Forum Settings
       
1 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 102
Reply To Thread

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

QuoteReply
#1402 Dec 01 2011 at 7:17 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Please explain the difference. How is it ok to judge someone based on their sexual behavior but not someone else?

Easy, homosexuals are consenting adults. Next question.


No one's arguing that it should be illegal to be homosexual either. He's talking about personal judgment, not legality. If I were to say that skat-play is disgusting, no one would call me a bigot. But if I were to say that homosexual sex is disgusting, many would. Pretty arbitrarily subjective, isn't it?


I don't think so. I'm not talking about whether you find homosexual sex disgusting or not. I'm talking about condoning homosexuality. It's not the same thing.


Ok. Maybe I'm confused. What do you mean by "condoning homosexuality"? Are you saying that the problem is that people aren't condoning it? Do you see the problem if someone is being asked/forced to condone something they personally dislike (or even find disgusting)? Maybe I'm missing your point, but I honestly don't see how that helps the issue at hand. If the problem is that some people find homosexuality disgusting (and there certainly are), then doesn't DADT (or something like it) make a lot of sense?

There's lots of things people may do at home among consenting adults which I don't think is appropriate conversation at work. Usually, we agree as civilized people to just not talk about things in a work environment which others may find offensive, right? So how is this really different?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1403 Dec 01 2011 at 7:23 PM Rating: Excellent
lolgaxe
View User Forum
+1
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
If the problem is that some people find homosexuality disgusting (and there certainly are), then doesn't DADT (or something like it) make a lot of sense?
If there was a Hiding Hetero equivalent, then it would make sense. Seeing as there wasn't, this is just the kind of point someone stupid would make hoping someone dumber then them would fall for.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1404 Dec 01 2011 at 7:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Samira
View User Forum
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
You know, there's a neutral ground between condoning and condemning.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1405 Dec 01 2011 at 7:35 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Samira wrote:
You know, there's a neutral ground between condoning and condemning.



I know that, which is why I was a bit surprised/confused at the statement that this was about condoning homosexuality. That seems to be way far beyond the scope of the issue IMO.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1406 Dec 01 2011 at 7:41 PM Rating: Default
gbaji
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If the problem is that some people find homosexuality disgusting (and there certainly are), then doesn't DADT (or something like it) make a lot of sense?
If there was a Hiding Hetero equivalent, then it would make sense. Seeing as there wasn't, this is just the kind of point someone stupid would make hoping someone dumber then them would fall for.


By that logic, the fact that there exists *any* behavior which people don't feel the need to hide means we should never condemn/question/etc any other behavior. Seems like poor logic.

We're talking about social perception, aren't we? Somewhat by definition there are going to be things which for one reason or another members of society find more or less acceptable, and they're going to feel less need to hide behaviors which are found more acceptable than those which aren't. We can sit around and howl about how unfair it is, but that's the way social mores work.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1407 Dec 01 2011 at 7:43 PM Rating: Excellent
lolgaxe
View User Forum
+1
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
Seems like poor logic.
It really isn't, but you're too stupid to realize that.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1408 Dec 02 2011 at 12:19 AM Rating: Good
Debalic
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
This thread still has legs?
____________________________
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.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1409 Dec 02 2011 at 12:26 AM Rating: Decent
rdmcandie
View User Forum
Scholar
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
if thats what you want to call idiotic ramblings of a ******* mentality stuck in an adults body.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1410 Dec 02 2011 at 12:30 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1701044194859
Guru
*****
12,735 posts
Samira wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Exodus wrote:

Can't we all just stop giving a rats *** what one narrow minded @#%^ slap's opinion is? I mean, yar, post whoring is fun but this is like poking a child with down syndrome in the eye with a stick while keeping a rubber ducky out of his reach at this point.

Was that wrong? Should I not have done that?



You magnificent bitCh. You make me so happy. Smiley: laugh



I never doubted the awesome that is Nadenu. Smiley: laugh
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1411 Dec 02 2011 at 4:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Nadenu
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Exodus wrote:
Samira wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Exodus wrote:

Can't we all just stop giving a rats *** what one narrow minded @#%^ slap's opinion is? I mean, yar, post whoring is fun but this is like poking a child with down syndrome in the eye with a stick while keeping a rubber ducky out of his reach at this point.

Was that wrong? Should I not have done that?



You magnificent bitCh. You make me so happy. Smiley: laugh



I never doubted the awesome that is Nadenu. Smiley: laugh

Smiley: inlove @ you both.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1412 Dec 02 2011 at 6:57 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1658708287938
View User Forum
Sage
****
9,507 posts
gbaji wrote:

We're talking about social perception, aren't we? Somewhat by definition there are going to be things which for one reason or another members of society find more or less acceptable, and they're going to feel less need to hide behaviors which are found more acceptable than those which aren't. We can sit around and howl about how unfair it is, but that's the way social mores work.
Things like blasting people in the face with white phosphorus probably have a poor social perception, too. But we are discussing the military here, they should have different rules and regulations, however, discrimination isn't part of the package.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1413 Dec 02 2011 at 7:41 AM Rating: Good
Elinda
View User Forum
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
If the problem is that some people find homosexuality disgusting (and there certainly are), then doesn't DADT (or something like it) make a lot of sense?



