If you are a heterosexual, you are in danger.
ping
Earth to folks...Rupaul would not be able to make it through boot camp and gays emulate him/her so I don’t think you will see an influx of gays joining the military. First they would have to get through boot camp. Some of them really could not handle that. I really believe that nothing would change. Maybe that one guy who was outted by a former friend would be able to stay, but otherwise I can’t see how those fems would join.
Military Quote of the Day:
“When I joined the military it was illegal to be homosexual, then it became optional. I’m getting out before it becomes mandatory!”
If a homo lays hands on a hetero, under the new proposed rules, the homo will have the upper hand. I predict murders over this. All of it is unnecessary. Just another way for Obama to humiliate and create dissent in the military.
“Gays in Military = Sex in Barracks”
Newsflash, there is already sex in the barracks.
I got F’d-overed many times while in the Navy, but that was figuratively not literally.
The military has shown tremendous inability to keep male and female service members from engaging in sexual activity, and that's with highly segregated berthing areas. That problem, but with gays, is only going to become exponentially greater because there's no way to segregate the gays from each other. This is going to be a moral and discipline nightmare.
Ummm ... Homosexuals have been allowed to legally serve in the military ever since Bill Clinton instituted "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" in 1993.
They just have to keep their mouths shut. (No pun intended.)
Only those of us that served prior to 1993 have ever experienced a military where homosexuals were not allowed to legally serve in the military. That excludes the vast majority of the current active duty population.
The Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Conway, honestly expressed his concerns to Congress last week while most of the other bureaucrats in the Pentagon are busy protecting their careers. I have 2 sons in the military who will be counting the days until they can get out if this horrible exercise in political correctness is inflicted upon our services.
When I was in the military, some guys decided to get out, claiming to be homo’s.
While their paperwork was being processed they moved to series of special barracks. We had various names for those but that isn’t the point.
The worst scutt duty was be put on night watch for those barracks to keep an orgy from breaking out.
The illusion that the homosexual lifestyle is a normal way of living has been successfully propagated by promoting a “victim” image for homosexual persons, and by the pseudo-science alleging a ‘gay” gene.
Of the reports alleging, or promising soon down the road, a “gay” gene, not a single one has survived scientific peer review. There is no “gay” gene.
On the other hand, the evidence does show that homosexual persons are indeed victims — but overwhelmingly of their own behavior, not that of others.
Typical homosexual behavior includes regular contact with fecal matter from oneself and from sexual partners, tragically reversing several centuries of learning about cleanliness, and thus several centuries of growing lifespan. Homosexual behavior makes no more sense than playing in the toilet.
All available evidence indicates that the lifespan of practicing homosexual persons is drastically shortened by their behavior. No reliable study indicates otherwise. The lifespan topic is taboo among homosexual advocates because the evidence is so damaging to their case.
My concern is homosexual officers who could misuse their authority to intimidate subordinates.
I'm raising the BS flag on that one. The interviewee has paranoia issues. Over 40% of her female Basic Training barracksmates were "found to be" lesbians and many more were likely? If her statement were true and her class is anything other than a remarkable channeling of lesbian trainees into a single BCT class, more than half of all female Soldiers are gay. That implication is an insult to every female Soldier and undermines the pro-DADT (or pro-don't be gay in the army at all) argument.
Personally, I've always viewed DADT as an escape clause more than a punishment for homosexual troops. Overturning it may force straights to serve with homosexuals, but it will also force homosexuals to serve out their contracts. As for the 'gay sex in the barracks', well sexual harrassment and e.o. works both ways. If it's a problem for good order and discipline, it will get fixed. I'm amazed at how little faith some people put in the abilities of the military to handle its own business.
We saw how well it worked for the Catholic church.
Blanket party time.... I saw a few when someone wouldn't shower....
Uh...just keep the butt bandits out of the military. Does anyone really want people like this in their squad? We want our enemies to fear us, not laugh at us...I disagree. Homosexuals usually have as much, or as little, self control as do heterosexuals. However, that being said, individuals identified as homosexuals in the military will be killed.
Everyone should be crystal clear about this. There are far more people in the military willing to kill homosexuals than there are homosexuals willing to join the military. And if the murderer is captured, this means that the military will have lost not one, but two service members.
The purpose of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is *not* justice, but to “preserve good order and discipline in the military.” This should be kept in mind when there is consideration of punishment for military offenses, and explains why some offenses, considered petty in the civilian world, are regarded as very serious in the military world, and vice versa.
In past, homicide may have warranted only a year or two punishment, but sodomy, with extenuating circumstances, could be punished with more than five years in prison. That is, some homicides could be seen as far less detrimental to good order and discipline, than sodomy, depending on circumstances.
Now, this being said, the first inclination of those that would inflict this policy change on the military, is to insist that through indoctrination and lesser punishments, military personnel can be “reprogrammed” to not kill homosexuals, and more, to even treat them as equals.
Not hardly. It would be just as likely as using group therapy, and frequent nattering and whining, to convince people to voluntarily immerse their hand in a deep pot of boiling lead. In many people, there is an instinctual revulsion to homosexuals that is just as strong as their unwillingness to incinerate their own hand.
The next inclination of those that would force this policy change on the military, is their opinion that it is *more* important that homosexuals be integrated into the military, than the retention of tens of thousands of personnel who would kill homosexuals. But in that regard, such people are disinterested in the military mission itself, and see it of far less importance than their social experimentation.
That is, they do not *care* if the military loses its effectiveness, in that they hold it in low esteem in the first place, and would not mind at all were it to be humbled on the battlefield, suffering defeat and destruction. A similar view they hold towards America as a whole.
While the military has become inured to such manipulations, the Pentagon will no doubt eventually embrace having homosexuals sent into its ranks, fully understanding that they will be killed. But that is the penalty in itself, that homosexuals who would dare to accept the invitations of the social theorists, are foolish enough to deserve what they get.
Being relatively wise, the Pentagon will not report the death of these homosexuals as being over their sexuality or actions, but as the result of training accidents, violent crimes, and bad luck. Much as they do right now.