Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
    #1

    DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

    Obama signed it this morning!

    I have already tweeted about it about 3904820 times and shared a few links on facebook.

    That said, I put this in debates because I wanted to know what everyone else's thoughts were on it, and I was being proactive putting it here so it won't have to be moved later.


    Discuss.
    It's a really, really cool thing, to be able to show people that you can be yourself, and you should be proud of yourself, and you should own who you are and what you're about, and never make apologies for it.
    -Adam Lambert


    Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools
    Tags: None
    #2
    Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

    I think its about damn time this rediculous act got repealed!

    Comment

      #3
      Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

      I'm glad to see it's going to take effect quickly. And it's about damned time!
      The forum member formerly known as perzephone. Or Perze. I've shed a skin.

      Comment

        #4
        Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

        *echoes the about time sentiment!*

        Seriously.

        Comment

          #5
          Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

          I'm all for it IF it means gays can serve openly.
          Sleep, my friend, and you will see
          That dream is my reality

          Comment

            #6
            Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

            I'm worried that it'll be rocky for the first little bit...but I'm hoping that by the time my kids are old enough to be trying to decide what to do with their lives, it won't be a big deal anymore.
            Great Grandmother's Kitchen

            Comment

              #7
              Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

              it shouldn't be a written rule... but i advise it stay an unwritten rule.

              you have a bunch of men sleeping in close quarters, all of which are themselves considered deadly weapons. one says "oh by the way, I'm gay", how do you think the others will react? i'm pretty sure it wouldn't be pleasant.

              there is people like me that really could care less about your preference, we're not cuddling, and that's that. however when you have say 20 people in the same close vicinity i bet all 20 won't have that kind of attitude. its just safer to keep your mouth shut either way. I know this may all sound a bit harsh, but honestly if you think about it. not everyone is comfortable with it.
              "Sometimes bad things happen, and theres nothing you can do about it, so why worry?" ~ Timon

              Comment

                #8
                Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                I don't see why it's an issue. Contrary to popular belief gay men and women aren't trying to prey on straight men and women. And it doesn't seem to be an issue in countries that allow openly gay people in their military.

                Comment

                  #9
                  Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                  Dufonce, the same could have been said about having a Black man sleep in your barracks 50 years ago. What about having women in active military units? There are lots of nations that do that, just fine, but the argument is about the same in America..

                  I think it's a mistake for people--anyone--to take a potentially divisive part of their personality and rub it everyone's faces. But someone who is honest, if private? There's a big, big difference between that and having to hide your spouse for fear of loosing your job.
                  Great Grandmother's Kitchen

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                    [quote author=Deseret link=topic=1251.msg24153#msg24153 date=1293044234]
                    Dufonce, the same could have been said about having a Black man sleep in your barracks 50 years ago. What about having women in active military units? There are lots of nations that do that, just fine, but the argument is about the same in America..

                    I think it's a mistake for people--anyone--to take a potentially divisive part of their personality and rub it everyone's faces. But someone who is honest, if private? There's a big, big difference between that and having to hide your spouse for fear of loosing your job.
                    [/quote]

                    Exaccctttllly.

                    Before Canada repealed their DADT policy in 1992, 62% of soldiers said they weren't ok with showering or sharing barracks with openly gay soldiers. But when it actually happened, no negative effect was found whatsoever, and people got used to it. I know that Canada's military is MUCH smaller, but it's the same idea just on a smaller scale. There was no increase in problems, harassment, disciplinary issues and no negative effects on performance.

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                      I'm glad it's being repealed. However, I fear for the safety of our soldiers, both gay and straight. Sure, it's not likely to be a widespread problem, but I'm willing to bet that more than one openly gay soldier is going to get the crap beat out of him or, heaven forbid, get killed. I'm willing to bet, too, that in other countries where openly gay soldiers can serve, there have been occasions where the soldiers in question have been ganged up on.

                      There's also the fact that recruiters will now be allowed to inquire potential servicemen about their personal lives, which of course means that more than one well-qualified would-be soldier will have his or her application thrown in the garbage. Sure, our military needs as much help as it can get, but our hospitals also need as much blood as they can get...doesn't seem to mean anything to some people.

                      I also do see a point in the conservatives who are concerned that it will cause distraction on the battlefield. Yes, we all know that it shouldn't be an issue, but in reality it is an issue for some people. I just don't want anybody to get hurt...it breaks my heart that so many of our soldiers are dying even without this repeal, but unfortunately there are usually casualties when huge changes in social policies are made.
                      Children love and want to be loved and they very much prefer the joy of accomplishment to the triumph of hateful failure. Do not mistake a child for his symptom.
                      -Erik Erikson

                      Comment

                        #12
                        Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                        I used to laugh at the guys, when I was in the Air Force, who would say, "If I'm in a foxhole, I don't want to worry that the other guy is looking at my ass." Really? If you're in a foxhole, no one is going to be looking at your ass. I'm pretty sure that even the gay guys' priority is going to be staying alive.
                        I also think that people have started getting used to the idea because of DADT, so I don't believe there will be widespread violence aimed at gays. Will it sometimes happen? Probably, but one would hope that commanders would severely punish those who start that kind of trouble.
                        Sleep, my friend, and you will see
                        That dream is my reality

                        Comment

                          #13
                          Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                          Aside from the civil rights implication of DADT, I fully support its repeal as a person...but as a former service member, I support it wholly on the grounds that it is subversive to the principles that members of the military are *supposed to* uphold, and it is overall prejudicial to good order and dicipline. My blog from October disusses my feelings about the matter...

