Update on DADT PolicyFollow

Codyy got it right. Alma is broken.

You're obviously trolling, but whatever.



You're purposely making it overly complicated to support your argument. WE MAKE THE RULES. If there is any current law or rule that slows the progression of this system from occurring, then you simply change it. Anything preventing this from occurring would be from us, the U.S. people. At that time, it goes back to what I said earlier, it's not that it can't be done, but people don't want to put forth the effort to do so. You have yet provided anything that would prevent us from establishing this system other than "look at how much work it'll take, I don't wanna".

Unless you think the U.S. system is flawless (i.e. no debt), then some changes need to be done. I'm all about the local governments, but at the same time, large issues should be done at the higher level. Certain things like k-12 education, marriage or anything else that might be affected by moving to another state should be standardized. There's no need to go down to the local level for every single decision.

You believe that you have more power what you actually have. If the U.S. population were to take a national vote on a lot of things that the U.S. is doing (i.e. war), I'm willing to bet it would be opposite of what we're actually doing.



Are you religious at all? Because at this point, you're just spouting complete BS. Just about every religion that uses the Bible teaches against the act homosexuality. I'm not sure what crap you're making up, but it's blatantly against adultery, homosexuality and incest. It's all there in black and white. Most religious preach against homosexuality because that's what's taught in the Bible. If you refuse to believe that, then you're just in denial.

So, no. If you're a homosexual and have ever been to church and you don't automatically think a Chaplain wouldn't preach against homosexuality as it is in the Bible, then you're an idiot.

There's nothing that I know in the Bible against drinking and smoking, but I would still expect a Chaplain to speak against those things if he were questioned.

Just give it up, you're wrong and I'm sure not one single person on this thread agrees with your statement about religion and sexuality.



When you decided to go to a Christian Chaplain is when you start discussing Christianity. As I googled for homosexual references in the New Testament, there were references that people interpreted, but nothing I saw that was black and white. I'm not a religious expert, but from my understanding, I think there were only certain rules that change from the Old Testament to the New Testament. Things such as tithing and offering still remained from start to finish.



Uh no one said anything about being closeted. Just don't go to a Miami Heat fan and start bad mouthing LeBron James and get insulted when s/he bad talk to you. It's really that simple. This is life. It happens everywhere. Homosexuals aren't special. There are tons of other people who can equally help you that are not authorized to judge you. WTF would you go to the one person who is authorized to judge you and then give him fuel to the fire? At that point, yes, it is your fault.



He isn't bound by religion either. No one else, or at least it's taboo to do so, can talk about religion being "Correct" other than the Chaplain. Although that Chaplain has studied various other religions, he does not have to reference anyone outside the "Christian God". By doing so, he is discriminating against other religions. Matter of fact, I haven't heard any references to any higher being other than the Christian God. You can't get any more discriminative than that.



What?

I'm not familiar with the Jewish religion, but if that person committed a sin under the Jewish religion (as a whole, not a denomination) and she specifically requests to talk about that "sin", then yes, by golly, that Chaplain can say that, because that's his freakin job.

I wonder if "blindly agreeing with [me]" is the right way to put it. Maybe I just made sense?

Edited, Jul 2nd 2011 9:17pm by Nilatai

Do you really need to ask that question?

I touch racists.


As for Alma... I'd rather do anything but research how many times you've rejected perfect logic for no reason at all, other than you simply thinking it's wrong and the person who you're arguing with just doesn't understand you. This is a time for self reflection. You go back and read all of those 30 page threads and think about how you argue and why you are stuck in this loop. Nobody can help you but yourself, Alma. Nobody. I was wrong before, we won't be the people to make you crack. The military or whatever it is that you do did that a long time ago, and you ended up here. At least now I know there is no hope.

No, I told you three times now that there was absolutely no merit behind me calling you that name calling BUT if you want an apology then you have provide merit to your statement about me that you actually understand my argument. How's that unfair?




So, in other words, you have nothing. Earlier today, someone took a few minutes and proved me wrong on my posting habits and went so far back to my first post. If I do what you claim ALL OF THE TIME, it would be too easy to click on my name, randomly pick a page of an argument and quote something. Given the fact that I've pretty much argued the same arguments in the same 3-4 topics in the past x amount of years, if you can't even at least form somewhat of a foundation of them, then you really have no clue what my arguments are. You just know the end result.

Surely, with Military being a branch of the state, religion has no place what so ever in it?


Also, why do you end every post with "You are wrong, give it up"? Would that work on you?

This just weakens your argument, you do realize that, right?

If they are giving simple services designed to be compatible with all denominations of a religion then it makes absolutely no sense for them to use their own denomination's ideas about what is and is not sinful.

Which is your entire argument, no?

I just want to restate how it cracks me up that almost every gay thread I've seen in both OoT and the Asylum revolves around Alma vs the forum. gbaji only if marriage is involved, cause only baby makers should get that right.

****...I might've accidentally summoned gbaji.

Sorry guys.

Anyway...I don't understand why any "devout heterosexual" would pay this much attention to what happens in the homosexual community. You aren't taking it up the pooper nor getting shot in the eye, so why the hell does anything related to this affect you? Why talk about it so much and debate on it so much? On an random video game forum, no less. What's there to gain? I mean, sure, let's all kill time, but gay people can't possibly be the only thing you can be completely wrong on, Alma. I'm just sure of it.

I win.

Yes, a serious lawsuit threat with an announced intent to subpoena IP records as evidence is an automatic thread lock. Theres also the "boy who cried wolf" aspect. If someone were to do such a thing and not actually follow through, I would be forced to remove them from the forums to remove a potential source of future litigation. So its not something to do lightly or without cause. We do cooperate with all validated law enforcement requests.

So far in the history of the forum, only 3 incidents have proceeded to that level. One was a death threat against a certian admin which sparked a certain "my other hat" meme back in the days, two mroe I am not at liberty to discuss other than to say they involved outside domestic incidents that spilled into the forums rather than stemming from something caused in the forums.

So yeah.

They are also bound by federal laws, which caused a huge uproar when DADT was repealed, because they thought gays would get federal protection under military codes. Which meant that they wouldn't be able to discriminate against gays, even if their religions says they should, while serving as a chaplain. It was an empty complaint anyway, since DADT's repeal doesn't provide legal protections, it just denies the legality of the military firing people for their sexuality.

Which is why the military put this exception into their policy in the first place. If a federal bill would pass, it would automatically override military anti-discrimination policies.

It's just absurd that they did this. Chaplains are clearly not in a position where they should be discriminating against anyone, for any reason. The fact that they would have considered it a violation of their rights for the military to tell them they couldn't discriminate is just stupid.

[EDIT]


Don't all chaplains come from specific religious organizations (which is not to say there are only a few)? AFAIK, you can't get ordained as a High Priestess in Wicca and serve as a chaplain, even though the gov't legally recognizes you as being ordained. Though I DO know that Chaplains are given guidelines for interacting with pagan service members--I just can't find evidence of pagan chaplains.

Which just brings me back to my central point. Chaplains aren't there to work as evangelists or judge. That's simply not their job, and it isn't acceptable in that environment. The fact that the military felt it was acceptable to make an official exception to that rule specifically for homosexuality is absurd.

Edited, Jul 3rd 2011 2:40am by idiggory