Stroker and his Marxist Minions need to GO!
Stossel is totally dead wrong about this. Homosexual “marriage” means forcing all other citizens to accept and praise homosexuality. Homosexuals in the military means they’ll have a protected status with innumerable possibilities for the disruption of the mission.
Maybe other countries don’t have the same problems ... but it’s interesting that most of the countries he mentions aren’t defending themselves, anyway, so using their militaries as a opportunity for homos to get a uniform doesn’t mean anything.
The majority of the military disagrees...and so do all people who still have a moral compass.
Stossel is a perfect example of how doctrinaire libertarianism rots the mind.
????? Free to do anything they want?? Gay marriage, open homosexual behavior in the military? The military is the government dim-wit. Legal marriage is the government. Government is not intended to be freedom. Am I free to not pay my taxes? Even for others aids treatments ??? Idiot.
If he is worried about freedom he should start else where like taxes and mandates not getting homosexuals special behaviour rights.
DOD just recently asked a random sampling of all service members to complete a survey on just this subject.
WE’ll see what the service members actual say back to DOD.
homosexuals have the choice to serve and be celibate, or to have sex and not serve. Military service is a privilege, not a right.
“...By contrast, Australia, the United Kingdom, Israel, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia and Spain all allow gay people to serve....”
What the Western Euro-Weenies do is so trendy and smart that we must blindly follow. I notice Poland, Finland, Switzerland, and Latvia are not on the list. Are they old-fashioned like America?
My opposition to Homosexuals in the military is quite simple. Just like Intravenous drug users and other drug impairing lifestyles, Homosexuality brings a life style that has Biological effects as well as morale and efficiency effects.
And as far as a Heterosexual having a Disease like HIV, Hepatitis A/B/C or whatever else pops up in the future. Then they too aren’t eligible for being in the military either.
Imagine being on the battlefield where you need a lifesaving direct blood infusion. Well, I guarantee you’ll take whatever is available. But if it turns out that that Blood infusion saved you right then and there but condemned you at the same time to a long and lingering death. Maybe it wasn’t such a good deal after all.
So to avoid that potential problem in the first place you make that lifestyle a negative in that line of work. That means no IV Drug Users, No Recreational Drug users and No Homosexual lifestyle users, No carriers of incurable diseases.
Being in the Military is a choice the Military Member made freely and voluntarily. There was no draft, therefore the rules were laid down up front before they became a part of the Military.
And just when has THAT ever happened???
To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a time in U.S. history when openly gay, lesbian or bisexual individual have been allowed to serve.
I was in the Navy for 13 years and yes, there were always some around, but they kept it damn quiet and if they were ever officially identified, they were booted out.
Refusing to acknowledge is NOT the same as "see no reason."
Why isn't Stossel citing the credentialed opposition?
Not hard to figure out...
Stossel has just ‘noonanized’ himself.
I’ll part ways with Stossel on this issue, though much of the time he is very good.
Stossel is doing the work of the CATO Institute, whose leader recently co-wrote an article with some extremely left wing pundit/think tank guy (I forget the name). CATO basically endorses gay marriage.
That is a degradation of the institution.
What the heck's wrong with discretion in regards to one's sexual preference? That's all don't-ask don't-tell demands. What used to be considered good manners is now discrimination?
World. Up. Side. Down.
These have included 800 "mission critical" troops such as Arabic linguists (59 of them), Farsi linguists (nine)
If they had been very Cunning Linguists they wouldn't have been kicked out.
Stossel thinks he is taking a libertarian position but in fact there is nothing libertarian at all about providing special status for homosexuality. We separate the facilities for men and women based upon a prejudice towards natural human sexuality. Most reasonable people would call it a violation of a woman’s rights if she was forced to bunk and shower with men. Obviously then by the same logic it is a violation of the rights of all soldiers to be told that they should have to shower and bunk with people who are openly expressing a perversion for their same gender.
Any true libertarian should believe in protecting the rights of individuals (our soldiers) and not telling them that they have no choice but to be subjected to homosexual perversions where they shower and sleep. Why should we have two different standards in regards to protecting the rights of soldiers? Separate the genders based upon discrimination of perceived heterosexual behavior but then tell soldiers that they have no choice but to be subjected to the perversion of the fascist activists. Stossel is taking the position of wanting to force his perverted morality on soldiers.
Yes. Let’s let gays serve openly in the military so we can be more like France.
I take it that Mr. Stossel has never served in the military.
(sigh)
Normally, I am a big fan of Stossel, but not this time. The issue is NOT about people's sex lives. It's about how close people end up sleeping together in the military.
Most people either paid no attention to or have forgotten what Clinton said in '93 after he visited his first aircraft carrier as POTUS (or EVER!) - "Wow, I didn't realize they slept so close together!" On most Navy ships, there is barely 3 - 4 inches between one person's nose in a berth, and either the next berth above him/her or the overhead. Sailors are typically stacked 3 and 4 high aboard ship and a practice called "hot bunking" (in which two sailors are assigned the same bunk on different shifts) is not unusual.
In the Army, you may well find yourself in tight quarters in a foxhole sleeping nose to nose with a fellow soldier. In NONE of these situations, do heterosexual men want to worry about whether someone in the bunk below them or the foxhole next them is getting an erection thinking about seeing them naked in the shower (and, yes, there are open showers with multiple shower heads in the military). THIS is why people like Clinton and Stossel who have NEVER served a minute in the military shouldn't decide what's best for the military. If Clinton and Stossel want to share sleeping quarters with gays, that's THEIR CHOICE, but they have NO BUSINESS depriving ME of MY right to choose based on their beliefs!!!