                          TBH, from a practical standpoint, the people that will cause problems are the same undereducaded, loudmouthed, prejudicial individuals that use homosexuality as an accepted stand-in for every other prejudice they have and can't state (race, religion, gender) without risking EO complaints and even possible discharge. The number of people that I know to be gay and in the service far exceeds the number of people that are likely to cause problems--and while I'm sure it will take time to get it "right" (considering there is still a big fail when it comes to gender, and its even worse when it comes to non-stereotypical cases of discrimination)... There isn't much difference between knowing SN So-and-so is gay because he's allowed to tell you and knowing he's gay because you saw him at a bar with another dude in a not-so-platonic encounter--the difference is that when someone is a jerk about it, SN So-and-so can file an EO complaint the same way I filed one when some dude wanted to whip it out, and make lewd comments, or someone else files one against a person for making threatening racist statements.

                          I really don't see what the big fuss is about. Studies of the military of other nations that have been forced to repeal similar measures (Britian, Isreal, etc) show the same initial concernse, and very few incidents. In fact, American troops have served not only with, but under openly homosexual military members and commanders from other nations in the past few years, successfully without incident in joint operations. Additionally, there isn't a single person in the military that doesn't currently serve with someone that is gay that they either know is gay or susupect is gay. The idea that every single homosexual is all-of-the-sudden going to jump out of the closet and turn into some falsely percieved stereotype that drags down military capabilities is farking rediculous. Its the same bs that was levied towards the service of black soldiers in the US thru WWII--which resulted in some of the most decorated and successful units (both segregated and integrated), and the same arguement that continues to be levied against equal opportunities in the military based on gender (never mind that both homosexuals and women have been serving in this nations military (both secretly and openly) since the Revolutionary War.


                          ETA: I might add, just as an amusing anecdote, that my *very* socially conservative grandfather (read: prejudiced), who is a veteran from Korea's comment on the matter is something along the lines of "who cares, we had those kind of boys serving with us in Korea, and let me tell you, when the bullets fly, they shoot just as good as the next guy" and "besides, it was less competition for the local girls, and its not like they would try anything with someone that isn't interested, because they'd get their ass kicked." Which I find so very backwards and yet so very progressive at the same time...


                          Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of HistoryPagan Devotionals, because the wind and the rain is our Bible
                          sigpic

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                            [quote author=calfhill link=topic=1251.msg24134#msg24134 date=1293037202]
                            I'm all for it IF it means gays can serve openly.
                            [/quote]Here is a rub ... Define openly ...

                            Once the uniform goes on then we are all the same, SOLDIERS ... I don't care if the guy next to me like other guys in his bed ... Just don't flaunt it in my face with overt hip swishing or makeup or other excessive non-essentials or attitudes ... "You have to accept my gay lifestyle" might get ya a busted lip ... But cover me in a firefight and we can share a brew at the club ...

                            "Don't ask ... Don't tell" .... Should be "Don't flaunt ... Don't care" ...

                            Ok ... Rant over ...
                            I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them ... John Bernard Books


                            Indian Chief 'Two Eagles' was asked by a white government official; "You have observed the white man for 90 years. You've seen his wars and his technological advances. You've seen his progress, and the damage he's done."

                            The Chief nodded in agreement.

                            The official continued; "Considering all these events, in your opinion, where did the white man go wrong?"

                            The Chief stared at the government official for over a minute and then calmly replied.. "When white man find land, Indians running it, no taxes, no debt, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, clean water. Women did all the work, Medicine Man free. Indian man spend all day hunting and fishing; all night having sex."

                            Then the chief leaned back and smiled; "Only white man dumb enough to think he could improve system like that."
                            ​



                            Comment

                              #15
                              Re: DADT Repeal Act of 2010!!

                              [quote author=Clive link=topic=1251.msg24162#msg24162 date=1293048687]
                              There's also the fact that recruiters will now be allowed to inquire potential servicemen about their personal lives, which of course means that more than one well-qualified would-be soldier will have his or her application thrown in the garbage. Sure, our military needs as much help as it can get, but our hospitals also need as much blood as they can get...doesn't seem to mean anything to some people.
                              [/quote]

                              I'm not sure I follow this, Clive, could you clarify? Being a soldier is a lot more of a commitment then donating blood.

                              [quote author=calfhill link=topic=1251.msg24163#msg24163 date=1293049354]
                              I used to laugh at the guys, when I was in the Air Force, who would say, "If I'm in a foxhole, I don't want to worry that the other guy is looking at my ass." Really? If you're in a foxhole, no one is going to be looking at your ass. I'm pretty sure that even the gay guys' priority is going to be staying alive.
                              I also think that people have started getting used to the idea because of DADT, so I don't believe there will be widespread violence aimed at gays. Will it sometimes happen? Probably, but one would hope that commanders would severely punish those who start that kind of trouble.
                              [/quote]

                              Between you and Thal's posts, I'm rather suspicious of something. While I think that there are some people who are legitimately afraid of gay people (especially if they were raised in a tradition that paints them as ravenous sex monsters), I think the "fox hole" thing is more about being self-obsessed...sort of the flip-side of the "oh, you're lesbian because you haven't been with me". Seriously, who thinks so much of themselves that they're sure the gay guys will be drooling all over them?
                              Great Grandmother's Kitchen

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X