Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

I appears that the issue of homosexuals in the service definitely needs to be ironed out prior to the draft being reinstated...

It appears the military has already given into the liberal social engineers, and will force acceptance of the integration of openly homosexual people into the confining communal living arrangement that is the military experience.

In our civilian world it's not really an issue as everyone is able to live their private lives as they see fit. The military life is a whole other issue.

I was only attempting to provoke a dialogue to see how others might view this, but it so far has descended into the baser aspects of what people fear, and not the social and privacy issues relevant to military life that I was hoping would be addressed.

Amen...if you haven't been there (military quarters) YOU are NOT ABLE to comment...you can imagine or wish or speculate but you do not know the environment. And for seniors who haven't been there to try to even imagine what the galloping hormones of a bunch of teens and lower 20 somethings is even more ridiculous.

Keep it simple, not political, not bleeding heart, not permissive this or that......there is a reason why they won't let the men and women cohabitate in the military....and the same holds for those of the same sex preference ilk...it is that simple.

There was nothing wrong with the way it was for 100's of years. And when the media and the special interest groups let this subject die it's own natural depth, life in the military will go back to some norm.

You cannot intellectualize something as complex as the sex drives of different types of people and you certainly can't comment with any accuracy whatso ever if you have never been there. Opinions? Have all you want but most are not knowledge or any other foundation based.

And those are my opinions on the matter.

btk

Originally Posted by RichieLion

It appears the military has already given into the liberal social engineers, and will force acceptance of the integration of openly homosexual people into the confining communal living arrangement that is the military experience.

In our civilian world it's not really an issue as everyone is able to live their private lives as they see fit. The military life is a whole other issue.

I was only attempting to provoke a dialogue to see how others might view this, but it so far has descended into the baser aspects of what people fear, and not the social and privacy issues relevant to military life that I was hoping would be addressed.

Don't you think the military will care more about if he/she can shoot straight then what their sexual orientation is? Gays being open about their orientation will not change their behavior. They are not stupid. Overcoming prejudice requires some action, not just verbalization. As I said, Eisenhower intergrated the troops on an order and that worked pretty well. Male military sexual predatory behavior against female military is much worse. Is there any progressive idea that you don't label "liberal social engineering?" Change is a good thing...There is no "expectation of privacy" in the military...this according to my hubby who was career military.

Originally Posted by billethkid

Amen...if you haven't been there (military quarters) YOU are NOT ABLE to comment...you can imagine or wish or speculate but you do not know the environment. And for seniors who haven't been there to try to even imagine what the galloping hormones of a bunch of teens and lower 20 somethings is even more ridiculous.

Keep it simple, not political, not bleeding heart, not permissive this or that......there is a reason why they won't let the men and women cohabitate in the military....and the same holds for those of the same sex preference ilk...it is that simple.

There was nothing wrong with the way it was for 100's of years. And when the media and the special interest groups let this subject die it's own natural depth, life in the military will go back to some norm.

You cannot intellectualize something as complex as the sex drives of different types of people and you certainly can't comment with any accuracy whatso ever if you have never been there. Opinions? Have all you want but most are not knowledge or any other foundation based.

And those are my opinions on the matter.

btk

Social engineering does not belong in military, Period. I still associate with a circle of military people including an a couple of officers and and an ex POW and I can tell you for certain that most in the military do not want to change DADT. And contrary to popular beliefs the military had to lower the standards as the women could not pass basic training.

There has been homosexuals in the military since the military started, maybe even before there was a formal military. Privacy in the military. You have to be joking unless you happen to wear stars. In a few years this will be as common as an intergrated military is today. I personally believe that every US citizen should be required to give at least 2 years in service of their country, that includes, handicapped, homosexuals, straights, transgengered, females, males and those that are still confused about what they are.

The all volunteer military is a joke as only the "poor" are serving. Don't get me wrong, the all vol force is awesome and the US has the best fighting force in the world, but an all vol force is NOT the way to go. Get those senator's kids and the representative's kids in uniform and watch how we, IE., the US, stops sending our youth off to foreign counties to make the Industrial-Military Complex rich.

Then pass a law that if you want to be in public service, from local to federal, you have to have serviced in the military.

Now Rick Santorum claims he would have said something to defend gay soldiers service to their country if he had only heard the crowd reaction. Ya right!!!...So where was he that he couldn't hear the boos?

