Um, here’s a thought - what about all of the military personnel who were LGBT and successfully had a worthwhile, successful, rewarding career?
It’s patently obvious that it is entirely possible to have LGBT military personnel without any problems.
I say, let whoever wants to join, join - and kick them out after they’ve proven they can’t do the job.
But then, that would make sense. Dur. :rolleyes:
Esprix
What I really want to know – and this is a point which has been consistently ignored throughout this debate – is how these dismissals will affect our military gaydar capability. Now more than ever, we cannot afford to relax our vigilance in this vital area of national security.
:rolleyes:
jr8, are you suggesting there’s a Gaydar Gap?
Absolutely. Maybe we need a Department of Homoland Security.
I don’t understand why some people claim to be too “modest” tp shower publicly. Have none of you ever been to a gym? During my college years (1979-1983), I worked summers as a waiter in Yellowstone National Park. On my off time, I would get nekkid along with the rest of my fellow early 20-somethings, male and female, and go hotpotting, usually in the Gardiner River between Mammoth Hot Springs and Gardiner, MT. In my fraternity house (Phi Gamma Delta, Hanover College), all the guys shared one large shower stall. And in every gym I’ve ever been in, there was an accepted level of public nudity in the locker room. And I can honestly say, as a card-carrying homo, that I have never–OK, rarely-- looked at anyone in a gym lasciviously because that’s not what gyms are for. Nudity is merely flesh; sex–for adults, that is–is a matter of the mind, not merely the body.
In any event, if gay people are thrown out of the military for fear they might prove too great a distraction to straight men, then I suggest that women be banned from the military, too.
I am saddened that Airman Doors has such a poor opinion of me and other gay men, that he thinks we are a liabililty to military preparedness.
For shame.
**LaurAnge wrote:
You’re absolutely right, they aren’t necessarily. But there is the potential, same as if a man and a woman had to shower together.**
If that’s the case, we ought to just throw EVERYONE in jail now and be done with it. That guy walking down the street? He MIGHT rob a bank. The woman in the checkout line? She MIGHT physically abuse her children. That college professor? He MIGHT crack under pressure and blow away a whole classroom. That judge behind the bench? She MIGHT leap over her desk and throttle the defendent. That gay guy in the shower? He MIGHT look at fellow soldier’s ass and think “NICE” !!
If we’re talking about IFs, MIGHTs and MAYBEs aren’t we really talking about THOUGHT crimes? Simply thinking something (or even MAYBE thinking of something) has now turned into a crime or punishable offense?
Giving it some thought, this thread needs to be locked and deleted for reasons of National Security!
We’ve given away the secret to defeating American troops if (or more likely when) they invade Iraq.
All Iraq has to do is line its borders with communal shower stalls and fill them with gay men. Our hardy troops, taking one look at those nelly queens showering and potenitally oogling them will cause a massive panic and send out men scurrying back home, forever questioning their manhood!
Really, the anti-gays-in-the-military contingent has got to come up with something better than the showers already. It’s just silly. Is that really the best they can do?
Assertions that could only be made by someone who has no clue about the current status of the military manpower situation or a grasp on the diffuse nature of very real, very serious threats against US security worldwide. We need a military that is large enough and well-supplied enough to face multiple threats on multiple fronts at once. Right now we have that – kinda sorta almost. Downscaling is the last thing we need to think about.
Wow. Do you ever wish for a splash of color in that black and white world of yours? Filthy, bigotted vermin? Whew, step right up ladies and gentlemen and watch the overstatements fly!
Is AirmanDoors filthy biggotted vermin? Am I? Because as much as I would like to see a completely open policy in the military with regard to soldiers’ sexuality, I recognize that it’s not going to happen right now or any time in the near future. I want it to happen, but I want it to be realistic, and I don’t want to see – especially not now when we’re facing threats we’ve never faced before – our military torn apart when it is forced into something that it isn’t prepared for.
