• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

queers in the military

Red Robin

Well-known member
Democrats Pushing for 'Gays in the Military'

A Massachusetts Democrat on Wednesday plans to re-introduce a bill repealing the congressional ban on homosexuals serving in the military.

Rep. Marty Meehan's Military Readiness Enhancement Act died last year in the Republican-controlled Congress. But with Democrats in charge, Meehan is more optimistic about passing the bill.

Meehan, who chairs the Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, plans to hold hearings as early as April, USA Today reported.

Meehan's bill would require the U.S. Armed Forces to adopt a policy of nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation - allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military, something they cannot do now.


Three Republicans have signed on, including Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida.



Since the Clinton-era "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" enforcement policy took effect, almost 11,000 troops have been discharged from the military, USA Today reported.

("Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was Bill Clinton's way of getting around the 1993 federal law that says homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The Clinton policy allowed homosexuals to serve in the military as long as they kept quiet about their sexual orientation. Critics have long argued that the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" enforcement policy is inconsistent with federal law.)

Meehan and his supporters argue that his bill will strengthen the military by retaining valuable servicemembers.

But opposition to homosexuals serving in the military remains strong in conservative quarters.
 

jigs

Well-known member
this is my rifle, this is my gun.
this is for killing muslims, this is for fun.

now, where they put it for fun is their own business, but I sure would not like to shower in a room with a few homo's scoping out my junk!
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
FACT: One of the reasons Islamic Law dictates that women be covered head to toe is because your typical Muslim is a rump ranger first and foremost. Even the late AIDS infected Yasser Arafat once said that "Women are for babies, but men are for pleasure!"

Gay US Servicepeople may find fun in the foxhole with the enemy.
 

Steve

Well-known member
As thin as the military is spread now they better take anyone they can get.

why stop at gays then,...why not transsexuals...cross-dressers?,... why not addicts?,,...liberals,... tree hugger activists... and other assorted thugs?

the military has to draw a line...in what is best for the units...and moral and unit cohesion would suffer under the new proposed rules. the current policy took some time to "get accepted"...adding a guy in a skirt and makeup would be a disaster at this time.

If they are gay and a competent soldier what does it matter?

it doesn't... and as long as it was "not the Issue" it was not a problem....but as soon as the "gay person made it the issue" it was a "big problem"...both on moral and unit cohesion....
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
jigs said:
this is my rifle, this is my gun.
this is for killing muslims, this is for fun.

now, where they put it for fun is their own business, but I sure would not like to shower in a room with a few homo's scoping out my junk![/quote]




Oh Please!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: I'd say your ' junk is safe in your trunk'.

I bet you're one of those guys that stand in front of the mirror in the bathroom and do poses and admire your ' junk' :roll: :roll: :shock: :shock:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
I was watching the history channel the other day and they were talking about Alexander the Great (who was thought to be gay). Alexander conquered a huge amount of the known world in his brief (no pun intended there) conquest. The passes (no pun intended) to Athens from Philip of Macedonia's (Alexander's dad) current kingdom was guarded by an elite group of homosexual soldiers who were known to be the toughest fighting force in the region and in the world at that time. They fought to the death and never retreated.

After Alexander's death, the kingdom was divided into three regions. The western regions became the inheritance of the latter roman empire.

So we know from this one historical instance, a gay leader conquered more men than any other in history.

Just thought I would throw that in there.
 

IL Rancher

Well-known member
He also had his troops dopped up on Opium but that is a whole other story...:lol:

Don't know if he was gay but the ancient greeks and romans kind of had different standards as to what was acceptable as far as homosexual behavior than modern society does for the most part.
 

jigs

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
jigs said:
this is my rifle, this is my gun.
this is for killing muslims, this is for fun.

now, where they put it for fun is their own business, but I sure would not like to shower in a room with a few homo's scoping out my junk![/quote]




Oh Please!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: I'd say your ' junk is safe in your trunk'.

I bet you're one of those guys that stand in front of the mirror in the bathroom and do poses and admire your ' junk' :roll: :roll: :shock: :shock:
well, if I could get one of those carnival mirrors that show things bigger than they really are...then I might just do that.
but for now I will settle for the gratuitous comments from my wife, and you.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
IL Rancher said:
He also had his troops dopped up on Opium but that is a whole other story...:lol:

Don't know if he was gay but the ancient greeks and romans kind of had different standards as to what was acceptable as far as homosexual behavior than modern society does for the most part.

I wasn't in any way condoning it.
 

IL Rancher

Well-known member
Wasn't saying you were Econ.. Just showing how times change..Opium as basically the first painkiller but it also had the side affect of increasing libido and of course, the addictive qualities.. Was a real interesting program on the refinement of Opium and how it went from a pretty mild narcotic to well, Opium, morphine and heroin...
 

Econ101

Well-known member
IL Rancher said:
Wasn't saying you were Econ.. Just showing how times change..Opium as basically the first painkiller but it also had the side affect of increasing libido and of course, the addictive qualities.. Was a real interesting program on the refinement of Opium and how it went from a pretty mild narcotic to well, Opium, morphine and heroin...

I didn't take offense, Il Rancher. They aren't my values.

I thought it was interesting that the homosexuals that Alexander the Great first defeated when combining Greece were known as great fighters during the day and so was he.
 

Jodi

Member
So are you saying that the homosexuals can't fight to protect your country . If they are Americans it is also their country. I understand not letting the drug addicts in because they can be unpredictable. If they follow the order given to them by commanding officers and are willing to fight nobody should give a rat a$$.
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
Jodi said:
So are you saying that the homosexuals can't fight to protect your country . If they are Americans it is also their country. I understand not letting the drug addicts in because they can be unpredictable. If they follow the order given to them by commanding officers and are willing to fight nobody should give a rat a$$.

It is hard enough keeping track of the enemy out in front, without having to guard your backside, too. :?
 

jigs

Well-known member
Soapweed said:
Jodi said:
So are you saying that the homosexuals can't fight to protect your country . If they are Americans it is also their country. I understand not letting the drug addicts in because they can be unpredictable. If they follow the order given to them by commanding officers and are willing to fight nobody should give a rat a$$.

It is hard enough keeping track of the enemy out in front, without having to guard your backside, too. :?
perhaps they should get Kevlar underwear!!!
 

Texan

Well-known member
Soapweed said:
It is hard enough keeping track of the enemy out in front, without having to guard your backside, too. :?
:lol2:

You have to wonder about some of these guys that aren't concerned with 'little' things like that...
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
What's ever funnier is that YOU GUYS seem to think ' you're all that' and that every gay man in the world is gonna want to get in YOUR pants!!!
 

IL Rancher

Well-known member
lol... I didn't have the girls knocking the door down so I doubt I would have a problem with the gay guys either. I don't know, this subject always leaves me with mixed feelings on it because folks I know who served have such widely different opinions about it. Some have the opinion that a good soldier is a good soldier and it doesn't matter what else they are (Color, religion, sex, sexual orientation) and others are the complete opposite on that regard saying things like you have to trust your foxhole partners 100% and any little doubt about them, no matter how stupid or valid, is too much...
 

passin thru

Well-known member
If having gays in the Military takes away from having a cohesive unit then you have to do what is necessary to create a cohesive unit.
Wouldn't be easier to get rid of one gay rather than the whole unit. Maybe it isn't fair to the gay guy, but we all learned long ago that life isn't always fair.
Taking away distracting factors is what I would call supporting the troops.
 
Top