Originally Posted by DaleMN

Now Rick Santorum claims he would have said something to defend gay soldiers service to their country if he had only heard the crowd reaction. Ya right!!!...So where was he that he couldn't hear the boos?

Wow, was there that much hype when Obama made fun of Special Olympic people?

figmo...both are excellent posts..I agree 100 percent...that will bring you trouble on this forum though..

hrp01, as someone else one said "Bring it on." Folks have to start looking at the truth of the matter and stop do what is not good for our country or we will not have a country much longer.

Just look at the current criminal activity of the senate. No budget for almost 3 years now and now they are saying the current bill to keep the government running is DOA, according to Knight Harry Reid. There needs to be another line on the ballot form "None of the Above, Start Over."

My feeling is that we ought to install term limits...Without legislation..All it would take is everyone to vote the incumbents out in the next three elections. I'd give up the senate,and white house, and take the house (tea party out)..Imagine the message that would send..Way too much partisan and non comprimising politics..a poster (vg) here said,the rep is their to fight for his district only,no room for comprimise...So a few can take over and stop the majority..Something basically wrong with that concept..we are a diverse people and no one among us is entitled to his view only, and at any cost,and with questionable rationale( read bigotry).

If I vote for someone who said he will never vote for a tax increase, I should think that he will hold his end of the bargain and vote no on tax increases. I think it is very prudent of him to vote for what his constituents voted for.

Originally Posted by ladydoc

Don't you think the military will care more about if he/she can shoot straight then what their sexual orientation is? Gays being open about their orientation will not change their behavior. They are not stupid. Overcoming prejudice requires some action, not just verbalization. As I said, Eisenhower intergrated the troops on an order and that worked pretty well. Male military sexual predatory behavior against female military is much worse. Is there any progressive idea that you don't label "liberal social engineering?" Change is a good thing...There is no "expectation of privacy" in the military...this according to my hubby who was career military.

It will definitely change the behavior of everyone else though.

Since you brought it up, how about providing those statistics of the greater predatory instincts of male heterosexuals as opposed to male homosexuals. I haven't read those findings or seen an analysis.

Sorry if you don't like the term "liberal social engineering", but that's what it is and your aversion to the term doesn't make it any less true.

I glad your husband has no trouble sitting on the toilet next to the openly gay male sitting on his toilet next to him, and taking a shower with him, and all the others daily activities we do. I'm pretty sure I would have a problem with it. That's just me though.

Originally Posted by DaleMN

Now Rick Santorum claims he would have said something to defend gay soldiers service to their country if he had only heard the crowd reaction. Ya right!!!...So where was he that he couldn't hear the boos?

Why didn't you also state that in articles about the incident that the people surrounding the couple of dolts who booed the question immediately shushed them. Didn't fit your agenda?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/20..._the_boos.html

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46388

Originally Posted by ladydoc

Don't you think the military will care more about if he/she can shoot straight then what their sexual orientation is? Gays being open about their orientation will not change their behavior. They are not stupid. Change is a good thing...There is no "expectation of privacy" in the military...this according to my hubby who was career military.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

OK, so you two women agree. Why? The answer isn't obvious.

The answer is obvious. As Ladydoc said, Gays being open about their orientation will not change their behavior. I don't understand why you think that gays serving in the military will suddenly turn into raving sexual predators just because their sexual orientation is known.

Anyway this thread is about the Debate so I apologize for going off topic.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

It will definitely change the behavior of everyone else though.

Since you brought it up, how about providing those statistics of the greater predatory instincts of male heterosexuals as opposed to male homosexuals. I haven't read those findings or seen an analysis.

Sorry if you don't like the term "liberal social engineering", but that's what it is and your aversion to the term doesn't make it any less true.

I glad your husband has no trouble sitting on the toilet next to the openly gay male sitting on his toilet next to him, and taking a shower with him, and all the others daily activities we do. I'm pretty sure I would have a problem with it. That's just me though.

Maybe you need to have a talk with yourself and see why you would have such a problem with a gay man on the toilet next to you. And for the third time, was Eisenhower a liberal when he integrated the military? I will find those stats when you tell me what the basis of your stating that the journal that published that liberals were smarter article was a liberal magazine. You can not just deduce that from the article. Also, you said that a liberal magazine would find that liberals were smarter. There was research backing up that conclusion. Again, were you implying a falsification of data, which is a very serious accusation.