Page 1 of 142 1231151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 2123
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Biggest Little City In The World
    Posts
    1,569
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Thumbs down General Wants Gay Ban Lifted

    General Wants Gay Ban Lifted




    Military.com | January 03, 2007

    In an op-ed published in Tuesday's New York Times, John M. Shalikashvili, retired Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says Congress should give "serious reconsideration" to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the ban on openly lesbian, gay and bisexual military personnel. Shalikashvili, who supported the ban on open service in 1993, writes that "I now believe that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces," and goes on to say that "Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job."

    "'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is out of step with both the American public and those within our armed forces," said C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN). "The counsel of military leaders increasingly supports repeal of the law. Congress must, as General Shalikashvili urges, consider the overwhelming evidence of the past fourteen years. If they do, the clear answer is that we must lift the ban."

    Shalikashvili, who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs from 1993 to 1997, joins other senior retired military officers who have called for repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." In May 2006, Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy, USA (Ret.), the first female three-star officer in Army history, called the law "a hollow policy that serves no useful purpose." Lieutenant General Daniel W. Christman, former superintendent of West Point, recently told The New York Times that "It is clear that national attitudes toward this issue have evolved considerably in the last decade. This has been led by a new generation of service members who take a more relaxed and tolerant view toward homosexuality." Retired Admiral John Hutson, who currently serves as Dean of Franklin Pierce Law School, also recently wrote that "It would be a great tragedy if we didn't take advantage of (the) chance to correct a flawed policy."

    In 2003, two retired generals and an admiral 'came out' in the New York Times, and in November 2006 fourteen senior retired military officers urged the First Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the ban. They wrote that the law "undermines the military's ability to fulfill its primary mission of providing national security by discouraging the enlistment of gay persons qualified to serve their country and by expelling from the military those who have served with honor."

    In today's op-ed, General Shalikashvili writes that "Last year I held a number of meetings with gay soldiers and marines, including some with combat experience in Iraq, and an openly gay senior sailor who was serving effectively as a member of a nuclear submarine crew. These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers."

    A December 18th Zogby poll also found that 73% of military personnel polled were comfortable with lesbians and gays.

    "General Shalikashvili's statement is the first by a Joint Chiefs Chairman to call for repeal, and as such is enormously significant," said Osburn. "The Pentagon has dismissed more than 11,000 men and women under this law. It is clear that enforcement of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is arbitrary. We continue to lose critical personnel who happen to be gay. As General Shalikashvili points out, continuing to keep this law on the books is detrimental to our national security."

    http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...RC=airforce.nl

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,000
    Thanks (Given)
    363
    Thanks (Received)
    1000
    Likes (Given)
    80
    Likes (Received)
    569
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5913560

    Default

    Don't ask don't tell is a pretty good policy in general, not just the military

    In another post, I said how much I hate those rainbow stickers on cars. Like I really want to know who is gay.

    But, since some people insist on telling us what their sexual preferences are... let me suggest a few of my own (this should be fun!)

    BONDAGE
    ZOO-PHILE (this one could have a picture of a pony)
    SCAT LOVER (a white bumper sticker with a brown streak down the middle)
    FETISH
    FOOT WORSHIPPER

    but here's the one that would offend people the most

    S T R A I G H T
    How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin. - Ronald Reagan

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    246
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    215

    Default

    In today's op-ed, General Shalikashvili writes that "Last year I held a number of meetings with gay soldiers and marines, including some with combat experience in Iraq, and an openly gay senior sailor who was serving effectively as a member of a nuclear submarine crew. These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers."
    I honestly don't have a problem with gays serving in the military but this doesn't make sense...a policy is still a policy. How can someone in the navy be openly gay?

    (I know the majority of sailors are gay but didn't know they could do it openly. )

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Communist China
    Posts
    2,325
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    good question....I think it is a matter of applying "don't ask don't tell" as literally as possible.... and that means that "don't act" is not part of the equation. A sailor can act "openly gay", as long as he keeps the sexual aspect of it private and off the ship.... and commanding officers may "know" that a sailor is gay, but until the sailor comes out and says so, the skipper will not ask the question....especially if the sailor knows his job and does it well.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    246
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manfrommaine View Post
    good question....I think it is a matter of applying "don't ask don't tell" as literally as possible.... and that means that "don't act" is not part of the equation. A sailor can act "openly gay", as long as he keeps the sexual aspect of it private and off the ship.... and commanding officers may "know" that a sailor is gay, but until the sailor comes out and says so, the skipper will not ask the question....especially if the sailor knows his job and does it well.
    True, but the article said an openly gay sailor. Plus how did the General meet with gay military personnel?

    "Any military personnel who is maybe gay but not really sure, please report to the Inspector General's office for an interview."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Communist China
    Posts
    2,325
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    the general is retired.... again...if the service does NOT want to get rid of quality service members who might also be gay.. even announcing that a meeting of members interested in talking with the retired CJCS about gay issues would be ok... and the active duty chain of command would make sure not to take attendance or have any representation at the meeting.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475234

    Default

    I'd like an article showing how many senior leaders are FOR the policy. I bet those against openly (mentally unstable) homos-in-uniform outnumber those FOR, by a margin of 10:1.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Communist China
    Posts
    2,325
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp View Post
    I'd like an article showing how many senior leaders are FOR the policy. I bet those against openly (mentally unstable) homos-in-uniform outnumber those FOR, by a margin of 10:1.
    well...with an enlightened attitude like that, I have no doubt you would feel that way. I think that you would find that military commanders, by and large, care a lot more about how well a person does his job when he's on duty than who he sleeps with off duty.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    The Biggest Little City In The World
    Posts
    1,569
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manfrommaine View Post
    well...with an enlightened attitude like that, I have no doubt you would feel that way. I think that you would find that military commanders, by and large, care a lot more about how well a person does his job when he's on duty than who he sleeps with off duty.
    Can you make ONE COMMENT, to a person with an opinion that differs from your's, WITHOUT THE OPENING SLAP IN THE FACE?!

