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

You can't expect him to understand other armed forces when he doesn't seem to even get the one he joined.

Edited, Dec 6th 2011 8:11am by lolgaxe

False equivalent. DADT only made homosexuals unable to tell someone if they were gay if they chose to & repealing it doesn't mean anyone who chooses to come out now gets to act like Richard Simmons.



DADT HAS been repealed, so you're more than welcome to share your thoughts on why you don't want them to serve.

I'm enjoying this debate, mostly because the jist I'm getting out of it is its now "too hard" for heterosexual males to cope with gays being able to express that they're gay. My wife is in the military and I can pretty much say without a doubt being a woman in the military is harder than being a gay.

You can hide being gay if you don't want people to know, it's kind of hard to hide being a female.

Unless you're Mulan.

IIRC I had written omeg instead of omega.

Every one of your posts between the first and last post of this thread. Wow, that was remarkably easy. Anything else I can help you with?

I think this forum is broken I keep seeing that number every few posts.

Complete & utter ********* If this is what you're afraid of, you must have no experience being around homosexuals as "Richards Simmons" type homosexuals are A) Never Going to Join & B) Even if they tried they'd never make it out of basic.

The gays that have served, are serving, & will serve are the kind of gays that would call Richard Simmons a ******.



You're not stating any reason because you're a god damn coward and/or a bigot. Which is sad, as I'd prefer those serving in the armed forces were brave men & woman, like those brave homosexuals that now serve openly.

So a step in the right direction is a bad thing? That's good to know.

I saw this, it made me sad. I'm going to lose my shit when Alan Alda dies.

There is no regulation against wearing short shorts, skinny jeans, walking with a twist, talking with a lisp or any other stereotypical homosexual action. Once you're an E5 or above, you may run into some unwritten rules of appearing a certain way, but in no way is it unauthorized.

I'm sorry if you have a hard time accepting the truth.



I'm not stating a reason because I don't have a reason under DADT. That does not make anyone a coward and/or a bigot. It means, under DADT, I have no problem with a homosexual serving.

Once again, I'm sorry if you have an hard time accepting reality.



It's only a "step in the right direction" if that's the direction the military was in. Since the foundation of the military is based on service members having limited freedoms of expression, that is contrary to the direction of how the military operates.

If your personal goal is to "end discrimination", then your argument must include ways to "end discrimination", not just "repeal DADT". Just because you're focusing on one thing at a time, that doesn't prevent you from addressing all discrimination. Since no one seems to care about any other form of discrimination other than "DADT", then your goal isn't "ending discrimination", but "repealing DADT", which means it isn't a "step in the right direction", because you have no more direction to take.

So answer me this. Where does "everyone must be clean shaven, unless you prescribe to a certain religion" fit in your definition of discrimination?

Because.... you..... know.... that's kind of what the military does..

Look.. you can call me a bigot all you want, but that doesn't change the truth. Your scare tactics is evident of your own immaturity, ignorance and overall stupidity.

The reality is, the world is not fair and we discriminate all of the time. In order to be fairer, we often justify our discrimination. We accept these types of discrimination because it appears logical to the said society. That logic doesn't take away from the fact that it's still discrimination.

People like you simply refuse to avow to any flawed logic. You focus on the end result with no regards on HOW the end result is obtained.

If you can't accept the fact that there can exist logical discriminatory rules, laws and or regulations against homosexuality, just like they exist in every other human trait known to man, then that's a personal problem.

You can't fight for homosexuality to be treated the same, but then get upset when it is. It's time for you to wake the eff up and realize that this is life and it is unfeasible, illogical and unrealistic to have it any other way.

For Alma, homosexuality = religion. I'm not surprised.

What the hell are you even talking about? I am not upset that homosexuals are being given the same basic rights to acknowledge their sexuality that all other service members are. If you really think "being treated the same" is equal to being discriminated against, you are even moronic than I originally thought possible.