 |
| |
|
|
tandeetaylor
|
|
Las Vegas
Apr 2001
time: 21:23
|
|
There are a lot of gays in the military. A lot. And everyone knows about them, and nobody cares... (Well, at least in Monterey there are) You can be flamboyantly gay in the military. Your platoon sergeant might know, but he probably doesn't care. If these people were in each other's rooms after visiting hours or were putting themselves at risk in some other way, that is the only reason they got in trouble. It also depends a lot on what stage in training they were in. If they were still in the "newbie" company, Bravo, they were much more likely to get caught. The cadre would prefer to look the other way, but when you break other rules, they have no choice. You wouldn't get kicked out for having a girl in your room after visiting hours, but you do get in a lot of trouble... especially in Bravo company, since there are no visiting hours. That would be tough to accomplish, actually.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Firts , all the arguments against Gays in the military are idiotic. They are simply based on prejudice. After all, the big Macho men of the army just don't want to deal with the tought of getting involved in homoerotic situaions. that is not a reason to ban men who want to serve from serving, but to get rid of those men who fear it. |
Now hear this: The military doesn't give a rat's ass about notions of "rights" "progressive thinking" etc. The only real concern is for the easiest way of maintaining apparent fighting efficiency. In that regard, the military has busted male sergeants for ****ing female privates, female officers for ****ing male enlisteds, male officers for ****ing female enlisteds, and in some cases, single males for ****ing civilians. In the last case, there was a funny one at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma, where this (single) major who couldn't keep his pants zipped and was apparently good at getting female pants unzipped was warned repeatedly, then finally GCM'd and given five years when he got caught ****ing the wife of the mayor of one of the towns outside the base.
The simple point is that if you rock the boat and make a pain in the ass of yourself, you will be handled.
quote:
The main point is that we are told that this war on terror is key, and that it is so vital that X and Y freedom must be supressed to fight it,. yert at the same time the army must fight to keep its prejudiced policies even when it actively hurts that same war... |
Says the man whose social engineering solution is to discharge anyone who has issues with open gay sexual conduct in a military setting.  No offense, but I'll take a few fundie staff NCO's at places like Bragg, Benning, Hood, Stewart, etc., over seven outed student linguists in Monterrey. If you're going to argue gay rights, at list stick with people like Cammermeyer and Meinhold. (***** slaps red_jon for thinking I haven't heard debate on the "issue")
Last edited by MichaeltheGreat on 17-11-2002 at 05:46
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kolpo
|
|
It is no surprise that in a groups of organized murder(read armies) there is much hate and intolerance. If you would in a prison put all murders togetter in a group and let them make rules will you also get intolerant and hatefull rules.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Greece doesn't.
Actually you just have to say you're gay and you're off the hook. (of conscription)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gangerolf
I'd imagine the only countries that doesn't are the US and Turkey. |
That's correct. All other NATO countries allow gays to serve. Also, Japan and Israel allow gays to serve. None of these countries has experienced any significant adverse effects in allowing gays to serve.
Also, studies of the American fire and police forces that have non-discrimination policies against gays have also shown no decline in morale or effectiveness.
quote:
All those who've actially been in a combat unit, raise your hand. OK. Keep your hand raised those of you who think that at the present time that gays interfere with unit morale. OK, all of you. |
Actually, the most valid opinion would be that of someone who has actually been in combat with a soldier he knew was gay. I could direct you to my grandfather there, and plenty of others, who say that it didn't make a damn bit of difference.
All of these arguments were made before in the 1940s before Truman made his order to integrate blacks. It was the same lame excuses--it would lower morale, reduce effectiveness, etc. And it didn't, not a bit. So once again I have to ask, why are we coddling homophobic bigots in this regard?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Also, studies of the American fire and police forces that have non-discrimination policies against gays have also shown no decline in morale or effectiveness.
|
That's nice, but irrelevant, since police and fire department personnel are drawn from the local communities in which they work. As such they pretty much reflect the opinions of the communities in which they work.
They also don't live together in barracks, hotbunk on subs, or get deployed to places with Sharia, etc.
quote:
All of these arguments were made before in the 1940s before Truman made his order to integrate blacks. It was the same lame excuses--it would lower morale, reduce effectiveness, etc. And it didn't, not a bit. |
There were a fair number of issues and problems in Vietnam. Why don't you check out Wallace Terry's "Bloods" for example.
quote:
So once again I have to ask, why are we coddling homophobic bigots in this regard? |
(a) Gays aren't excluded per se.
(b) All sorts of things that rock the boat can get you booted out of the military. If you want a mainstream religious case, see Parker v. Levy (1986) which is a SCOTUS First Amendment decision involving religious practice in a military setting.
(c) the real issue is conduct - these guys outing themselves was in all likelihood a settlement of an investigation in lieu of a court-martial for something that came under the UCMJ "General Article" (Sections 124 or 125)
(d) The homophobic bigots went through the roof when Clinton changed the policy to "don't ask, don't tell" - some of them still have their agendas, but as Tandeetaylor said (and Connorkimbro could confirm, since he graduated DLI while she was there for less time, there are known gays in the military. If you want to know the homophobic bigot stance on the issue, check out Melissa Wells-Petry. I don't know if she's still in the Army, but in the 80's she was the lead JAG pit bull, and she's a fundie Christian type, who was the darling of Christian Coalition and others. If you check out The Army Lawyer magazine from the 80's and early 90's, she wrote several articles on the whole issue from the prosecutor's legal standpoint. She did an awful lot of off base speaking and TV appearances, etc., which is kind of interesting, since O-4's usually don't have that much free time.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
That wouldn't be the case any longer. All EU countries must have non-discrimination policies in regards to homosexuals serving. That's why the UK dropped their ban, the EU court ruled against them.
Turkey would also have to change its policy were it to join the EU. |
The EU can't interfere in matters of national security.
You have your facts wrong or the brits screwed up one more time.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Rest assured that there is none of discussion on that issue and that most european countries do not allow gays in the army.
go ahead and search.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
|
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paiktis22
The EU can't interfere in matters of national security.
You have your facts wrong or the brits screwed up one more time. |
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_mili.htm
"Great Britain: The Amsterdam Treaty grants the EU "the power to take appropriate action to combat discrimination. The possible grounds of intervention are discrimination based on sex, race or ethnic origin, religion, belief, disability, age or sexual orientation." 1 This treaty applies to the UK, which is a member state of the EU. Great Britain was found guilty by the European Court of Human Rights on 1999-SEP-27 for violating the human rights of four military personnel. They had been dismissed because of their sexual orientation. The ruling said, in part: "Those negative attitudes could not, of themselves, justify the interferences in question any more than similar negative attitudes towards those of a different race, origin or colour." The UK now permits gays and lesbians to serve freely."
http://www.worldpolicy.org/americas...ail-000127.html
This Greek source says that gays are only prohibited from being officers and exempted from compulsory service, not banned:
http://www.onlineathens.com/stories...113000041.shtml
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Mistake #1.
European court of human rights has no authority to impose anything.
you have it confused with the european court of justice.
so whatever the brits did, they did it of their own will.
EU cannot interfere in matters of national security.
Mistake #2: what you wrote about Greece is all its army.
officers are permanents conscipts are temporary.
both permanent and temorary make up the whole army.
in other words no gays.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2002 20:55
On nights off, while his room-mates would play poker or go out for a beer, he would put on make-up and dress up in womens clothes
|