    I'm getting sick of it. I'm asking you to cool it.

    __________________________________________________ _____


    There's only one way to incorporate homo's into the military, and that would be to put them one by one into a girl basic training squadron. If you put them in with men or together to themselves, that's the same as putting straight men and women in together. You'd have to put them in with a sex they weren't attracted to, since the whole group is naked and showers together. As far as on the job, sure, let them go fight if that's what they want.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Communist China
    Posts
    2,325
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Mr. Pale Rider, sir. I would suggest that referring to gay people as "mentally unstable homos" might be construed as a slap in the face to a great number of people, and even though I am not gay myself, I am offended by such references. It seems that you are willing to condone slaps in the face when they originate from your side of the aisle.

    Just respectful food for thought

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Communist China
    Posts
    2,325
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pale Rider View Post

    There's only one way to incorporate homo's into the military, and that would be to put them one by one into a girl basic training squadron. If you put them in with men or together to themselves, that's the same as putting straight men and women in together. You'd have to put them in with a sex they weren't attracted to, since the whole group is naked and showers together. As far as on the job, sure, let them go fight if that's what they want.
    I also must say that I am quite leery of suggestions that there is "only one way" to do nearly anything. I think such a pronouncement is profoundly presumptious. I served in the Navy and there was no question in my mind that numerous sailors and officers I served with over the years were gay. I knew it...They knew that I knew it and I knew that they knew... and damned near every one else on the ship knew. There was NEVER one single problem with ANY of those men during all those years.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    246
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manfrommaine View Post
    Mr. Pale Rider, sir. I would suggest that referring to gay people as "mentally unstable homos" might be construed as a slap in the face to a great number of people, and even though I am not gay myself, I am offended by such references. It seems that you are willing to condone slaps in the face when they originate from your side of the aisle.

    Just respectful food for thought
    I agree with MFM on this one. Generally speaking, you can't say the shit you guys say and then not expect to get a response like that. His response was mild at best.
    Last edited by dirt mcgirt; 01-24-2007 at 11:05 AM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manfrommaine View Post
    well...with an enlightened attitude like that, I have no doubt you would feel that way. I think that you would find that military commanders, by and large, care a lot more about how well a person does his job when he's on duty than who he sleeps with off duty.
    Do you know any Military Commanders? There IS no 'off duty' for soldiers. Being on Active Duty in the military is a lifestyle. A lifestyle which is NOT compatable with open homosexuality. Should homosexual relationships be allowed, commanders would have to also sanction relationships between enlisted and commissioned soldiers. I mean, 'off duty hours' belong to the people, RIGHT?

    Wrong. That's simply NOT how the Army (specifically) works.

    Homosexuals, by their very acceptance of their lusts, show lack of good judgement, lack of mental toughness, and lack of discipline - off the top of my head. Homosexuality is a treatable affliction for those who have the good sense to seek help. It's probably tougher to kick than alcoholism - but people can be restored from the deviant behavior.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dirt mcgirt View Post
    I agree with MFM on this one. Generally speaking, you can't say the shit you guys say and then not expect to get a response like that. His response was mild at best.

    [admin hat = on]
    Thanks for your input - but this is not a debate. When a Moderator asks a member to change the tone or direction of their post, the member needs to comply - rightly or wrongly. The member is encouraged to take up the issue with the moderator via PM; if they don't get the results they want, they can speak to an Administrator about the problem.

    Thanks

    [/admin]
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    246
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmp View Post
    [admin hat = on]
    Thanks for your input - but this is not a debate. When a Moderator asks a member to change the tone or direction of their post, the member needs to comply - rightly or wrongly. The member is encouraged to take up the issue with the moderator via PM; if they don't get the results they want, they can speak to an Administrator about the problem.

    Thanks

    [/admin]
    And I totally respect your need to police the board and keep civility. But IMO it's being done selectively. I've already complained to the admins about some of the behaviors of the mods. MFM might be wrong in how he comes off sometimes but he's correct in that this board is slanted to the right. I've seen Pale Rider and OCA engage in personal flame fests and then flaunt the fact that they were mods during those exchanges. Some of PR's posts might be offensive in nature despite being his personal opinion, just as MFM's might be offensive in nature despite being his personal opinion. It's unacceptable for the admins and mods to say that generalizations are okay but personal attacks aren't because it's in the eye of the beholder.

    Example: If I say that homos are sick fucks then you guys would consider that acceptable because it's a personal opinion. But if I say conservatives are sick fucks some of the mods, admins, and posters would consider that trolling.

    The admins and mods need to apply the rules equally if you want the board to grow. Either put every thread that devolves into a flame fest in the steel cage area or don't put any of them in there. But one thing's for sure, it's not acceptable for mods to engage in mud slinging but then appeal to decency when they get it back. I have more people that are interested in registering, but they're not going to participate if they're not going to get a fair shake. I really do want the board to grow, but my participation is dependent on how objective you guys are. My 2 cents.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums