEACHERS WHAT THEY DESERVE!
Adam - 14 years ago
This just shows how uninformed the general population is about what this bill does. Right now 69% are saying NO. That means they have no idea what NCLB has done. It has severely cut funding for most schools, especially where they are needed most while schools that were performing well get increased funding. Underperforming schools under this law are penalized by HAVING MORE FUNDING CUT! How on earth is that supposed to help anything? Oh your school is having trouble? Let's take away more of its resources! That's a great idea!
Programs like Art, Drama, Music and Gym are being dropped so our students can spend more time learning ONLY what is on the standardized tests. This is totally unacceptable. Math and Science are not the only things we should be learning in school. Gym is definately NOT something American children can do without. People wonder why child obesity is such a problem? No Child Left behind is the problem. Kids learn nothing about nutrition and exercise at school and then they go home and play xbox. Even worse is it's policies towards non-native english speakers who are required to be fully 100% integrated in 3 years. So our teachers are expected to effectively teach foreign born students as well as native students in their classrooms when these students have only been in our school system for 3 years and many speak little or no english outside of school. Having more than one of these kids in your class, under the current rules will result in you being fired for underperformance when your class test average is too low. NCLB is a complete and utter waste of paper and it should be removed at its earliest opportunity.
As a very healthy and normal heterosexual man, If I were sleeping in a dormitory full of beautiful women, my mind would only be able to think of one thing. If I knew that another man was thinking of me that way, I may want to hurt him very badly. If I am a homophobia person, I don’t want to change.
Paul
I know Isreal and England alows gays to serve...wonder about others ?
Obvious insurmountable problems: Battlefield transfusions, sharing showers & latrine facilities; sodomy is still a court-martial offense (UCMJ), cross-dressing, "transsexualism," and the like, STD's; retention of career heterosexual soldiers, recruitment problems, homosexual "marriage," homosexual "couples" courting on military installations, showerroom brawls galore over homosexual ogling and "trailing." Endless court-martial-worthy complaints from heterosexuals due to relentless homosexual harassment and flirting. Sharing 2-men "pup" tents during training, field duty and bivouac. What about AIDS tests with the AIDS "WINDOW" period? Should homosexuals be AIDS-tested after every pass or leave? (Yes!). But this means that heterosexuals will have to have similar AIDS tests or the homosexuals will complain re uneven treatment. Hetero- homosexual fistfights with no witnesses where one soldier is badly beaten up. Who gets blamed with no witnesses? The hetero will claim self-defense; the homosexual will say he was unjustly attacked. And the band play on ... Is it all worth it to accommodate sexual deviants as the miltary wages two wars? The answer is an unqualified no because it will never work.
Henry, if you're worried about a gay man ogling you, just open your mouth and I guarantee they'll pretend you don't exist. You're a worthless bigot.
Henry, you are ignorant. As I said, I served with men and women who I knew to be gay. Both in the field and in the barracks. If you truly think that every gay male has a hard-on for you, you give yourself WAY too much credit.
All that matters is if they can do their job, plain and simple.
How many of you have served in the military. But not some pogue (people other then grunts) unit like a desk jockey or whatever. Well you know what not everyone in the military gets to have a private shower, bathroom or even a private place to get dressed. In the infantry we live in close quarters that require us to undress or do things other things in front of soldiers of the same sex that would not be allowed if we were a unit made up of women and men.
So now myself as a straight male who is a majority of the population has to be told to do these things in front of a man who finds other men attractive in a sexual way. If I were a woman and you told me to take a shower or go to the bathroom in front of men in the open how many complaints of a sexual nature would you have on your hands. And how comfortable would you feel if you were that woman? Probably not to comfortable. Now you are forcing me to do this because of some MINORITY GROUP (opposite of majority, just a reminder) wants to feel warm and cuddlely inside, no offense KISS IT you idiots. You have no idea what you are talking about, to say that it would not affect unit morale in that situation, come on you can't be serious.
I am not anti-gay nor do I care what you do in your bedroom or life. But this would defienatly affect how I perform my job. If I look over at some guy with a hard-on giving me a look over while I'm getting dressed, now what if that man is your boss who is the one that decides who gets promoted or has a say in your promotion.
I have made friends with openly gay males and females and have no problem with gay marriage. But what I have a problem with is you are forcing a majority of the military population into a unfair position involving possible sexual harassment situations that will never be voiced since most males sexually harassed by another male will never be reported for fear of being considered weak. Also tell me that I have to accept it just because some one had their feelings hurt well mine are hurt too. And for justifiable reasons that are just as good as theirs. But since I am a majority in this country I don't matter anymore since it seems the minority rules majority over and over nowadays.
Obama despises the military and this is a way of undermining it indirectly.
Obama sets some pretty odd priorities; go easy on terrorists and screw the military. Our enemies must be laughing at the empty suit that IS Obama.