I suggest that there be a law that says people must eat their split pea soup in secret and must deny ever having eaten it - cuz, you know, it's disgusting.

It makes perfect sense yes?



____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1414 Dec 02 2011 at 7:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Uglysasquatch
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
It might if split pea soup was disgusting, which it absolutely is not.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1415 Dec 02 2011 at 7:59 AM Rating: Excellent
lolgaxe
View User Forum
+1
*******
50,767 posts
Debalic wrote:
This thread still has legs?
Never did.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1416 Dec 02 2011 at 8:05 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1658708287938
View User Forum
Sage
****
9,507 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Debalic wrote:
This thread still has legs?
Never did.
Ironically, there are open gay people will to lose theirs from a land mine or something to protect American interests. Well, fuck, I guess they are just anti-Americans just unfit for service.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1417 Dec 02 2011 at 8:13 AM Rating: Good
Elinda
View User Forum
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
It might if split pea soup was disgusting, which it absolutely is not.

Dirty pea-lover.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1418 Dec 02 2011 at 8:15 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1658708287938
View User Forum
Sage
****
9,507 posts
I've never tried split pea soup, but I'm hoping it tastes better than it looks.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1419 Dec 02 2011 at 8:41 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1709511392366
Sage
****
6,471 posts
gbaji wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Please explain the difference. How is it ok to judge someone based on their sexual behavior but not someone else?

Easy, homosexuals are consenting adults. Next question.


No one's arguing that it should be illegal to be homosexual either. He's talking about personal judgment, not legality. If I were to say that skat-play is disgusting, no one would call me a bigot. But if I were to say that homosexual sex is disgusting, many would. Pretty arbitrarily subjective, isn't it?


I don't think so. I'm not talking about whether you find homosexual sex disgusting or not. I'm talking about condoning homosexuality. It's not the same thing.


Ok. Maybe I'm confused. What do you mean by "condoning homosexuality"? Are you saying that the problem is that people aren't condoning it? Do you see the problem if someone is being asked/forced to condone something they personally dislike (or even find disgusting)? Maybe I'm missing your point, but I honestly don't see how that helps the issue at hand. If the problem is that some people find homosexuality disgusting (and there certainly are), then doesn't DADT (or something like it) make a lot of sense?

There's lots of things people may do at home among consenting adults which I don't think is appropriate conversation at work. Usually, we agree as civilized people to just not talk about things in a work environment which others may find offensive, right? So how is this really different?


Yes, I think that DADT did not condone homosexuality; specifically that it didn't condone homosexuality if discovered. The policy didn't make sense for the reason that Elinda posed above.

You're going to have trouble with this if you keep conflating homosexuality with a sexual act, as you're wont to do.

Edited, Dec 2nd 2011 9:42am by Eske
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1420 Dec 02 2011 at 8:43 AM Rating: Good
Uglysasquatch
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Elinda wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
It might if split pea soup was disgusting, which it absolutely is not.

Dirty pea-lover.
And proud of it.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


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

▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1421 Dec 02 2011 at 8:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel
View User Forum
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Ironically, there are open gay people will to lose theirs from a land mine or something to protect American interests. Well, fuck, I guess they are just anti-Americans just unfit for service.

That's why good, God loving Republicans make sure to openly boo them and their service at every opportunity.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1422 Dec 02 2011 at 9:09 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1636935913888
Sage
******
27,272 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
I've never tried split pea soup, but I'm hoping it tastes better than it looks.
It's delicious and jummy.
▲ Page top
#1423REDACTED, Posted: Dec 02 2011 at 9:24 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) loob,
QuoteReply
#1424 Dec 02 2011 at 9:33 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1709511392366
Sage
****
6,471 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Like any cause the homosexuals have their martyrs and people willing to sacrifice themselves for what they perceive to be the greater good. Doesn't mean they're right or that they should succeed.


The greater good that they're sacrificing themselves for...that'd be America, chief.

Why don't you want America to succeed?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#1425 Dec 02 2011 at 9:39 AM Rating: Good
Elinda
View User Forum
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
varusword75 wrote:
If 10,000 potential soldiers, from say the mid-west, refuse to serve because they don't want to bunk and shower with flaming ****'s that's the true harm the homosexuals have done to the military. They're effectively neutering the military. Like any cause the homosexuals have their martyrs and people willing to sacrifice themselves for what they perceive to be the greater good. Doesn't mean they're right or that they should succeed.
No need to speculate. We know that 10,000+ soldiers were booted from the military because of DADT.

DADT was neutering the military.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
▲ Page top
#1426Almalieque, Posted: Dec 02 2011 at 9:39 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Once again, you're the closest one out of the group. I've been around questionable men before. Heck, my store manager at McDonalds was a flaming *****. This is why I've stated that there is a difference between being comfortable working with a homosexual and living/showering with a homosexual. It's the same philosophy a woman uses when working with a man. It's a really simple concept that people refuse to accept because it doesn't support their argument and cause.
1 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 102
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 353 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (353)
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC