Amid military's recruiting woes, efforts intensify to end ban on openly gay soldiers

findlaw.com - AP ^ | June 14, 2005 | DAVID CRARY

[GulliverSwift]

Anyone know how to contact Gilchrest? The Rino is trying to get in close with the MSM.

They think this will help the recruiting: "Join the Army now and you get to spend the night in a fox hole with a fag."

[2banana]

Why control of the courts is so important to liberals...

[SR 50]

Lowering the standards again?

[Austin Willard Wright]

Actually, I think that Bush will start easing up. He needs the troops after four months of recruting shortfalls. I suspect that this one reason he isn't cracking down on the border. He needs more folks to sign up......including non-citizens. There are at least 37,000 in the military now.

[traviskicks]

um... it is one thing to battle against the 'gay agenda', but another to prevent a group of citizens from serving their country. It hurts the country and it IS discriminatory.

I'm totally supportive of allowing gays to serve in the military openly.

Now, should we take this further and push for 'quotas', 'affirmitive action' and all of that rot? Of course not.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

Americans who want to fight for their country should be welcomed with opened arms.

Radical homosexual activists should not join the armed forces because it is not a place to be with a leftist agenda.

As long as men and woman keep their hands to themselves and do not break any laws re:sexual contact- what the heck difference does it make what kind of adult they sleep with when they are at home?

I support a don't touch rule. I would assume most service people adhere to that rule, since I am pretty sure that aggressive,unwanted sexual contact upon another service person in a foxhole is already against military law.

[GulliverSwift]

No, that is a distraction. There have to be standards. The military must not let up on this, it would be the sign of one PC victory after another.

[carrier-aviator]

Let's get the facts out on this.

Prior to 1993 there was a Pentagon POLICY not permitting the service of gays. With a phone call Presidnet Clinton could have ordered the Secretary of Defense to rescind that policy, and gays would then have been able to serve. But Clinton, the Draft Dodger, had no credibility with the military, so he retreated in the face of criticism from the generals.

The Democrat Congress then passed the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law, and Clinton signed it.

So, the ban on gays in the military IS NOT a Pentagon or Military POLICY it is the LAW OF THE LAND, passed by a Democrat Congress and signed by a Democrat President.

People who attribute any of this to the Secretary of Defense or the Military leaadership need to be educated.

[Ford4000]

If they think they are having trouble recruiting now, watch what will happen if they change this policy.

[AIC]

I say sign them up, put them on the front line or the first ones in. There's no need for straight guys and gals to get killed and leave nothing back in the states but homosexuals.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

How about if the standards are the ability to get the job done.

[GulliverSwift]

I hear the Iraqi military is having problems getting recruits. Why don't they allow homosexuals!!! < /sarcasm>

[purpleland]

Hitler's early Nazi Party's oppressive *Stormstroopers* were an "uber-masculine" homosexual cadre. (Just an interesting historical note on how radical leftist political movements pander to centric groups to form a power bloc, e.g., the current Democrat party.) ========================================================= Homosexuality and the Nazi Party ... homosexuals within its own ranks, even among its highest leadership. The Homosexual Roots of the Nazi Party The "gay rights" movement often portrays itself as an American phenomenon which arose ... www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Cached page MAJOR NAZI PARTY LEADERS ... Ernst Roehm - Ernst Roehm was one of the original members of the Nazi Party. Like many of the earlier Nazis, Roehm was a homosexual. He was a Captain in the Army on the staff of the Army’s District ... =======================================================

[GulliverSwift]

"If you are flaming me for being a stubborn Conservative"

No, I'm flaming you for being a stubborn liberal.

I looked up your profile to see if you were a liberal lurker for banning.

[GulliverSwift]

I suppose the enemy artillery needs to shoot at something.

[purpleland]

"I say sign them up, put them on the front line or the first ones in. There's no need for straight guys and gals to get killed and leave nothing back in the states but homosexuals."

And "leave nothing back" in America but leftist effete anti-American proMarxist "liberals".

[Diva Betsy Ross]

I find that comment so repulsive.

[fireforeffect]

I wish I had some pictures to show you, then again maybe not.

If you have never been in the military, you do not know why the military is opposed to homosexuals.

Imagine a row of toilets, no dividers. Makes it easy to pass the newspaper. Imagine a shower, 4 heads for 40 people. You are in a high tick area, like Ft. Chaffee, AR. You can not check parts of you body for ticks, your buddy has to. I could go on but you get the idea. Who wants to worry about your buddy "checking you out"?

When Patton said "If they wont F**k, they wont fight" I do not think he meant male-male, female-female interation.

[mlc9852]

Agreed

[Diva Betsy Ross]

I don't need any photos. And I do not believe you for one moment.

Out of all the veterans and soldiers who I know, I can not think of one of them who is so concerned about a person's sexual preferences that they would prefer the tick on the butt to remain- to asking a guy or gal, who has shown they have the stuff that makes an American soldier, remove it.

I understand why the military is opposed to radical homosexual activists....but I don't think many of those pansies would make it thru bootcamp.