69% of Americans now support the repeal of DADT. Even a majority of conservatives do: http://www.gallup.com/poll/120764/Conservatives-Shift-Favor-Openly-Gay-Service-Members.aspx
As a Vietnam vet I can tell you that when the bullets start flying that no one is busy looking his buddy's ass. At that time you do not care what their sexual orientation is, sex, race or creed ( they could be lime green with purple dots) as long as they hold up their end of the stick.
.
If they repeal the "dont ask dont tell" policy, it should only be to go back to "absolutely no gays in the military'' as it was when I signed on the dotted line 20 years ago. I am still in the Corps, and there is no place for a gay or lesbian on the battlefield. We already have to make huge adjustments in the field for females, and exactly who do I put an openly gay man with? The males or the females? I do not know one active duty serviceman that supports allowing openly gays in the military.
There were plenty of gays serving in the military back when I was in from 85 - 89. Mature, non-prejudiced soldiers knew who they were and didn't care, as long as they did their job. I would much rather work with a hard-working homosexual than a lazy heterosexual any day (and I did while serving in the military). Let's end the policy and let all who want to serve their country do so.
I would only support the repeal of this policy if it is in concert with the military abandoning their "stoploss policy" and offering an immediate honorable dischage to personell that would prefer to serve in a "gay free environment" this would also have the effect of protecting gays from physical harm from "training accidents" to "friendly fire" incidents.
Who cares if your gay ?I repect what people desire in the bedroom,however,when is it a TOPIC of conversation on the battlefield ? I understand the fact that your PROUD to be Gay,understand the fact that alot of people are NOT gay,so,When I go for a promotion,and my GAY military supervisor will pass my promo. up for someone who is GAY can i sue ? The problem with todays gay movement is,the MAJORITY of AMERICANS dont give a shit. Example ST PATRICKS DAY NYC. why gays cannot march ? well,because its the st. patrics day parade,not,the lesbian /gay parade? duh?So stop making it about your sexuality,we are happy for you,but respect non gays please.............
Adam, please read more carefully.
Notice the big "don't ask, don't tell" at the top of the poll? This has nothing to do with NCLB. However, it is still disappointing that all of Limbaugh's fans swarm the site every day and ruin poll results like this. Also, for the "ruining moral" argument - this is from a 2006 Zogby poll courtesy Wiki.
66% of military respondents who had experience with gays or lesbians in their unit said that the presence of gay or lesbian unit members had either no impact or a positive impact on their personal morale, while 64% said as much for overall unit morale. Of those respondents uncertain whether they had served with gay or lesbian personnel, 51% thought that such unit members would have a neutral or positive effect on personal morale, while 48% thought that they would have a negative effect on unit morale. 73% of respondents said that they felt comfortable in the presence of gay and lesbian personnel.
I also can't figure out why anyone would want to have a law that takes all personal responsibility away from the student and the parents and places it on the teacher. Our teachers get paid CRAP. IT"S AWFUL. I left being a teacher because I found out I could make more money working 9-5 as a shipper/receiver for a medical device company. A job that didn't require a college degree and, most importantly, didn't require all the outside work of being a teacher. No dealing with kids, no correcting papers, no dealing with parents.
If you want to help our schools, increase all teacher pay by 25%. They need a salary that is competitive with the private sector. 40-50k per year starting, Not 25-30k per year. You can make more than that selling TVs at Bestbuy. If you want the best people you have to pay the best salary. Why would anyone want to be a math/science teacher when they can make double the money working in the private sector? It's a no brainer of a question. If the problem is bad teachers then the problem can be solved by giving them the money they deserve for putting up with your annoying children all day. THINK ABOUT IT AMERICA! PAY YOUR TEACHERS WHAT THEY DESERVE!
This just shows how uninformed the general population is about what this bill does. Right now 69% are saying NO. That means they have no idea what NCLB has done. It has severely cut funding for most schools, especially where they are needed most while schools that were performing well get increased funding. Underperforming schools under this law are penalized by HAVING MORE FUNDING CUT! How on earth is that supposed to help anything? Oh your school is having trouble? Let's take away more of its resources! That's a great idea!
Programs like Art, Drama, Music and Gym are being dropped so our students can spend more time learning ONLY what is on the standardized tests. This is totally unacceptable. Math and Science are not the only things we should be learning in school. Gym is definately NOT something American children can do without. People wonder why child obesity is such a problem? No Child Left behind is the problem. Kids learn nothing about nutrition and exercise at school and then they go home and play xbox. Even worse is it's policies towards non-native english speakers who are required to be fully 100% integrated in 3 years. So our teachers are expected to effectively teach foreign born students as well as native students in their classrooms when these students have only been in our school system for 3 years and many speak little or no english outside of school. Having more than one of these kids in your class, under the current rules will result in you being fired for underperformance when your class test average is too low. NCLB is a complete and utter waste of paper and it should be removed at its earliest opportunity.