This makes me happy to know. I’m not THAT old, but it seems like yesterday that friends and I packed a scared gay friend off to Seattle, because he felt constantly threatened. That was only the 80’s. Granted, it was Idaho, and granted, even I used to go to the gay bars in Boise <yes, there were some!> because they had THE best dance floors and music, was a blast…anyway, point is, he was young and scared. Nobody should feel scared or threatened due to sexual orientation. Yes, it’s difficult to discuss sex with the youngins sometimes but that’s not going to get any easier by denying the facts.
I’m truly not trying to make any judgments about your personal views or tolerance for others. But its seems to me that there are some people who are fully supportive of the kiss on the dock, some who don’t like it because they think homosexuality is immoral, and some in the “middle” who have no problem with homosexuality but find it difficult to deal with a public behavior that isn’t all that common.
I take it that you may be in the third camp. While I understand that some people may not be used to the sight of two people of the same sex kissing, the suggestion that you have – that same sex couples should not kiss in public – is plainly discriminatory. There’s no way around the fact that it relegates homosexuals into second class citizens. Regardless of one’s 1950’s values of what may be expected to see in public, but there really is no moral or justified position to come up with expected rules of behavior such as, “Straight people can kiss in public and that’s okay, but gay people shouldn’t because that’s wrong to some people.” That’s just plain discrimination, and we shouldn’t let the burden of what we are used to seeing dictate the answers to questions of right and wrong. If modest displays of affection are good for straight couples, they ought to be okay for same-sex couples. It is only fair.
I also understand that some people do indeed hold their 1950s values dear to them. It’s great to raise children with 1950s values when those values are good things: saying please and thank you, calling older people sir and ma’am, not being disruptive in public, etc. But is it really a good idea to expect children to be raised with bygone values of the 1950s, like that homosexuals ought to be act in accordance with a discriminatory set of rules?
Wow…I can just imagine the “uncomfortable position” those people with their “1950’s values” are placed in when they see a NEGRO thinking he’s the equal of a white man, such as, oh, the freaking President of the United States?
Or a woman demanding equal pay for equal work.
Or Jews and Muslims thinking they have a right to believe in anything other than a Wonder Bread-white Jesus.
And what about those Poles, Italians, Irish, and…dare I mention among polite ears…the MEXICANS? Why do we let these “people” mix with the rest of us?
The clue phone is ringing, and when the people with “1950’s values” pick it up (after first, I imagine, answering their shoe, the toaster, and perhaps a small dog), they’ll hear a pre-recorded message saying “These women are servicewomen, potentially putting their fucking lives on the line to protect the people of the United States of America, everyone from the aforementioned President right down to the lowest, bigoted, backwards corncob-cmokin’ cousin-pokin’ hillbilly. Allow them please the dignity of being allowed to express that most positive and constructive of all human emotions - if you haven’t taken notes, that emotion is known as love.”
I can’t understand this.
Do you believe same-sex relationships are okay? Then I can’t see what the problem is with telling your kids that.
Do you believe they’re not okay? Then, once again, I can’t see what the problem is with telling your kids that.
Just have the views and feelings that you do. Model them for your kid. Answer your kid’s questions if he has them. I honestly don’t see what the problem is supposed to be.
Very nice, Una. Indeed.
Meh. Women have been kissing each other for years.
Wake me up when the men start kissing each other.
In America that is.
Aw, dammit, you’re right…sorry, Blackberry, mid-way through a 12 hour night shift my reading comprehension takes a dive.
Heh, it may be minor, but it’s a good point - a very photogenic couple indeed, and such things do matter when it comes to public support. The picture reminds me of the famous one of a sailor kissing a nurse at the end of WW2!
Excepting a bad typo (“cmokin”). Thanks to diabetes my eyes don’t work that well in the morning any more so it’s difficult to review things.
Because their right to live like the rest of us, unashamed and unafraid, is a bit more important than your right to not talk to your own kids.
(edited to add: has this thread really made it this far without a single, “Since when are there GAY people in the NAVY?” joke?)
“Kiddos, remember how I told you that sometimes a man and a woman love each other very much, and want to live together, and [however you described sex], and even get married?”
“Yah …”
“Well, sometimes a man and a man or a woman and a woman love each other very much, too. Some people feel that way about the opposite sex, some about the same sex - both are perfectly okay, and you’ll figure out how you feel when you’re older.”
“I’m bored! Can we get waffles?”
As difficult conversations go, this isn’t one.
Now I regret that I don’t have any waffles. Can I blame this on public displays of homosexuality?
Life doesn’t revolve around you. If men and women are free to display a particular romantic behavior in a particular situation, gay people are too. There’s no objective reason why a casual kiss is okay for some couples, but not for others.
Why not expect all of the sailors to “show some restraint” and not kiss in front of you, regardless of gender? My guess is because it’s a ridiculous request. The world doesn’t revolve around making you comfortable in all situations, particularly when your comfort is rooted in discrimination against gays, and it’s shockingly ignorant to expect otherwise. If you choose to teach your children that, then it’s up to you to explain the world to them – not for the world to change to fit your backwards and repressive values.
I, for one, welcome our new gay military overlords.
No prob 
Should have been obvious. Not your fault that it wasn’t.
Yes, yes you can. The Gay Agenda is at its heart anti-waffle.
You know, there’s actually an important 1950s value on display here: Capitalism!
Consider: How did Petty Officer Gaeta win the kiss lottery? Well, she placed a high value on it, and so she invested a lot of money in it: $50, at one buck a ticket. Thus, she maximized her chances of winning, and the free market efficiently allocated a scarce resource (the first kiss) to the consumer who most desired it. Isn’t that so much nicer than Communist-style central planning? One can imagine, for example, a regime in which COs simply assign first-kiss privileges. But we let the market decide, instead!
Buchanan can consider this a valuable teaching moment about free markets. Never too early to teach kids about Adam Smith.
I knew it!
Wait, I mean sailors being gay isn’t news; rum sodomy and the lash forged the British Empire and all, but when did we start letting women in the Navy?!?
I’m shocked an uncomfortable at the thought.
One more thought: Why are there no Battlestar Galactica jokes in this thread? Come on, people - the rise to prominence of an officer named Gaeta aboard a heavily-armed warship should worry us all.