If you don't want them serving in the military. I suggest you get off of your ass and defend our country.
I'm thankful for ALL of the soldiers. The only thing that should matter is they're here to protect us.
Do Gays Soldiers Hurt the Military?
SodaHead News
2010/12/01 19:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
97 votes
|
|
24% | |||
|
274 votes
|
|
67% | |||
|
38 votes
|
|
9% | |||
Sen. John McCain, the rainbow-colored ball is in your court.
McCain, a decorated Vietnam war veteran, has lately been staunchly opposed to repealing "don't ask, don't tell," which bans gay and lesbians from openly serving in the military. Many Republicans, and some Democrats, have said it would hurt military effectiveness, while others objected on moral grounds.
But a Pentagon study indicates that a strong majority of soldiers couldn't care less if a fellow soldier is gay or lesbian. As one Special Forces operative said, according to CNN, "We have a gay guy [in the unit]. He's big, he's mean, and he kills lots of bad guys. No one cared that he was gay."
The Democrats have to now decide if they want to get mired in a debate over a repeal. With only a few short weeks, it might be difficult to get on the agenda. And with Republicans taking over the House in January, now might be the last opportunity in a while to take the issue up.
McCain, a decorated Vietnam war veteran, has lately been staunchly opposed to repealing "don't ask, don't tell," which bans gay and lesbians from openly serving in the military. Many Republicans, and some Democrats, have said it would hurt military effectiveness, while others objected on moral grounds.
But a Pentagon study indicates that a strong majority of soldiers couldn't care less if a fellow soldier is gay or lesbian. As one Special Forces operative said, according to CNN, "We have a gay guy [in the unit]. He's big, he's mean, and he kills lots of bad guys. No one cared that he was gay."
The Democrats have to now decide if they want to get mired in a debate over a repeal. With only a few short weeks, it might be difficult to get on the agenda. And with Republicans taking over the House in January, now might be the last opportunity in a while to take the issue up.
Read More: http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/30/military.ga...
Top Opinion
-
Aubbles the Dorkocent one o... 2010/12/02 00:52:28
"We have an epidemic here," she said. "Women serving in the U.S. military today are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-...
No.
We all need to be treated as equals.
I don't "push" any agenda on anyone, though I will work for full equality for gays in this country (supposedly the land of equality for all -- so why do dozens of other nations treat their gay citizens with equality but we don't?).
As for "pushing agendas" I've practically had to stop going to the post office. Nearly every time, while I'm waiting in line, someone tries to push their religious agenda on me. I've never seen a gay person do that.
Gay's have just as much equality as any individual in society. There is only one area that needs addessed and it isn't just about gays--it is eqaulity for those that desire to have a person designated as there partner in life--two men, two women, a man and a woman, a mother and a son--whatever you call it is fine but it isn't marraige.
You do make a point about someone pushing a religious agenda but it is also different in that it involves a person's beleifs and not his or her person.
I was fine with people who are gay, even though I beleive it is wrong, while in the Marines as long as they never pushed it on me. We all got along. Just like any other subject you need to be cautious who you discuss this with.
Gays are no more obsessed with sex than straights. Those who say otherwise are pushing their anti-gay agenda.
Gays have just as much equality as any individual in society, you say?
The Government Accountability Office disagrees with you. It has tallied 1,138 rights straights have that gays do not.
One example: straight couples can file their taxes as "married, filing jointly" and access the "marriage penalty relief" clause in the tax code. Thus, a straight couple will pay less in taxes thatn a gay couple with identical income. We can fix this by raising the taxes on straights.
Two gay guys can and do enter into marriage -- in 5 states plus the District of Columbia here in the US and in several nations around the world (The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, for example). Marriage is first and foremost a legal construct. You can add religious overtones if you like, but that's completely optional.
The points I try to make here are that being gay is completely normal, that you probably deal with several gay people during the course of the day without realizing it, that the vast majority of gays are productive members of society, and that gays are completely deserving of equal rights -- as guaranteed under the 14th Amendm...
Gays are no more obsessed with sex than straights. Those who say otherwise are pushing their anti-gay agenda.
Gays have just as much equality as any individual in society, you say?
The Government Accountability Office disagrees with you. It has tallied 1,138 rights straights have that gays do not.
One example: straight couples can file their taxes as "married, filing jointly" and access the "marriage penalty relief" clause in the tax code. Thus, a straight couple will pay less in taxes thatn a gay couple with identical income. We can fix this by raising the taxes on straights.
Two gay guys can and do enter into marriage -- in 5 states plus the District of Columbia here in the US and in several nations around the world (The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, for example). Marriage is first and foremost a legal construct. You can add religious overtones if you like, but that's completely optional.
The points I try to make here are that being gay is completely normal, that you probably deal with several gay people during the course of the day without realizing it, that the vast majority of gays are productive members of society, and that gays are completely deserving of equal rights -- as guaranteed under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.
Some people may not like gays. Some people may not like Republicans. Some people may not like Democrats. Doesn't matter, really. All are to be accepted equally and all are to have equal rights in this country -- which was founded upon the principle of equal rights for all.
There were gay soldiers in General Washington's Continental Army. A gay officer was killed in the battle for our country's freedom -- and now, 234 years later, we're debating about whether gays should serve in our country's military? How ridiculous.
All that is being sought here is equal treatment. A gay soldier should be able to mention his or her same sex partner in the same manner as a straight soldier is permitted to do.
It's interesting that some complain about how military readiness will be hurt by allowing gays to serve openly -- yet they are silent on the harm caused to the military via the discharge of some 14,000 soliders because of DADT -- including many who had vital skills needed by the military.
And one of the soldiers drummed out of the military was Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach -- who flew some 90 combat missions, destroying Taliban and Al Qaeda targets in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. His awards includr the Meritorious Service Medal, nine Air Medals -- including one for Heroism -- the Aerial Achievement Medal, five Air Force Commendation Medals and the Navy Commendation Medal.
A true American hero -- but the Air Force thought it was far more important to discharge this soldier because he was gay.
If they can do without him, they have no right to complain about any supposed "harm" that would be caused by allowing gays to serve openly. Look at the harm DADT did in just this one instance.
Note that the Navy, by decree, is putting women on board submarines. If they can make that work, they can make having gays on board work.
What also hurts our military is forcing gays to lie about who they are. Well, so much for that "honor" and "integrity" thing the military brags about -- thereby underscoring that oxymoron about "military intelligence".
Isn't there a general rule about sexual activity -- of any kind -- in the barracks?
phu loi viet nam.
Having said that, I think it should also be required that unmarried men and women, in the military remain celibate for the sake of the job.
Why should one sexsin be accepted while another is denied?