DO I LOOK PRETTIER THAN REGGIE LOVE?
Posted on 12/18/2010 9:04:14 PM PST by massmike
We are now stuck with sexual deviants serving openly in the U.S. military because of turncoat Republican senators ... Had the cloture vote failed, we would still have sane moral and sexual standards governing military personnel policy. But sadly those days are gone, perhaps forever.
...
The armies of other nations have allowed gays to serve openly in the military. The reason they could afford to do this is simple: they could allow homosexuals to serve in their military because we didn’t allow them to serve in ours.
They knew they could count on the strength, might, power, and cohesion of the U.S. military to intervene whenever and wherever necessary to pull their fannies out of the fire and squash the forces of tyranny wherever they raised their ugly heads around the world.
Those days are now gone. We will no longer be able to bail out these other emasculated armies because ours will now be feminized and neutered beyond repair, and there is no one left to bail us out. We have been permanently weakened as a military and as a nation by these misguided and treasonous Republican senators, and the world is now a more dangerous place for us all.
(Excerpt) Read more at rightwingwatch.org ...
Yeah, I corrected that earlier. Sorry. Not surprised he got zotted.
Except the perverts are now protected and have instant access to the willing perverted press.
ATTENTION:
Now that DADT has been repealed the following barracks codes will be implemented:
MAW – men attracted to women
WAM – women attracted to men
MAM – men attracted to men
WAW – women attracted to women
BAA – bisexuals attracted to anyone
MAA – men attracted to animals (located furthest away from K-9 units)
MAC – men attracted to children (no contact allowed with local civilians)
That is all.
You forgot at least two.
Oops. Stuff happens. :)
IBTZ
WAA & WAC? (eeuuww - I didn’t want to go there!)
I want so many zots that you can’t even see through the smokey haze.
But I want these zots in Congress....
This is the real impact. God-fearing folk will dissuade their kids from joining. Readiness will suffer.
Mullen is an amoral bootlicker. Sold his soul for rank and privilege and turned his back on those he is paid to lead.
‘Bohica’ takes on a whole new meaning.
No, the entire world won’t come to an end. But the revolting and evil homosexual agenda will be highly energized, the US military greatly weakened and harmed, and more freedoms lost. Note one of these links below puts the lie to the claim that most in the military are “fine” with serving with homosexuals.
Homosexuals in the military in the US already cause plenty of problems; even more so in countries where they are allowed to be flagrant about it:
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 REAL PENTAGON POLL: 91% OF SERVICE MEMBERS REJECT HOMOSEXUAL LEADERS - 1 IN 4 WOULD QUIT”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2635458/posts
“MILITARY: Marines lead opposition to repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2635350/posts
“Mullen: Troops Who Balk at Change in Gay Service Policy Can Find Other Work”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2636350/posts
Thanks.
The war isn’t over, just one battle lost. It’s not over.
The evidence is crystal clear for anyone who takes the time to read.
The freaking fiends in DC want to ruin the military. They’re just Evil with a capital E, it’s simple.
Can not the new conservative congress undo this?
Hmm... Navy boot camp,ca. 1980. Eighty young women living in a barracks, in a large room with lots of bunkbeds and lockers. A large bathroom, with toilets and sinks in one room, and a shower room with maybe 12 stalls in another. The young women were given maybe 15 minutes to shower, which meant they were showering 2 and 3 to a stall, because there just wasn’t time to take individual showers.
It is just as inappropriate to put open lesbians into such an environment as it is to put young men in that environment.
After basic training, many young enlisted have to share barracks rooms with one or more other people. If it is inappropriate to put members of the opposite sex in such living arrangements, it is equally inappropriate to put homosexuals into such arrangements.
This has nothing to do with discrimination. Not wanting to room with a lesbian is no different than not wanting to room with a man—and it doesn’t mean the lesbian is any more an object of hate than a man is.
Given the lack of privacy in the military, there are valid reasons for not wanting gays to join.
Welcome to FR.
What a strange coincidence that you should be posting in this same thread where two people so recently got zotted—and that your opinion is quite similar to theirs.
The Few, the Proud, the Queer..
“start praying to the alter of the human brain”
While bragging about your intellect,, you spelled “altar” incorrectly.
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.