And it’s not just because the military is full of bigots that it’s not prepared for open integration of gays, it’s also – largely, even – because the military is a fairly good representation of our society at large, and our society does not openly accept the integration – nay, the very existence – of gays. This is a society in which it is far more rare than common that gays are afforded the most basic protections. When your homosexuality gets you fired or evicted, in most parts of the country there’s no legal recourse for you because it’s not illegal.
This is a society in which homosexuals have had their children taken from them on the grounds that being gay in and of itself made them unfit.
This is a society where we not only refuse to extend legal protection or recognition of gay relationships which is analogous to hetero relationships, we actually have seen widespread voter acceptance of referenda making it impoosible to do so.
This is a society where (even in cities with large gay populations and laws protecting gays from many forms of discrimination) gay people must still fear harassment and even assault when out in public – and not even when with their friends and partners, but simply for LWG - living while gay.
For all of the lip service we pay to tolerance and diversity and everybody getting along, and as quickly as almost everyone will join in the cries of outrage and condemnation after a high profile incident like Matt Shepherd’s murder, as a society we have a long, long way to go until homosexuals are even close to being on par with the rest of the minorities in this country – let alone on par, period.
If we want to see a change in military policy, then we need to become far more serious about change in society overall. That means getting into the hearts and minds of people, and convincing our more stubborn citizens that equal rights aren’t special rights, and that discriminating against people because of the way that they were born is never excusable – nor does refraining from discrimination mean that they “approve” of anything other than every individual’s right to exist in peace so long as they aren’t infringing on anyone else’s rights.
Hopefully our military is feverishing working on plans for “The Bridge On The River Queer” to go over and bypass this threat.
Does anyone actually believe the Armed Forces of the United States would be torn apart by dropping the ban on gay soldiers? I don’t believe that. I’d like to give the average soldier a little more credit for her/his professionalism and dedication.
Anyone who thinks the US Armed Services would curl up and die if queers were allowed to serve is nothing more than a filthy bigot trying desperately to find a notch to which to secure thier bigotry.
Every decent country in the modern world has already done this – and many have extended other necessary . If America doesn’t follow suit then the Bill of Rights is a lie, the Constitution is horseshit, and the American dream is nothing but a facade.
Kirk
You know, I don’t always agree with how you state everything, Kirk, but this is a point where I am fully, completely in agreement with you. The idea that this country is a paragon of human rights is obsolete. What we’re asking for is simple; we want to be treated like everyone else under the law. And until that happens, “the Bill of Rights is a lie, the Constitution is horseshit, and the American dream is nothing but a facade.”
Eddie Izzard suggested the opposite approach:
Okay, yes, I know there’s a difference between transvestites and homosexuals, but just go with the joke for the moment, people…
And of course Maggie Cassella:
I hope you are right, but aren’t the majority of servicemen uneducated? I suspect that there will indeed be a lot of problems bringing gays into the military, but still the bullet must be bit in the name of the equal rights and freedom the armed forces are supposed to be fighting for.
A majority of servicemen are UNEDUCATED? I would surely love a cite for that insane allegation.
A bunch of drooling morons, all of whom are expected to operate advanced technology, such as tanks and other advanced battle vehicles, targeting hardware, aircraft, radar, sonar, submarines, battlefield communications gear, as well as learn tactics, linguistics, ballistics, cartography, and on and on.
The days of the uneducated grunt are far since long past.
The question here isn’t whether or not the ban is correct, but if people are using the ban as a means for removing themselves from potential harm. With war impending with Iraq, suddenly a dearth of Arabic speaking military linguists turn up gay? Sure they are. Just like Kilinger was gay on MASH.
The ban on gays in the military should be removed if for no other reason then to prevent cowards from using it as a way to escape their obligations to the military. Those linguists were trained with your tax dollars, and now they are free to use that training in the private sector. How much tax money did we lose in their training?
I was asking, not stating. Notice that thing at the end of my sentence? It’s called a “question mark”.
And I never stated nor implied that undeducated = drooling moron.
Besides, it could argued that learning to operate all that equipment is more “training” than “education”. Do you believe that military training results in the same lessening of bigotry than, say, a college education? Or do you deny that education is a factor at all in whether someone is bigoted or not?