If you believe Don't Ask Don't Tell Should be ended!
 

This is urgent, Congress is debating this now. There are a couple of reps that are possible NOs that could be swayed with enough American's letting them know they want Congress to take action.

Here is the list of reps, please call if you have time today and tell them to leave in the Murphy Amendment

http://thequeertimes.com/2010/05/adv...bers-congress/

Senate Armed service committee voted 16-12 to repeal DADT.

Vote should happen soon in the House

What exactly is the big deal? I am sorry if I do not get it. I can't help but think that we have a few more pressing issues than DADT that Congress should be dealing with.

that's for sure!

It's a very big deal. We are losing qualified men and women who want to serve their country. We are stretched so thin as it is. Other countries like Israel even don't have an issue.

For you it might not be a big deal, sure, but for some others it could mean a lot.
And there will always be more pressing issues, does not mean minor(ity) issues should not be dealt with :2 cents:

And I am asking it to be explained to me. Can you do that?

So, you are telling me that qualified gay men and women will not join if they can't announce their sexual preference?

why do they have to announce their sexual preference anyways? I have never understood this issue.

It's not about announcing their preferences, I don't think most of the gay people care to annouce it, it's about being comfortable living with their partner at a military base for example without having to go through harassments.

The mere fact that there is a DADT policy is on its own a discriminatory policy.

Qualified gay men and women are being kicked out because someone even out's them. There was a women kicked out cause her lover was dying and she asked for permission to leave to visit her. If it was a women asking for permission to visit her dying husband that would not have happened.

They also recently kicked out interpreters? Do you know how hard it is to find people to be able to interpreter and monitor terror cells and foreign intelligence in time of war?

What sometimes happens is that do get re-hired from the private sector doing the same thing and getting paid more of our tax payers money....so it even costs us more.

I agree.

You have links to the specific instances you brought up? Why did they kick out the interpreters?

God, you're stupid.
Its not about joining, its about staying and not being afraid to be yourself.

That's not a stupid question...I never understood the issue either.

By "being yourself" do you mean banging other dudes? I'm with the dog on this one.

I'll pull the links tonight from home and post them tomorrow

Thanks. So, what kind of numbers are we talking about anyway? 100's? 1,000's?

it's about sexuality, not sex

You shouldn't be asking that question period. These people are risking their lives for you and me. I don't care who he's fucking. He could be fucking a goat for all care.

Bump for you

Here is one link
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/58_..._from_military

Looks like 58 Arab Linguists have been kicked out for being gay. That isn't a huge number, but I would imagine these people are pretty hard to find.

Here is another.

http://www.seattlepi.com/connelly/412068_joel11.html

This one says that around 13,500 men and women have been discharged for being gay over the last 10 years.

I would like to see how that number compares to just regular dishonorable discharges for other offenses.

Bad Dog, I see someone beat me to posting the links....thanks.

They do not receive Dishonorable Discharges for just being gay...they receive a General Disharge under less than honorable conditions and there is a difference between the two types of discharges. The overwhelming majority of those that are discharged for being gay are those that play the gay card because...for whatever their reason/reasons they do not want to finish their contract and want to be discharged.

That is wrong here is two personal stories of people would would be willing to still serve

http://thequeertimes.com/2010/05/sto...er-thursday-6/
http://thequeertimes.com/2010/05/sto...ednesday-19th/

Even though the amendment made it in the bill last night John McCain is threatening a filibusterer when the final bill is up for vote in the Senate.

dont ask me cause i wont tell ya :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

The military does not want people who want to "be themselves." Individuality has always been frowned upon. They want people who are soft in the head and easy to lead. Lots of these kinds of people are alpha male types who hate "faggots." It's a chest-pounding, sand-n1gger killing, high-fiving brotherhood. Letting openly gay people serve would threaten the cohesiveness of the unit.

