Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Military indoctrinated on GAYS kissing, behavior....
Washington Times ^ | March 23rd, 2011

Posted on 03/24/2011 8:47:58 AM PDT by TaraP

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: dila813
“Commanders may honor a request not to shower with known gay service members.”

But you will be marked as a 'homophobe' and looked at with suspicion by the 'tolerant' ones. In other words, your career in the military is at a roadblock.

21 posted on 03/24/2011 9:14:14 AM PDT by fwdude (The world is sleeping in the dark that the Church just can't fight, 'cause it's asleep in the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dila813

The problem they are having is that morality and a code of conduct does not ***exist** in homosexuality, because at it’s core homosexuality is immoral...

They know how to enforce morality in heterosexuality because it comes from biblical standards and commandments...

How do you make something *Moral* that has always been abnormal and immoral in the fabric of society...


22 posted on 03/24/2011 9:16:07 AM PDT by TaraP (An APPEASER is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I am sure you are right, the commander’s order is going into your service jacket and you will carry that mark.

Imagine when you check in at your next duty station and you find out your commander/division officer is gay? You have marked yourself for special treatment until you are rotated out. That can be a hard 3-4 years of abusive treatment that you can’t do anything about.


23 posted on 03/24/2011 9:17:17 AM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Yes, it is a conflict, in being tolerant of this, they in fact end up promoting it due to the special status it is being given.


24 posted on 03/24/2011 9:18:42 AM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ABN 505

Yep, it is about destroying the USA in any way they can...

What happens if you say the word *Sissy* or *Queer* is that grounds for a court martial???


25 posted on 03/24/2011 9:20:47 AM PDT by TaraP (An APPEASER is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

The rest of the platoon should resign their commission as a group. See # 26 and # 27 in the Communists goals for bringing down the United States. The document you will see is part of the Congressional Record from 1963. While the American people were being brainwashing by Communist operatives these insidious goals were being brought to fruition in American life. None of this was an accident, folks.

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm


26 posted on 03/24/2011 9:22:53 AM PDT by Seeing More Clearly Now (http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seeing More Clearly Now

Wow..

Do you think the Military is truly aware of this?


27 posted on 03/24/2011 9:26:36 AM PDT by TaraP (An APPEASER is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping it will eat him last)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

life-imitates-Gomer Pyle....


28 posted on 03/24/2011 9:27:53 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Sorta gives making out at the NCO or Officers club a whole new meaning.


29 posted on 03/24/2011 9:33:50 AM PDT by Joe Boucher ((FUBO) Obammy, the man is too small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dila813
gays have the right to kiss in public in uniform, then they have more rights than the heterosexual counterparts.

This is what the repeal of DADT was all about. Most people think its repeal was for "fairness," but they were wrong. The repeal was for EXTRA rights for homofags. Oopsie.

30 posted on 03/24/2011 9:37:17 AM PDT by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mikey_hates_everything

excellent


31 posted on 03/24/2011 9:51:03 AM PDT by silverleaf (All that is necessary for evil to succeed, is that good men do nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mikey_hates_everything

excellent

do ask, do tell


32 posted on 03/24/2011 9:51:18 AM PDT by silverleaf (All that is necessary for evil to succeed, is that good men do nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dila813

The Army training is that any policies have to be neutral. So, if it’s against a commander’s policy for no PDA while in uniform, then it’s supposed to apply to everybody. We’ll see how this actually works in practice, though.


33 posted on 03/24/2011 10:21:05 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ConjunctionJunction

You know how it works, the argument is “even if the policy is neutral, the effect of it isn’t”

Any officer writing them up would have to justify that they would write up a heterosexual couple as well. If they have been in the service for 30 years and only wrote up one other couple for the same thing, they will point out that this wasn’t enforced neutrally.


34 posted on 03/24/2011 10:56:49 AM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dila813

Exactly.


35 posted on 03/24/2011 11:32:32 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

veteran of two services, served in iraq. when they passed this, i threw away all my shirts that said “army” on them. how sad that I am now ashamed of my country.


36 posted on 03/24/2011 1:20:32 PM PDT by stompk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dila813
“Commanders may honor a request not to shower with known gay service members.” I wonder how long this is going to last?

my guess is it will go like this: "oh yeah? well give me 100, and then go field day the barracks. we'll see if you feel like showering tomorrow"
37 posted on 03/24/2011 1:26:09 PM PDT by stompk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Puke.


38 posted on 03/24/2011 1:29:54 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dila813

You are saying “marching in civilian clothes” means “readily identifiable as a member of the military”?


39 posted on 03/24/2011 1:33:00 PM PDT by newzjunkey (Obama: nobel peace prize winner, warmonger, golfer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

They are flaunting their military associations. That hasn’t been permitted previously.

It gives the impression that the military supports something when it doesn’t.


40 posted on 03/27/2011 3:25:49 AM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson