Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Don't ask, don't tell, don't persueFollow

#152 Sep 25 2011 at 4:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
Ari wrote:
I could tell there were a few young guys who found me sexually attractive by their first shocked widening of their eyes, hastily veiled, and a tendency to draw me like a goddess on the page, instead of my real form.


Smiley: um

You probaly shouldn't make a judgement call on that statement if you haven't seen her naked.


Bijou, we all know that you haven't seen her, either.

I was actually just umming because that whole thing read like a romance novel.

Danielle Steele is alive and well.
#153Almalieque, Posted: Sep 25 2011 at 10:37 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I know.
#154 Sep 25 2011 at 10:44 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
It'd kind of help if you had an actual argument, though.
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#155 Sep 26 2011 at 12:50 AM Rating: Good
Eske Esquire wrote:
Friar Bijou wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
Ari wrote:
I could tell there were a few young guys who found me sexually attractive by their first shocked widening of their eyes, hastily veiled, and a tendency to draw me like a goddess on the page, instead of my real form.


Smiley: um

You probably shouldn't make a judgement call on that statement if you haven't seen her naked.


Bijou, we all know that you haven't seen her, either.


While your joke is duly noted, you'ld lose money on that bet.Smiley: sly
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#156 Sep 26 2011 at 1:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
Oh ha, were you one of the people that opted into the breast pics? Yeah, it was shortly after that that I became a Life Model, from about 20 to 24.

And while Bijou might be mostly blind, Double Ds are hard to entirely overlook >.< Thank God for reduction surgery.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 3:06am by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#157 Sep 26 2011 at 1:11 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,091 posts
Sweetums wrote:
It'd kind of help if you had an actual argument, though.


Well, I guess you have to actually read it first.. eh, I can't do EVERYTHING for you.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#158 Sep 26 2011 at 2:21 AM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
Or you have to actually have an argument other than repeatedly saying how you really don't think gays are icky even though everything else you say points at that.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#159 Sep 26 2011 at 3:56 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,091 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Or you have to actually have an argument other than repeatedly saying how you really don't think gays are icky even though everything else you say points at that.


Oh really? You say that I'm incapable of making an argument. Why don't you take my argument from this thread and dissect it. Specifically point out why it's not logical, sound and/or coherent. Specifically point out which parts point to the belief that "gays are icky".


Honestly, it's not looking good for you. I guess you overlooked my response to you huh? Probably not.

You claim that I never admit to anything, yet I recall admitting to a mistake in this very thread. So, obviously I do admit to be wrong. So, here's your chance to shine.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#160 Sep 26 2011 at 3:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Alma wrote:
I don't think that gays are icky, that's not my argument.


Aethien wrote:
OK, so what is your problem with gays in the military.


Alma wrote:
.

..

...

Screenshot


Edited, Sep 26th 2011 6:05am by Lubriderm
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#161 Sep 26 2011 at 4:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
What's the difference between a straight guy and a *** guy seeing your junk? Chances are the *** guy doesn't find you any more attractive than the straight guy does, Alma. Especially if he's ever spoken to you.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#162 Sep 26 2011 at 4:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Nilatai wrote:
What's the difference between a straight guy and a *** guy seeing your junk? Chances are the *** guy doesn't find you any more attractive than the straight guy does, Alma. Especially if he's ever spoken to you.
As he pointed out, it doesn't even matter, he's a Captain. Middle management, not an actual soldier. His opinion from the soldier's point of view is about as valid as Varus and his extensive basketball experience with Marines.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#163 Sep 26 2011 at 4:20 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Also shower curtains so it's not even about seeing anyone's junk. It's just that now straight guys will have to live together that closely with *** guys and THEY'LL KNOW WHO THE *** GUYS ARE. LIKE OMG!
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#164 Sep 26 2011 at 4:28 AM Rating: Excellent
I still don't get why the legitimate homophobes wouldn't want to know who the *** people were. That way you could hide your unit if you didn't feel comfortable when they were around.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#165 Sep 26 2011 at 4:30 AM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
As long as you don't know who the gays are you can pretend that gays don't exist.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#166 Sep 26 2011 at 4:36 AM Rating: Excellent
Similar to the thought process that let's people think that the poor are living luxurious lives?
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#167 Sep 26 2011 at 4:40 AM Rating: Decent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,765 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Similar to the thought process that let's people think that the poor are living luxurious lives?
The poor aren't living luxurious lives. They just have non necessities purchased with cash that should have been spent on necessities instead of someone else's tax dollars buying those necessities. If they have the money for non necessities, then they have the money for necessities and should be taking less subsidies.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#168 Sep 26 2011 at 4:42 AM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
What you don't see don't exist.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#169Almalieque, Posted: Sep 26 2011 at 5:52 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ha... You're making this too easy for me. Every time one of you all military inclined people say such nonsense, you further prove my point. Since you obviously don't know, the U.S Army fights and wins battles with company size elements. Now, I'll let your ignorance addle you on why that is relevant.
#170 Sep 26 2011 at 5:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Similar to the thought process that let's people think that the poor are living luxurious lives?
The poor aren't living luxurious lives. They just have non necessities purchased with cash that should have been spent on necessities instead of someone else's tax dollars buying those necessities. If they have the money for non necessities, then they have the money for necessities and should be taking less subsidies.

**** refrigerators!! Smiley: mad
#171 Sep 26 2011 at 5:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Do you ever make a solid point, or just give a semi-point or two and then say "now I'll let you figure it out"? I can't imagine an officer in the US Army getting much done by being enigmatic.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#172 Sep 26 2011 at 6:03 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,765 posts
Nadenu wrote:
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Similar to the thought process that let's people think that the poor are living luxurious lives?
The poor aren't living luxurious lives. They just have non necessities purchased with cash that should have been spent on necessities instead of someone else's tax dollars buying those necessities. If they have the money for non necessities, then they have the money for necessities and should be taking less subsidies.

**** refrigerators!! Smiley: mad
Don't get me started on those. Do you know how much electricity they use up, raising the bills of all of these poor people?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#173 Sep 26 2011 at 6:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Similar to the thought process that let's people think that the poor are living luxurious lives?
The poor aren't living luxurious lives. They just have non necessities purchased with cash that should have been spent on necessities instead of someone else's tax dollars buying those necessities. If they have the money for non necessities, then they have the money for necessities and should be taking less subsidies.

**** refrigerators!! Smiley: mad
Don't get me started on those. Do you know how much electricity they use up, raising the bills of all of these poor people?

Mine is hooked to a stationary bike. Free electricity AND exercise!
#174 Sep 26 2011 at 6:18 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Do you ever make a solid point, or just give a semi-point or two and then say "now I'll let you figure it out"? I can't imagine an officer in the US Army getting much done by being enigmatic.


That's his thing. You'll never get him to state his case in clear, concise terms.

He'll ramble for a bit without really committing to a useful point, then insist for pages that his argument is clear, and that you have to go back and find it, because he won't say it again. He'll stonewall you that way for about 6-7 pages.

He'll obfuscate his position with a bunch of irrelevant, but shockingly incorrect points, with the hope that you'll lock onto one of them and he can argue the debate further away from the key part. You'll find yourself on the tangent of a tangent of a tangent's tangent. By the end, you'll be saying things like "Alma, things that are not, can't be." and he'll be no closer to giving you a good reason that gays shouldn't serve openly.


It's a great time, lemme tell ya.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 8:18am by Eske

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 8:20am by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#175 Sep 26 2011 at 6:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,765 posts
And by great time, Eske really means an exercise in mind-numbing futility.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#176 Sep 26 2011 at 7:01 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
It'd kind of help if you had an actual argument, though.


Well, I guess you have to actually read it first.. eh, I can't do EVERYTHING for you.
Try writing it in English.
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#177 Sep 26 2011 at 7:27 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,514 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
I can't imagine an officer in the US Army getting much done by being enigmatic.
I can't imagine an officer in the US Army getting anything done.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#178 Sep 26 2011 at 8:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Since you obviously don't know, the U.S Army fights and wins battles with company size elements.