I don't see how anyone's sexuality should even come up in the military. Don't ask, don't tell is fine. If gays want to serve then great. Join and shut the fuck up about sucking dick. If they want to act like squeaky little twinks then there are plenty of hair dresser and florist jobs in the civilian world for them.

Maybe "tell us and we will not fire you" is more fair than "don't ask don't tell."

Neither of the two stories contradict anything in my post...and even if they did...it is but two stories of more than 13,000...which would still not contradict anything in my post...thank you very much.

I think we can all agree that no one cares what their sexuality is. We have women in the armed forces too so what is the big deal? I honestly don't even understand what the debate is about..

There's some things you need to understand about this...

It's not about Gay Rights... There's a reason why women can't be in combat with men. The reason is, men will sacrifice their mission in order to save a woman they've slept with. It's a fact of life...

The same thing applies if men were sleeping with other men in the unit. This makes the unit completely dysfunctional and unreliable.

In addition... what do you do about field showers? And deployment areas... it's a giant group shower and it's really not right to force men to shower with other gay men if they're straight... It would be like forcing women to shower with men or visa versa... It's a giant operational cluster fuck that would result in a military which is less efficient.

I'm all about gay rights, I support gay marriage and once of the quickest ways to piss me off is to tell me you don't support at least civil unions... but that's not what this is about and the majority of people who think you should be allowed to be openly gay in the military have no fucking clue what the reasons are... let alone any military experience.

So at the very least... they'll need to reclassify who can be in a combat unit... And I'm not sure WHAT they'd do about two men being in the same unit (or two women) that then become "involved"... Since that's not really allowed now in a non combat unit with mixed genders... You'd certainly run more risks of that occurring... It's like dating in the workplace x 5,000 ... I giant operational cluster fuck waiting to happen.

I want them to kick out everyone who wont do it standing up in the shower.

Prove to me that unit cohesiveness wouldnt suffer if you learned someone was doing it standing up.

Ok I'm not gay, but saying "what about showers?" is assuming that a person loses their brain if they're gay.

Does the military have rules about men sodliers banging women soldiers? Then thats the same rule that'll apply to everyone. Come on people, get over it.

oh, and by the way.. gay men and women are in the military in those showers RIGHT NOW. oh the horror? hardly.

There is a big difference between not being allowed to show any interest in other men while in the shower... and being openly gay in the shower... And regardless of gay or straight... I really don't think it's very ethical to force people to shower with other people who are sexually interested in them...

I have never been in the military, but have several friends that have. I asked one of them, a Marine who fought in the first gulf war, if the thought knowing a few of his fellow soldiers was gay would bother him. He said it wouldn't as long as they didn't make a move on anyone and did their job.

He did have an interesting story about that though. During Desert Storm he spent about 9 months basically living in the desert as they trained and waited to fight. At one point he developed a rash so he goes to the medic. The medic tells him this type of rash is common considering their living conditions, the heat etc. He has a cream that will help it. My buddy holds out his hand so the medic can put the cream in his hand and he can rub it in. The medic insists that he needs to apply it to make sure it is done right. My friend tells him that he has the rash on his arm, which the medic is welcome to apply creme to, but it is also on his balls and he doesn't want the medic rubbing his balls. The medic still insists on applying the creme. They have an argument about this for a few minutes and my buddy leaves without any creme. He goes and tells his lieutenant who goes to the medic, gets the tube a creme and brings it to my buddy. All is fine. The next morning that medic was gone and a new guy was there.

My buddy said he didn't know the medic was gay, but everyone that heard the story assumed he was and that he wanted to feel my buddy's balls which would have made dealing with him difficult so they were glad they got rid of him. The first thing the new guy told them all is that he would not be handling anyone's nuts. :)

I'm so tired of the shower excuse.

I've been showering with other men since jr. high school. I shower with straight men at the gym all the time now. The last thing I'm thinking about after a workout is getting it on with anyone.

