Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

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

#352 Oct 02 2011 at 3:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
That was a lot of words to avoid just asking the question. Go go embarrassed obfuscation! Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#353 Oct 02 2011 at 3:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,288 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Jophiel wrote:

Except it is. Man looked at by Man = Woman looked at by Woman. It's still equal, it's just that this doesn't help your argument so you need to try to create new dynamics.

.....

Not at all and that's an exceptionally weak defense.


If a child asks his mother for a ham sandwich and she's "No, because it'll ruin your appetite for dinner", then what should be her response if he asked for a turkey sandwich and why?


So I went back and looked up where he posted this the first time. I still have no idea what this has to do with the price of tea in China.

Man looking at man = woman looking at woman is ham = turkey? Smiley: confused
#354 Oct 02 2011 at 3:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
If he can avoid explaining it, he avoids admitting how flawed it is.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#355 Oct 02 2011 at 3:40 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,460 posts
Quote:
500+ billion dollars mean absolutely nothing if you fail at discipline, team work and training. I know that you think the U.S. wins battles by simply pressing a single button, but I assure you that isn't the case.


Wins them a lot more than countries that don't have that ability, i bet a **** pushes the switch.

Let me put it another way. Every nations military has discipline and team work and training. Not many nations in the world have all the expensive toys.

actually you probably didn't understand that either, but w.e you are a Captain after all and must understand better than me how a well trained squad is the reason why China can't really be a threat, and not the billions of dollars spent on the best aircraft carrier groups in the world. Obviously it is the men not the equipment....

oh and just to keep on topic. Are you trying to say that homosexuals are incapable of being as disciplined as hetero sexuals? Is that what this is all about? you got a poof in your outfit captain, he not taking to well to your teachins, @#%^ing queerosexuals. (that may or may not *touches nose* have been there all along.)

lol idiot.



Edited, Oct 2nd 2011 6:11pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR **** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS **** SHITTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#356 Oct 02 2011 at 4:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,922 posts
If you feel the need to isolate and/or suppress homosexuals, then it would seem that discipline is a bit lacking. As I said before, so much for professionalism.
____________________________
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.
#357 Oct 02 2011 at 4:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Repressed Memories
******
20,574 posts
Alma hungers for sandwiches, but the rest of us hunger for the truth.
#358 Oct 02 2011 at 4:46 PM Rating: Excellent
******
30,642 posts
I'm going to have a turkey sandwich for dinner, but not a ham sandwich.

Now, what does that tell you about DADT?

If you don't understand, you're obviously too stupid to understand.
#359 Oct 02 2011 at 4:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Now, what does that tell you about DADT?

That you're either looking for a face-punch or a walrus ride.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#360 Oct 02 2011 at 4:54 PM Rating: Excellent
******
30,642 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Now, what does that tell you about DADT?

That you're either looking for a face-punch or a walrus ride.


The former seems needlessly violent, and the latter could be... interesting.

I'll take the latter for $500, Alex.

ETA: Also, because I'm a glutton for punishment, I just want to add that it is entirely possible, even incredibly common, to have different reasons for denying a child a sandwich not wanting two seemingly related events to happen.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2011 5:55pm by Belkira
#361 Oct 02 2011 at 9:20 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
The kid isn't getting any sandwich because I didn't spend all of that money on St. Scholastica for them to die in some third world ****
____________________________
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.
#362 Oct 02 2011 at 9:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,952 posts
Quote:

If you believe that nonsense, then not only do you fail to understand the military, but team work in general. Just because you throw together an all star team, doesn't mean they'll win a game. It takes discipline, training and team work. All of those factors are mutually exclusive of equipment.

I'm not a history buff, but I thought the colonies "army" was inferior equipment wise in comparison to the British.


Superior tactics. It's the same reason the dispersed terror networks are proportionally winning against the US.
____________________________
"India black magic anal sex zionist blow job terrorism child rape bicycle"
Just as Planned.
#363 Oct 02 2011 at 9:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,952 posts
Sweetums wrote:
The kid isn't getting any sandwich because I didn't spend all of that money on St. Scholastica for them to die in some third world sh*thole


It's much more efficient to send the ones who that money hasn't been spent on.

But in either case, it's safer than driving a truck.
____________________________
"India black magic anal sex zionist blow job terrorism child rape bicycle"
Just as Planned.
#364 Oct 02 2011 at 10:14 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Quote:

If you believe that nonsense, then not only do you fail to understand the military, but team work in general. Just because you throw together an all star team, doesn't mean they'll win a game. It takes discipline, training and team work. All of those factors are mutually exclusive of equipment.

I'm not a history buff, but I thought the colonies "army" was inferior equipment wise in comparison to the British.


Superior tactics. It's the same reason the dispersed terror networks are proportionally winning against the US.
The French backing the colonies and the fact that Spain declared war on Britain in 1778 were also not factors at all
____________________________
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.
#365 Oct 02 2011 at 10:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,952 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Alma wrote:

If you believe that nonsense, then not only do you fail to understand the military, but team work in general. Just because you throw together an all star team, doesn't mean they'll win a game. It takes discipline, training and team work. All of those factors are mutually exclusive of equipment.

I'm not a history buff, but I thought the colonies "army" was inferior equipment wise in comparison to the British.


Superior tactics. It's the same reason the dispersed terror networks are proportionally winning against the US.
The French backing the colonies and the fact that Spain declared war on Britain in 1778 were also not factors at all


Yeah, **** that international diplomacy **** It's all about teamwork and friendship!
____________________________
"India black magic anal sex zionist blow job terrorism child rape bicycle"
Just as Planned.
#366 Oct 02 2011 at 10:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Hey this is pretty awesome, not only is Alma ignoring my post, he's pretending that it never happened. He's far gone guys. He's ignoring your questions, he's basically being exactly what he complains about in every single thread.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2011 11:39pm 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
#367 Oct 03 2011 at 3:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Hey this is pretty awesome, not only is Alma ignoring my post, he's pretending that it never happened. He's far gone guys. He's ignoring your questions, he's basically being exactly what he complains about in every single thread.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2011 11:39pm by Xsarus
It's not easy being Gbaji's understudy.
____________________________
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
#368 Oct 03 2011 at 3:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,263 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Well if you don't think it will adversely affect the military shut the fuck up!


What are you talking about? Your proposition was the military collapsing, which I never implied.


Well you think less people will join because of this right? Which leads to the military collapsing. If you don't think this, why are you making such a big fucking deal about it?

Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 5:49am by Nilatai
____________________________
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
#369 Oct 03 2011 at 4:07 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,950 posts
Jophiel wrote:
That was a lot of words to avoid just asking the question. Go go embarrassed obfuscation! Smiley: laugh


I already explained it directly in reference to DADT, let me quote it again for you. If you don't understand that and don't want a further explanation, then politely STFU
Almalieque on Page 6 wrote:
Except that isn't the counterpart. The reasons why heterosexual men dont' want to shower with homosexual men ARE THE SAME reasons why heterosexual women don't want to shower with heterosexual men.

It's the concept not the details. If you accept one argument based on feelings x,y and z, then you must also accept the other argument based on feelings x,y and z. Like I keep saying in every SSM argument, if you argue for all, then you must accept all. Else, you must make an exclusive argument


Nadenu wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Jophiel wrote:

Except it is. Man looked at by Man = Woman looked at by Woman. It's still equal, it's just that this doesn't help your argument so you need to try to create new dynamics.

.....

Not at all and that's an exceptionally weak defense.


If a child asks his mother for a ham sandwich and she's "No, because it'll ruin your appetite for dinner", then what should be her response if he asked for a turkey sandwich and why?


So I went back and looked up where he posted this the first time. I still have no idea what this has to do with the price of tea in China.

Man looking at man = woman looking at woman is ham = turkey? Smiley: confused


Well your lack of understanding is obviously the reason for your own confusion. I just simply asked a question and you're already making false comparisons before I was even able to respond to your answer.

Jophiel wrote:
If he can avoid explaining it, he avoids admitting how flawed it is.


I explained it first, see above in my quote.

rdmcandie wrote:
Quote:
500+ billion dollars mean absolutely nothing if you fail at discipline, team work and training. I know that you think the U.S. wins battles by simply pressing a single button, but I assure you that isn't the case.


