Vageta wrote:
So, in post #206, you were against DADT repeal because of the following reasons:
1- Since the USA & Military discriminate for other reasons, why not sexuality?
Incorrect. You're confusing a counter to an argument with my actual argument. I was pointing out the fact that the main argument against DADT was that "it's discrimination" and I countered that by pointing out that the military is a discriminatory organization. Therefore, "it's discrimination" isn't a valid argument.
You inferred your understanding because you wanted to argue that point. I stated several times within that very own post that wasn't the case.
Almalieque on post 206 wrote:
Just like current discrimination practices don't justify other forms of justification, neither does being affected by a form of discrimination justifies its removal.
Vageta wrote:
You have since backed off from that.
2- Because the people who repealed DADT don't know the military
What? I was asked a very simple question. How do I feel about the repeal? That was the answer. People who don't know what they are talking about, shouldn't be making rules. That is in no way, shape or form a contradiction to anything. I've stayed consistent on that throughout this entire thread.
Vageta wrote:
You've since gone back on that.
What?
Vageta wrote:
3. Housing, Benefits, & Potential Sham Marriages (only if DOMA was repealed)
DOMA has nothing to do with having a dependent. You refuse to accept that fact, because you know that you are wrong. Being married and being able to have a dependent are two different issues. You get extra money for having a dependent, not for being married. The government doesn't ever have to repeal DOMA in order for Joe and Tom to be able to claim themselves as dependents. The military just chooses not to because everyone will claim to be dependents.
Vageta wrote:
Nothing has changed since DADT was repealed, irrelevant until you can prove otherwise.
Oh, well, I guess you wouldn't mind it being reinstated then? I've already pointed out living conditions and the ability to be with your significant other has changed. While before in certain living situations, it was only married couples, now it's married couples and homosexual couples.
Vageta wrote:
4. Showers & Comfort!
Both of which have been debunked despite your multiple attempts to equate straight men living with gay men as equivalent to men & woman being forced to live together.
Debunked how? You have yet explained to me the difference between a person not wanting to be exposed in front of another person vs a person not wanting to be exposed in front of another person. Regardless if the person is black, white, male, woman, tall, short, Mexican or Chinese, the bottom line is not wanting to be exposed to another person. Is there a justification for the difference? Of course! But, that doesn't mean it isn't the same concept.
Vageta wrote:
So...what is it now that you're clinging too as justification to reinstate DADT?
You simply amaze me. There is no one "magic bullet" reason, so I'm not sure why you think there is. ALl of that was on one post for a reason, they are all reasons against the repeal. This is why I keep referring to post 206, I'm not going to go into details over all of those every time someone asks me. There is no simple one line answer against the repeal.
At this point, we've made a circle at least once and it's time to just agree to disagree. I'm personally against the repeal, but if people want homosexuals to serve openly, then they should understand the situation before making decisions. They have to understand that we waive our rights as a normal citizen when we sign that paper. We're number one for a reason and a lot of it has to do with the fact that we want to do this. We volunteer to serve. As much as people want to point at the money and equipment (those play a major role), it's the people that connect the dots to make it happen.
I'm still getting paid the 1at and 15th in either case. This is just another example of people simply not understanding something before reacting nor caring.
Did I miss something?