While I haven't been there, I'm sure in a combat situation after a long day of fighting the last thing on your mind is getting laid as well.

If it is really the only issue, so you pop up one more shower tent.

The idea that every gay man is interested in straight men needs to be squashed.

before don't ask don't tell if you were asked if you were gay and you lied then you were found out to be gay you DID get a dishonerable discharge because you lied. With DADT they COULDN'T ask you that question so no chance of you lying about it.

That is not correct. Before the DADT policy was instituted and it was learned that one was gay one could received an Undesirable Discharge. If one were to be caught engaging in a homosexual act one could receive a Dishonorable Discharge.

You are missing the point ... it's the same as having women and men together... Of course not everyone is going to be interested in everyone else... but that doesn't mean it isn't going to make a lot of people unfairly uncomfortable...

And that's certainly not the only reason... I posted my main reasons first, earlier :P

What makes you think they talk about it?
People are being outed out for different reasons. Someone saw them walking with another dude/girl, rumors.. who knows. You really thing that some flaming homo with pride bumper sticker is going around telling people he likes to suck cock?

I spent 12 years in the military and was discharged before DADT was instituted...but if it would have been instituted that gays could openly serve...and that is what is being proposed now...I would have left the military...unless and only unless gays had their own units. I do not choose to associate with known gays socially or professionally.

I am satisfied that in my lifetime I have done both...but not knowingly and what I don't know cannot bother me one way or another.

Homophobe much?

So blacks, hsipanics and other non-whites should be seprated into different units so those whites that don't like them won't have to serve with them?

Let's see DADT was instituted in 1993 you served 12 years so that means you served about 25 years ago. Guess what, people and society have evolved over the last quarter century.

ho·mo·phobe   /ˈhoʊməˌfoʊb/ Show Spelled[hoh-muh-fohb] Show IPA
?noun
a person who fears or hates homosexuals and homosexuality.

I neither fear not hate homosexuals...I choose not to socialize with them...but there are a lot of classifications of people that I have always choosen not to socialize with and this day and age that would include about 99% of people. I only socialize with old school friends and old comrades in arms...I am pretty anti social at this point in my life.

The first paragraph are your words and not mine. I was medically discharged in '92 for injuries sustained during the '91 Gulf war.

Damn,
I wonder how many people chose not to socialize with you. I know I wouldn't. But I don't think you would say this in public. Well maybe after 10 beers.

I would love to see you and this guy (he's homo) talk this whole "gay" thing.
I would order PPV and TIVO it.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_2tvND65PRA...0/gareth+1.jpg

If they're uncomfortable, they need to get over it. I mean seriously they really do.

And I wouldnt let some medic rub my balls with creme either, lmfao. wtf thats a weird one! LOL

You must not have ever served in the military... I don't care what a person's sexual preference is. I just don't see why a gay person HAS to announce their preference to the world..

The reason I feel it is not good for the military to allow OPEN gay persons to serve is this: When someone gets wounded or blown up you rush to help them, to try and save their life, HOWEVER, now lets say that the guy that has been flaunting his gayness gets hit some people WILL think twice before running to help them. The first thing in some people minds WILL be HIV, does this person have it? Yes, you are tested in the military but there are ways around that as well.. You have to remember most of the military is comprised of people from the south as well as the lower end of the social structure in life and as a result those folks WILL not change with the times..

Not to mention ALL the issues it will cause in the living areas... As well as when a open gay person flunks out of a school or course their will be lawsuits claiming it is because he or she is gay.. etc..etc.. Just stay with the current DADT policy...

I seriously doubt that he would be pissed because I choose not to associate with him...now would he?

As long as the fags aren't dicking up their units or putting people's lives in danger, let the homos serve. If someone wants to serve their country, who cares what their sexual preference is, and that's weird coming from me. As long as they make good soldiers, that's all that matters. Now if they get a bunch of flamboyant homos running rampant, then the don't ask don't tell should be brought back.