Posted on 11/30/2010 12:30:01 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The White House says President Barack Obama agrees with a Pentagon survey that overturning the military's ban on gay service members would not disrupt unit cohesion.
Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said Obama continues to believe that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is divisive and should be overturned through the legislative process....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Obama to the Army: Write me a report that says letting gays in the service won’t disrupt life.
Army to Obama, weeks later: Here is your report that says letting gays in the service should not disrupt life.
So, the members of the service still follow orders. There is a shock.
Think about it. if they do NOT attribute to names and such then they can easily declare ANY result they want. I resent these bastard soul-less scum in my military who bend over for the likes of Gates and Obama to overturn something that is clearly out-of-kilter with reality.
Liars!
This will give an entirely new meaning to the order, “assume the leaning rest position”.
Open gays would not have made it through boot-camp in my Army during 1965.
So wait,
Obama is in agreement with the DoD which follows the lead of the CinC?
Wow- that’s pretty deep!
So if I write a letter with a lie in it, and then if I get caught if I reference my onn letter, is it true? Is it now OK?
Ten Reasons to Oppose an “LGBT Law” or Policy for the Military
The Center for Military Readiness ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608259/posts
Senate Testimony: European Militaries Are Not Role Models for U.S.
The Center for Military Readiness ^ | 3/22/2010
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608228/posts
Rates of Homosexual Assault in the Military Are Disproportionately High
FRC ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608306/posts
In Support the 1993 Law Stating that Homosexuals are not Eligible to Serve in the Military
CMR ^ | July 23, 2008 | Elaine Donnelly
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2608370/posts
The report doesn’t really say that. It says that of the people who currently THINK they have a gay person in their group, most didn’t think it bothered the group to have what they thought was a gay person.
That in no way indicates that having an openly gay person who is allowed to act on their sexual preference wouldn’t cause trouble. Right now, a gay who hits on another guy will get booted, so they live in secrecy.
My Dad was a WWII combat veteran. Years ago, I asked him about homosexual participants in combat. He said that the obvious ones washed out pretty quick. It took GUTS to stay the course in what they went through. No time for any of that “ride in my beautiful balloon gay parade” nonsense. - People who can’t grow up, don’t. The rest of the adults have to pull their own weight and the parasites’ weight as well. - He didn’t sound resentful of it - just matter of fact.
Anyone on the site, who has been in an Infantry unit or with them on a combat OP will tell you he does not want gays in his unit anymore then he wants a person who snores or makes any damn noise.
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.