Blackwater's a company. Are they the element winning your battles for you?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#179Almalieque, Posted: Sep 26 2011 at 8:43 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ahhhh.. you can't read English? Now, I understand the problem.. Just tell me which words you don't understand and we can do this together.
#180 Sep 26 2011 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Here's the thing. You all continuously make these comments, but when asked to dissect my argument (which is just one page ago) to specifically point out your claims, you choose not to. You're talking without walking. So, I apologize if you somehow believe that I should accept your criticism when you fail to substantiate your own claims.


How can I dissect that which does not exist?

I've read your posts. You didn't make your argument clear. Common conversational etiquette would suggest that you should try to restate it in simpler, more direct terms. Honestly, I shouldn't have to explain that to you.


Now, from previous threads about this, I've got a rough idea of your stance, and I know well enough than to bother trying to argue with you about it. But if anyone else really wanted to, you're going to have to do a better job of stating your case to them.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 10:51am by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#181 Sep 26 2011 at 8:53 AM Rating: Good
Internet Footsie Lawyer
*****
12,846 posts
Almalieque wrote:


Just in case you have forgotten, I'm a Captain of the United States Army. I live in my own apartment/house with my own bathroom. Even now, I'm in Iraq and I have my own room.

Captain Numbnuts!
____________________________
>.> heheheheh I am DF's sockpuppet.
rachelravage.us (somewhat NWS website)
http://www.guytalon.com/linger15.html My freeze Fetish DVD, on sale now! (WORK SAFE!)
http://venasevildolls.blogspot.com/ NWS
Niobia will establish a charity for orphaned mooses. (meese?) - Kao
ElneClare wrote:
So grow up folks and don't post anything you don't want your child to read. Doesn't matter if they are in diapers or adults, if it can upset them or you then it shouldn't be posted.
#182 Sep 26 2011 at 8:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Internet Footsie Lawyer
*****
12,846 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Since you obviously don't know, the U.S Army fights and wins battles with company size elements.

Blackwater's a company. Are they the element winning your battles for you?


Yes but in Iraq the contracts with Triple Canopy. Most of the other countries are, and you are correct, Blackwaters just under various different names. According to my hubs, the military just shows up to leech food and internet.
#183 Sep 26 2011 at 9:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,765 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
I know well enough than to bother trying to argue with you
what you don't seem to know well enough though, is to not fucking talk to him, because so long as what you say doesn't 100% agree with him, then you're arguing with him, and you **** well fucking do know that.

TL;DR, Shut the fuck up. You know better.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#184 Sep 26 2011 at 9:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,049 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Here's the thing. You all continuously make these comments, but when asked to dissect my argument (which is just one page ago) to specifically point out your claims, you choose not to. You're talking without walking. So, I apologize if you somehow believe that I should accept your criticism when you fail to substantiate your own claims.


Alma, one page before, quoted from someone else wrote:
If you want to reorganize the military and it's rules, fine, but do so by looking at the whole "big" picture. Changing some rules, while not addressing other affected and/or related/similar policies breaks down the core of the military. This goes beyond "sexuality". For example, allowing people of certain religions to not shave, while forcing others to shave and not recognizing other religions that may have similar shaving rules.

This being your argument, doesn't exactly explain a whole lot. You haven't said what the "big picture" is, what the other "affected and or related/similar policies" are, or what needs to be changed and why. All you say is "this will ruin the military". Now, I guess your grunts are supposed to follow orders unquestioningly without any explanation or justification, but we're gonna need more than that.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#185 Sep 26 2011 at 10:10 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,320 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I provided the justification.


Almalieque The Most Awesome wrote:
Other jobs do not force you to live, sleep and shower with someone. No matter how much people want to deny it, it's the same exact reason why men and women don't share close quarters.
I don't really like playing these word games, but this is the only thing I could see that is any way justifying discrimination against gays.

But, allowing gays in the military doesn't anyway impact the enlisted from living, showering and shaving together.

Tell me specifically what actions do *** people exclusively perform, or are unable to perform, while serving their country that weakens the military?


Almalieque previously wrote:
If you want to reorganize the military and it's rules, fine, but do so by looking at the whole "big" picture. Changing some rules, while not addressing other affected and/or related/similar policies breaks down the core of the military. This goes beyond "sexuality". For example, allowing people of certain religions to not shave, while forcing others to shave and not recognizing other religions that may have similar shaving rules.



I'm sorry I wasn't even able to figure out what your stance on the issue is.

I've not been able to figure out if you're simply against the repeal of DADT or if you think the military simply should not allow *** folks to serve at all.

It seems you feel that there is some justifiable reason that *** people should be either excluded from the military or should have to keep their gayness secret, but you've only danced around what that reason is.

Clues: A big picture, peeps that don't want to shave, it goes beyond sexuality.

Anyway thanks for sharing, Alma.



____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#186 Sep 26 2011 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
TL;DR, Shut the fuck up. You know better.


Apparently not!
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#187 Sep 26 2011 at 10:27 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,514 posts
Debalic wrote:
Now, I guess your grunts are supposed to follow orders unquestioningly without any explanation or justification, but we're gonna need more than that.
Thankfully that isn't how it goes at all, or we'd all be dead.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#188 Sep 26 2011 at 10:28 AM Rating: Excellent
Almalieque wrote:
Relevant to this case, when you sign up to become a service member of the U.S military, you forfeit many of your "rights". That is part of the foundation of the U.S. military which is part of the "success" of the U.S. Military. Cherry picking certain "rights" due to current popularity only breaks that foundation.

If you want to reorganize the military and it's rules, fine, but do so by looking at the whole "big" picture. Changing some rules, while not addressing other affected and/or related/similar policies breaks down the core of the military. This goes beyond "sexuality". For example, allowing people of certain religions to not shave, while forcing others to shave and not recognizing other religions that may have similar shaving rules.

For the most part, I don't support discrimination of sexuality when hiring job positions, but the military isn't a typical job. Other jobs do not force you to live, sleep and shower with someone. No matter how much people want to deny it, it's the same exact reason why men and women don't share close quarters.

People don't understand how the military operates and then make false comparisons to discrimination of skin color and ***. As discussed numerous times in the past, simply discriminating isn't the problem, it's the wrongful discrimination without justification. That's why the military STILL discriminates against women and not discriminate by regulation on skin color.

I'm personally not affected by this ruling, but it's just another negative chip at the military which will eventually be part of a bigger chip until people start focusing on the "big picture".
This is the only statement of position that I could find from you in this thread, but you're really not saying anything specific. you say it's a negative chip, but provide no specific reason as to why. You make some general statements about the military being so different, and allude to big picture rules, but don't clarify what you mean. I know you've probably stated a bunch of stuff in a bunch of other threads, but frankly if you want to say something in this thread then say it in this thread.

As a general comment, you seem to be flipping back and forth on the shower issue. In one post you state that you're forced to shower together, and in the next statement you state that it's all curtained off and so is a non issue.

I could interpret your comments but I don't really want to deal with you crying about how I've misunderstood you for three pages, so I'm not going to.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 11:29am by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#189 Sep 26 2011 at 10:48 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,091 posts
Quote:
How can I dissect that which does not exist?

I've read your posts. You didn't make your argument clear. Common conversational etiquette would suggest that you should try to restate it in simpler, more direct terms. Honestly, I shouldn't have to explain that to you.


Now, from previous threads about this, I've got a rough idea of your stance, and I know well enough than to bother trying to argue with you about it. But if anyone else really wanted to, you're going to have to do a better job of stating your case to them.


How can I make something clear when you don't tell me what's unclear. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel. You tell me exactly what part of that argument which you don't understand and I'll make it clear. Unless you are unable to read English (which you wouldn't be able to respond to my posts) then you understand SOMETHING.

Debalic wrote:
This being your argument, doesn't exactly explain a whole lot. You haven't said what the "big picture" is, what the other "affected and or related/similar policies" are, or what needs to be changed and why. All you say is "this will ruin the military". Now, I guess your grunts are supposed to follow orders unquestioningly without any explanation or justification, but we're gonna need more than that.


The entire post is my argument. That is why I separated it from my other posts.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#190 Sep 26 2011 at 10:52 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,091 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Relevant to this case, when you sign up to become a service member of the U.S military, you forfeit many of your "rights". That is part of the foundation of the U.S. military which is part of the "success" of the U.S. Military. Cherry picking certain "rights" due to current popularity only breaks that foundation.

If you want to reorganize the military and it's rules, fine, but do so by looking at the whole "big" picture. Changing some rules, while not addressing other affected and/or related/similar policies breaks down the core of the military. This goes beyond "sexuality". For example, allowing people of certain religions to not shave, while forcing others to shave and not recognizing other religions that may have similar shaving rules.

For the most part, I don't support discrimination of sexuality when hiring job positions, but the military isn't a typical job. Other jobs do not force you to live, sleep and shower with someone. No matter how much people want to deny it, it's the same exact reason why men and women don't share close quarters.

People don't understand how the military operates and then make false comparisons to discrimination of skin color and ***. As discussed numerous times in the past, simply discriminating isn't the problem, it's the wrongful discrimination without justification. That's why the military STILL discriminates against women and not discriminate by regulation on skin color.

I'm personally not affected by this ruling, but it's just another negative chip at the military which will eventually be part of a bigger chip until people start focusing on the "big picture".
This is the only statement of position that I could find from you in this thread, but you're really not saying anything specific. you say it's a negative chip, but provide no specific reason as to why. You make some general statements about the military being so different, and allude to big picture rules, but don't clarify what you mean. I know you've probably stated a bunch of stuff in a bunch of other threads, but frankly if you want to say something in this thread then say it in this thread.

As a general comment, you seem to be flipping back and forth on the shower issue. In one post you state that you're forced to shower together, and in the next statement you state that it's all curtained off and so is a non issue.

I could interpret your comments but I don't really want to deal with you crying about how I've misunderstood you for three pages, so I'm not going to.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 11:29am by Xsarus


Since it appears that you're the only person with any form of intelligence, I'll answer your questions when I get off work.

As a quick response, I am not flip flopping on any issue. I said that I am not affected, not anyone else. The argument was that I was afraid of someone seeing my junk. I stated that isn't true because I live by myself and shower in curtained off areas. I am not speaking for others in every military scenario around the world, only myself.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#191 Sep 26 2011 at 11:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,049 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Debalic wrote:
This being your argument, doesn't exactly explain a whole lot. You haven't said what the "big picture" is, what the other "affected and or related/similar policies" are, or what needs to be changed and why. All you say is "this will ruin the military". Now, I guess your grunts are supposed to follow orders unquestioningly without any explanation or justification, but we're gonna need more than that.


The entire post is my argument. That is why I separated it from my other posts.

It doesn't actually tell us anything.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#192 Sep 26 2011 at 11:04 AM Rating: Excellent
You signed up for the military.

You've been given orders that it's ok to be out of the closet in the military. You don't have to like it, dislike it, or have an opinion on it all. But that dude Carl that always went a little "too far" with the roughhousing? He's ***, was always ***, & now you're sure 'cause he told you.

ALma wrote:
it's (DADT Repeal) just another negative chip at the military


How?
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#193 Sep 26 2011 at 11:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,049 posts
I'd think that anyone who has a problem with it lacks the kind of professionalism and discipline needed to be in the military and shouldn't be, not the other way around.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#194 Sep 26 2011 at 11:23 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Quote:
How can I dissect that which does not exist?

I've read your posts. You didn't make your argument clear. Common conversational etiquette would suggest that you should try to restate it in simpler, more direct terms. Honestly, I shouldn't have to explain that to you.


Now, from previous threads about this, I've got a rough idea of your stance, and I know well enough than to bother trying to argue with you about it. But if anyone else really wanted to, you're going to have to do a better job of stating your case to them.


How can I make something clear when you don't tell me what's unclear. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel. You tell me exactly what part of that argument which you don't understand and I'll make it clear. Unless you are unable to read English (which you wouldn't be able to respond to my posts) then you understand SOMETHING.


The comment had a joking tone, but I was being serious. I can't tell you what part of the argument that I don't understand, because you literally did not provide an argument for why gays should not be allowed to openly serve.

