Replies

In fact, allowing homosexuals in the military will reduce the amount of reenlistment as many in the military don't want to shower, room or share a foxhole with someone that might have an unwanted sexual attraction to them.

Thank you for helping make my point. The Army is more concerned about gays than it is about radical jihadis in the ranks. If Hasan had said he way gay, he'd have been given the boot immediately. Instead, he told anyone who would listen that he would not fight fellow Muslims, sympathized with the Jihadis, yada, yada, yada and the Army did nothing. I'll bet all the homophobes here would go ballistic if a queer was allowed to stay in the Army for one day.

Anyone who equates homosexuality and radical Islam is an idiot. The overwheleming majority of AIDS cases in the world are in sub Saharan Africa, where homosexuality is rare. Cultural traditions are largely to blame for the rapid spread of AIDS in Africa as you can read here.

The overwheleming majority of AIDS cases in the world are in sub Saharan Africa, where homosexuality is rare.

Actually, homosexual males are four times more likely in Africa and 19 times more likely worldwide to get HIV:

http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/article.php?articleid=2273&viewarticle=1

The worldwide statistics are shocking. Globally, men who have sex with men are 19 times more likely to be infected with HIV than the general population. In Latin America, which is hosting the biennial international AIDS conference for the first time, MSM are 33 times more likely to be infected than the general population. And though MSM make up nearly a quarter of those infected with HIV in Latin America as a whole, programs targeted toward MSM receive less than 1 percent of total HIV/AIDS spending in the region.

The report found that MSM are 18 times more likely to be infected with HIV than the general population in Asia and at least 4 times more likely in Africa.

The issue, though, on this subject is not allowing something that will disrupt military unit cohesion.

You, like others in this thread, seem to have drawn incorrect conclusions based on what I wrote, and may also have attributed things to me I didn't write. It is difficult to tell since your posted reference is not mine.

Some of your points are valid. Hasan should have been investigated and dealt with. But why would you imply I or anyone else here believes differently?

I did not equate the two except to try and press the point that they are both threats to this country. I posted numbers to indicate that the problems caused by the homosexual agenda are greater than people typically believe. That doesn't mean it is an equal or greater threat than Islam; it is not, and I never said it was. But it is a threat.

They are two separate issues and they both need to be dealt with correctly. The logical fallacy proposed by the article is this: because there is an over emphasis on finding and removing gays rather than Muslims the policy toward gays should be changed.

Frankly, I am baffled as to why you and others on this thread do not see what is being done here.

1) There is NO information to support the implication that Muslims go undetected because the military is ferreting out gays.

2) There is nothing to support the assertion that the military even does expend resources to actively look for gays. Wasn’t that one of the key points of “don’t ask – don’t tell”? That "don't ask" part?

3) Consider, the argument to relax restrictions on gays inherently compares the two. The article, you and others here are saying "we have a flawed focus on a phantom threat instead of the proper focus on the much bigger true threat!" Yet you and others have stated that any comparison is foolish. I agree, your comparison is foolish.

4) Even if the current policy was to allow openly gay soldiers into the military nothing would have changed regarding Hasan. That would require a change in policy toward Muslims.

You and others on this thread seem to have bought into this flawed argument. The two are separate issues. I have never said otherwise.

Another freeper said it well – it is the equivalent of deciding to disconnect the brakes to go faster because the engine isn’t working.

The military needs to drastically increase its scrutiny of Muslim soldiers. The military does not need to relax its policy toward gays.

Lastly, as to your reference to aids in Africa, I'm at a loss as to how that ties to the homosexual agenda in America. I don't think it does. You are going to have to provide more information on that one. I suspect you are using a tangent in order to avoid debating specific statements. Copy in what I wrote and provide your data and objections and we can discuss it.