And thats exactly what the End America crowd runnin from Washington wants.
Would that 10% be made up with homosexual enlistment?
Leaving the military is exactly what Obama wants! That sick bastard is out to cripple our country! He would not mind if all out military sounded like Barnie Fwank and looked like Rose!
No problemo.
Simply have an ALL GAY military.
Homicide cops will tell you that one of the hallmarks of a homosexual murder is the level of violence and, frequently, genital mutilation of the victim.
Just the thought of it should have the muzzies running for their lives BEFORE confronting outfits with catchy nicknames like the Pink Panthers, the Swishing Slashers, the Gay Blades, the Twisted Tankers and, of course, the obvious choice, the Rump Rangers.
1) Leave the military
2) Buy soap-on-a-rope
If having to serve with a gay person is enough to make them abandon the defense of their nation, the military is better off without them.
If you think it sucks to be in the military if this goes through, what the hell do you think they are trying to do in the public with gay marriage? Teaching 3 and 4 year olds that perversion is normal? Trying to become protected classes that will sue you for damages if you come out against homosexuality? Who want to take away your right to speak your mind about the dangers of homosexuality? It’s about forcing homosexuality on people who object to it and would just rather not know about your perverted sexual lifestyle.
The military is just a microcosm of the very same stuff going on in the country, just under tighter controls.
What percentage would go AWOL if ordered to fire on domestic terrorists (you know- gun owners, Christians, “homophobes”, bloggers too critical of “The One”, people the government is trying to kill at the time, etc.)?
No one ever mentions the MOST important reason for not having gays in the military (and ‘don’t ask, don’t tell is still dangerous).
Next time you are watching a war movie- “Saving Private Ryan”, “Blackhawk Down”, “Band of Brothers”- pay close attention to the scenes where the soldiers are up to their elbows in a wounded soldier’s blood. THAT is reality. I defy anyone to volunteer to expose themselves to the blood of a gay man. This is hate speech? So be it. It is time to face facts.
Soldiers in the field, and even the commanders, are not allowed to know the HIV or hepatitis status of the soldiers. And the “gay community” can make any claims it likes- there is little argument against the fact that these diseases are occuring at far higher numbers among homosexuals. When you factor in the numbers among IV drug abusers, it is more than apparent that HIV, in particular is a lifestyle disease and almost 100% preventable.
Now does anyone think it fair that we demand that our soldiers, our heroes and protectors, be exposed to a disease that THEY have chosen to avoid?
Having been around the military for 30 years...I know there are various ways that you can phrase a question and get a positive, then rephrase the question and get a negative. Anybody that asks if military folks are somewhat acceptable of gays...most military folks would give a positive response and say that they don’t have anything against gays. When you phrase the question and say...would you have a problem living in the barracks with openly gay folks...do you have a problem? Then the response will be overwhelming negative. Same issue exist if you suggest that gay married couples could be living in base housing...that won’t fly either.
What the gay media folks do...is just leave a open-ended question with no real scenarios behind it. I noticed the same problem when you ask gay agenda folks what we would do if a country (Middle Eastern in nature), has major problems with a deployment of gay openess...and their general response is that we as a country can’t support that “friend” in this case. So we end up choosing our allies and “friends” by their perception to gays? At that point, the media guy and the interview guy tend to quickly shut up.
There are around fifty questions that I’d like to see answered before we move onto “forcing” acceptance across the ranks. I have serious doubts that we’d get beyond answer number four when the episode of honesty comes into play. Even the acceptance of gay marriages comes up very quickly because the US military must accept foreign marriages without question...so any country where a legitimate gay marriage occurs...immediately draws in umpteen additional questions but they aren’t ready answerable either.
The plain truth is that outside of urban areas...when you start getting into the heartland....you find few people who readily accept gays or practice a gay lifestyle. So its not as widespread as some people think.
Does anyone know what percent of military personnel read the Military Times? The article didn’t say what percent of readers responded either.
Who knows if this is a meaningful sample of the military?
Barry Goldwater
Not to worry. The draft along with tolerance training in Basic will take care of this problem. /s/
Hello, REVOLUTION!!!!!
That’s exactly what the Marxist DemocRats want. Another gutted and ineffectual military. Here we go again...probably for the last (and final) time.
Women have their own barracks. Why? They don’t want to be subjected to potential unwanted sexual attention from the men. Want gays in the military? Want to put them in a barracks with other men who don’t want to be subjected to potential unwanted sexual attention? Fine, make it fair all ‘round. Put the men in with the women. One big barracks, communal showers, etc.
What the Homosexual advocacy groups like SLDN won’t tell you is that almost 100% of the discharges for “homosexuality” were initiated based on requests by the service member. In almost 100% of the cases, these are straight soldiers and sailors that are using this as a tool to get out early.
Almost all of the Navy’s discarges for being “gay” are at the Navy’s Nuclear Power school. When the course gets very demanding, often the students will “come out” in groups asking to be discharged.
Of course, the few that contact the SLDN are provided form letters which claim that they are being harassed and feel threatened. When it is pointed out to these sailors, that such allegations have to be investigated and “False claims” are subject to punishment, they all withdraw the letter and just ask to be discharged.