You say that the military is different in its treatments of rights than the civilian world. That's all well and good, but that's not a reason that gays should not be allowed to openly serve in-and-of-itself.

As others have said, you alluded to the DADT repeal being a "negative chip" against the military. They probably want you to explain how so.

Not me though. No thanks.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#195 Sep 26 2011 at 1:08 PM Rating: Excellent
******
30,643 posts
I think Alma is arguing that DADT shouldn't be repealed because it's a small part of a larger issue. Repealing it doesn't actually do anything if things like sodomy and oral *** are still "illegal" in the military.

He is also angry that he can't grow a beard but others who's religion prevent them from shaving can.

I think his point is, we shouldn't concern ourselves with one thing, but concentrate on everything at once. Which, of course, means nothing will ever get done. (That last line was mine, not his, before he accuses me of attributing that to him.)

Edit: Posting on an iPhone can cause issues...

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 2:12pm by Belkira
#196 Sep 26 2011 at 1:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,049 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
I think Alma is arguing that DADT shouldn't be repealed because it's a small part of a larger issue. Repealing it doesn't actually do anything if things like sodomy and oral *** are still "illegal" in the military.

He is also angry that he can't grow a beard but others who's religion prevent them from shaving can.

I think his point is, we shouldn't concern ourselves with one thing, but concentrate on everything at once. Which, of course, means nothing will ever get done. (That last line was mine, not his, before he accuses me of attributing that to him.)

Edit: Posting on an iPhone can cause issues...

It would be nice if he would actually say some of these things, when we ask him for clarification.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#197 Sep 26 2011 at 1:41 PM Rating: Good
******
30,643 posts
Debalic wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
I think Alma is arguing that DADT shouldn't be repealed because it's a small part of a larger issue. Repealing it doesn't actually do anything if things like sodomy and oral *** are still "illegal" in the military.

He is also angry that he can't grow a beard but others who's religion prevent them from shaving can.

I think his point is, we shouldn't concern ourselves with one thing, but concentrate on everything at once. Which, of course, means nothing will ever get done. (That last line was mine, not his, before he accuses me of attributing that to him.)

Edit: Posting on an iPhone can cause issues...

It would be nice if he would actually say some of these things, when we ask him for clarification.


Sure, but it sounds like the poor argument it is when you don't surround it with obfuscation and tangents. Smiley: grin
#198 Sep 26 2011 at 1:52 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,514 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Repealing it doesn't actually do anything if things like sodomy and oral *** are still "illegal" in the military.
The only reason Article 125 of the UCMJ (The law which deals with sodomy) still exists is for "extenuating circumstances unique to military environment," and contrary to popular belief, has nothing to do with "teh gays." You'll be charged with it for fraternization, rape, public sexual behavior, or other factors that would adversely affect good order and discipline. In short, consensual buttsex, even in the military, is not a crime.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 3:53pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#199 Sep 26 2011 at 1:55 PM Rating: Excellent
******
30,643 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Repealing it doesn't actually do anything if things like sodomy and oral *** are still "illegal" in the military.
The only reason Article 125 of the UCMJ (The law which deals with sodomy) still exists is for "extenuating circumstances unique to military environment," and contrary to popular belief, has nothing to do with "teh gays." You'll be charged with it for fraternization, rape, public sexual behavior, or other factors that would adversely affect good order and discipline. In short, consensual buttsex, even in the military, is not a crime.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 3:53pm by lolgaxe


Good to know, thanks.
#200 Sep 26 2011 at 2:01 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
fraternization....

....consensual buttsex, even in the military, is not a crime.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that fraternization?

Now that I think of it, I don't think I've ever seen the actual definition of that word.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 4:02pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#201 Sep 26 2011 at 2:04 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,514 posts
Fraternization deals more with rank. As in, an officer and an enlisted dating or enlisted and junior enlisted and such. And it isn't that big a deal until one of them ***** up and abuses the situation. (IE: The officer commands the enlisted to date/*** them or the enlisted uses the relationship to advance themselves)
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 50 All times are in CST
Bijou, Kuwoobie, lolgaxe, Poldaran, rdmcandie, Samira, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (43)