Wins them a lot more than countries that don't have that ability, i bet a **** pushes the switch.

Let me put it another way. Every nations military has discipline and team work and training. Not many nations in the world have all the expensive toys.

actually you probably didn't understand that either, but w.e you are a Captain after all and must understand better than me how a well trained squad is the reason why China can't really be a threat, and not the billions of dollars spent on the best aircraft carrier groups in the world. Obviously it is the men not the equipment....





Edited, Oct 2nd 2011 6:11pm by rdmcandie



Mr. cheap **** cell phone, coke bottle IED terrorist guy would like to say hello to you. I'm not denying the obvious boost from technology, but the people makes the military successful, not the equipment. You don't just effectively integrate a piece of equipment without the proper training and skill set.

RDD wrote:
oh and just to keep on topic. Are you trying to say that homosexuals are incapable of being as disciplined as hetero sexuals? Is that what this is all about? you got a poof in your outfit captain, he not taking to well to your teachins, @#%^ing queerosexuals. (that may or may not *touches nose* have been there all along.)

lol idiot.


You got that from my post and you call me an idiot? You're so confused that you're getting your own self off topic.

I countered the notion that "every other military does it" with the fact that it doesn't make sense for the "best" military (if you support that notion) to emulate an inferior military.

You countered that it has nothing to do with people but the equipment.

I countered back that training, discipline and overall team work has a major role in any group success. No where did I imply that homosexuals are incapable of that, but simply people do play a role in success, not just equipment.

Sir Xsarus wrote:
Hey this is pretty awesome, not only is Alma ignoring my post, he's pretending that it never happened. He's far gone guys. He's ignoring your questions, he's basically being exactly what he complains about in every single thread.

Edited, Oct 2nd 2011 11:39pm by Xsarus



So, I quoted where I explained to Jophiel my proposition already, now it's time for you to do the same. You don't have to, primarily because it doesn't exist. If it does, then you must not really want an answer because I at least reference my overlooked posts, i.e. see page 14.

Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Well if you don't think it will adversely affect the military shut the fuck up!


What are you talking about? Your proposition was the military collapsing, which I never implied.


Well you think less people will join because of this right? Which leads to the military collapsing. If you don't think this, why are you making such a big fucking deal about it?

Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 5:49am by Nilatai

I don't think that and my reason on why it's a big deal is in my ginormous post on page 5.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#370 Oct 03 2011 at 4:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
27,182 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
That was a lot of words to avoid just asking the question. Go go embarrassed obfuscation! Smiley: laugh


I already explained it directly in reference to DADT, let me quote it again for you. If you don't understand that and don't want a further explanation, then politely STFU
Almalieque on Page 6 wrote:
Except that isn't the counterpart. The reasons why heterosexual men dont' want to shower with homosexual men ARE THE SAME reasons why heterosexual women don't want to shower with heterosexual men.

It's the concept not the details. If you accept one argument based on feelings x,y and z, then you must also accept the other argument based on feelings x,y and z. Like I keep saying in every SSM argument, if you argue for all, then you must accept all. Else, you must make an exclusive argument
Only you have, once again, completely failed to realize that this isn't the issue at all. Homosexual men (and women) have already been showering with the straight people for quite some time so apparently nobody really minds that.

Really, the only difference is that now the homosexual people don't have to hide that fact anymore. It doesn't change anything about those people, about their colleagues and it shouldn't change the way they are thought of.

Sooo, what's the problem again?
____________________________
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.
#371 Oct 03 2011 at 5:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Really? THAT was your argument? The thing that was discredited back on page 6 as well?

Well, hell, had you just asked "If a child is already eating a ham sandwich and then says it'd be unfair to let him eat that if he's not also being force-fed a turkey sandwich as well because he has to be held down with every conceivable sandwich shoved down his gullet or else he can't have any food ever again, should the mother run to the store now or quietly call DCFS and save them the hassle of an investigation?" then I might have understood what you meant. Because, as I suspected, your "comparison" didn't work at all.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#372 Oct 03 2011 at 5:31 AM Rating: Excellent
How did we get to 2 pages of sandwich analogies?




Oh, wait, Alma's here
____________________________
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
#373 Oct 03 2011 at 5:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
These posts layer upon each other like slices of meat and cheese.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#374 Oct 03 2011 at 5:47 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,263 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Well if you don't think it will adversely affect the military shut the fuck up!


What are you talking about? Your proposition was the military collapsing, which I never implied.


Well you think less people will join because of this right? Which leads to the military collapsing. If you don't think this, why are you making such a big fucking deal about it?

Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 5:49am by Nilatai

I don't think that and my reason on why it's a big deal is in my ginormous post on page 5.

TL;DR, be more succinct.
____________________________
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
#375 Oct 03 2011 at 5:48 AM Rating: Excellent
This thread needs more soup, and perhaps a pickle spear.
____________________________
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
#376 Oct 03 2011 at 6:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
FFS, ban Alma already.
____________________________
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

#377 Oct 03 2011 at 6:13 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,950 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
That was a lot of words to avoid just asking the question. Go go embarrassed obfuscation! Smiley: laugh


I already explained it directly in reference to DADT, let me quote it again for you. If you don't understand that and don't want a further explanation, then politely STFU
Almalieque on Page 6 wrote:
Except that isn't the counterpart. The reasons why heterosexual men dont' want to shower with homosexual men ARE THE SAME reasons why heterosexual women don't want to shower with heterosexual men.

It's the concept not the details. If you accept one argument based on feelings x,y and z, then you must also accept the other argument based on feelings x,y and z. Like I keep saying in every SSM argument, if you argue for all, then you must accept all. Else, you must make an exclusive argument


Only you have, once again, completely failed to realize that this isn't the issue at all. Homosexual men (and women) have already been showering with the straight people for quite some time so apparently nobody really minds that.

Really, the only difference is that now the homosexual people don't have to hide that fact anymore. It doesn't change anything about those people, about their colleagues and it shouldn't change the way they are thought of.

Sooo, what's the problem again?


I already answered that as well. I can find the quote to that later if I have time. I believe it was a response to RDD. The fact that homosexuals are currently serving in the military HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MY ARGUMENT. Read my post on page 6 and tell me where it says otherwise.

Jophiel wrote:
Really? THAT was your argument? The thing that was discredited back on page 6 as well?

Well, hell, had you just asked "If a child is already eating a ham sandwich and then says it'd be unfair to let him eat that if he's not also being force-fed a turkey sandwich as well because he has to be held down with every conceivable sandwich shoved down his gullet or else he can't have any food ever again, should the mother run to the store now or quietly call DCFS and save them the hassle of an investigation?" then I might have understood what you meant. Because, as I suspected, your "comparison" didn't work at all.


Responding to the post isn't the same as discrediting it. As I suspected, you completely fail because your "comparison" had nothing to do with my statement. You once again, made up some illogical crap, projected unto me as if it were my argument and then argued against it as opposed to just answering the question. You must be that scared huh?! Afraid of putting your foot in your mouth that you would rather avoid answering the question by projecting a stupid argument.

Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Well if you don't think it will adversely affect the military shut the fuck up!


What are you talking about? Your proposition was the military collapsing, which I never implied.


Well you think less people will join because of this right? Which leads to the military collapsing. If you don't think this, why are you making such a big fucking deal about it?

Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 5:49am by Nilatai

I don't think that and my reason on why it's a big deal is in my ginormous post on page 5.

TL;DR, be more succinct.


Well, then I guess you just wont know then... too sadSmiley: frown
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#378 Oct 03 2011 at 6:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,263 posts
Or you can't actually construct a succinct answer, meaning everything you've written thus far is just babble. Much like everything else you write, really.

Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 8:17am by Nilatai
____________________________
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
#379 Oct 03 2011 at 6:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Nilatai wrote:
Or you can't actually make a succinct answer, meaning everything you've written thus far is just babble. Much like everything else you write, really.
If you read his post on page 6 (that he can't be bothered to dredge up himself) all things will be clear.
____________________________
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
#380 Oct 03 2011 at 6:20 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,182 posts
Almalieque wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Only you have, once again, completely failed to realize that this isn't the issue at all. Homosexual men (and women) have already been showering with the straight people for quite some time so apparently nobody really minds that.

Really, the only difference is that now the homosexual people don't have to hide that fact anymore. It doesn't change anything about those people, about their colleagues and it shouldn't change the way they are thought of.

Sooo, what's the problem again?
I already answered that as well. I can find the quote to that later if I have time. I believe it was a response to RDD. The fact that homosexuals are currently serving in the military HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MY ARGUMENT. Read my post on page 6 and tell me where it says otherwise.
You have plenty of time to type in non answers so why don't you go search for that quote now?
Or you can restate it because I'm pretty sure you're the only one who thinks you answered 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.
#381 Oct 03 2011 at 6:21 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
As I suspected, you completely fail because your "comparison" had nothing to do with my statement. You once again, made up some illogical crap, projected unto me as if it were my argument and then argued against it as opposed to just answering the question. You must be that scared huh?!

Nope. My comparison actually addresses your asinine belief that if you do A, you must do B, C, D, E, etc. It was much closer to your argument than yours.

But, yeah, keep saying I'm scared because that'll probably make me agree with you Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#382 Oct 03 2011 at 6:22 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,263 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Or you can't actually make a succinct answer, meaning everything you've written thus far is just babble. Much like everything else you write, really.
If you read his post on page 6 (that he can't be bothered to dredge up himself) all things will be clear.

*Groan*

Do I have to? Will it really be worth my time?
____________________________
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
#383 Oct 03 2011 at 6:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
27,182 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Or you can't actually make a succinct answer, meaning everything you've written thus far is just babble. Much like everything else you write, really.
If you read his post on page 6 (that he can't be bothered to dredge up himself) all things will be clear.

*Groan*

Do I have to? Will it really be worth my time?
He won't do it himself and no it definitely won't be.
____________________________
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.
#384 Oct 03 2011 at 6:24 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Or you can't actually make a succinct answer, meaning everything you've written thus far is just babble. Much like everything else you write, really.
If you read his post on page 6 (that he can't be bothered to dredge up himself) all things will be clear.

*Groan*

Do I have to? Will it really be worth my time?
He won't do it himself and no it definitely won't be.
Being worth his time or not is irrelevant. He's clearly shown his time has no value by arguing with Alma in the first place.
____________________________
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

#385 Oct 03 2011 at 6:44 AM Rating: Excellent
ALma, on page 5 wrote:
The reason why my post did not have details the way you wanted is because it was a conceptual argument. I was asked what I thought of it and I expressed my opinion. What I realized after finishing this post was that you all expected a different type of response. I responded to the question of how I feel with the conceptual argument of allowing overall ignorance making changes does more harm than good. My post wasn't intended to point fingers at any one thing, but to go over the conceptual errors. The concept of the "big picture" is two fold.

Just as with SSM, you either accept discrimination or you don't. Just like current discrimination practices don't justify other forms of justification, neither does being affected by a form of discrimination justifies its removal.

People act like there doesn't exist a scenario in life to justify discrimination against homosexuality. At the same time, TODAY in our society, we have laws, rules and regulations that openly and blatantly discriminate against sex, skin color, height, weight, age, nationality, national background, family background, religious preference, etc. and yet you all somehow believe that it's IMPOSSIBLE for sexuality to be part of that list? What makes sexuality so special that the aforesaid can be discriminated against in the "Land of the Free", but not sexuality?

As I stated, when you join the military, you forfeit many rights that a normal citizen has. This has nothing to do with homosexuality, but the foundation of the military.

This brings up the other half of the concept. People that are ignorant of scenarios should not be making decisions on something that they don't understand. From the statements made on this forum, it is blatantly obvious that most of you all do not have the slightest clue of how the military operates. Your entire vision is derived from the media.

The U.S. military is "successful" because it operates off the concept of discipline. This is noticeably done by uniformity. When I look to my left, I see my Logistical Officer, not CPT Jorge Gonzalez, the Mexican Muslim. When everyone is treated relatively the same, you see a Soldier, regardless of sex, nationality, age, etc. This mentality enhances respect, comradery, esprit de corp and overall teamwork. When you start giving people special treatment, that all changes. When that all changes, people are looked at differently with different expectations and that bond of "Soldiers" is gone. We're no longer both Soldiers but PFC Shnuffy and SPC Smith.

Now, I'm the first person to fight against conformity. I have and will in the future be "That Guy" to stand up against something "protocol" that isn't right. So, don't get me wrong about "individualism", but if your intent is to be able to freely express yourself, then the military isn't for you. The list goes on for the rules and unwritten rules of expression while being in the military.

Let's take the living conditions. By allowing homosexuals to freely express themselves, you've created a discrimination in couples. Homosexuals are now authorized to live together in the barracks, but not heterosexual couples. Furthermore, a heterosexual male shouldn't have to live with a homosexual male for the same exact reasons why a woman shouldn't have to live with a heterosexual man. I know many are saying "suck it up, you're in the military", but the same thing can be said in any situation, i.e. to the woman living with the man. What makes your scenario so special and unique?

Next, the infamous showers. There still exist open bays and open showers, but for argument's sake, lets assume that ALL shower facilities are curtained off. Does that make a difference? Would curtains be good enough to convince society to have co-ed showers? Where I'm at, not only do the women use different showers, there's a combination on the lock that only the women know.

Next, basic housing allowances. Most junior enlisted live on post except in cases of dependents. Do you realize how many Soldiers would marry each other for the sake of extra money, nice houses and extra freedom? While there are sham marriages between men and women, it's much more likely to occur with people of the same sex, especially if they are already living together. Totally allowing this to occur with no restrictions would be costly.

Lastly, but not all, the government realizes the previous statement. That is why homosexual couples (at least from my last thread) would not get any additional benefits that a heterosexual couple would receive. Doing this creates yet another discrimination between the couples. Only this time, it's against the homosexuals. Are you willing to say "suck it up" now? Or is that only when it's against heterosexuals?

I gave you some examples, just to satisfy your hunger, but the overall issue is that you are either discriminating or you are not. If you want to end a form of discrimination, then you need to evaluate the entire scenario before making changes. If you're saying stuff like "not a real Soldier" and "middle management", then you obviously have no clue what you're saying and are not knowledgeable enough to be part of the process.

When you evaluate how the military operates, i.e. less rights and freedoms of expression, it's much cheaper and easier just to go with DADTDP. I know that same mentality was used for other forms of discrimination, but just as I said earlier in this thread, if you're accepting discrimination (just as with SSM), one doesn't automatically justify the other. You have to exclusively argue for your argument. If you argue against ALL forms of discrimination, then it does include ALL forms of discrimination, rather you specifically mention them or not.

These examples are not necessarily points to argue against DADTDP, but to demonstrate that there can exist logical reasoning against open homosexuality in an organization that restricts freedom other than fear or hatred. You may not accept it, but you can't deny that they exist. Therefore, something like this shouldn't be changed all willy~nilly, just because you think it should.

If you want it changed, fine, but if your goal is to reduce discrimination, that has to be done after reevaluating everything. It doesn't necessarily have to happen all at once, but there should at least be a plan in place. Else, you're just ADDING more discrimination. If that doesn't bother you, then you can't use "discrimination" or "fairness" in your argument to repeal DADT.

Nilatai wrote:

*Groan*

Do I have to? Will it really be worth my time?


It has nothing to do with sandwiches. Apparently, he believes repealing DADT leads to more discrimination, thinks there's some scenario where discrimination due to sexual orientation is ok (but doesn't offer an example), thinks that there are laws, rules and regulations that openly and blatantly discriminate against sex, skin color, height, weight, age, nationality, national background, family background, & religious preference (but doesn't give examples), forgets yet again that GENDER is why people use the same showers, thinks it's reverse discrimination because two homosexuals can bunk together it's unfair to heterosexual couples (It isn't, because not only is GENDER why they bunk together, but two homo's sleeping in the same barracks don't HAVE to be a couple & are still subject to the same rules regarding fraternization that straights are), believes there're logical reasons for DADT (But offers none), doesn't understand what "lastly" means (by using it midway through his post), thinks there will be more SS "sham" marriages than traditional "sham" marriages (And offers no evidence), & is still afraid the poofs are looking at his wiener.

And again, I offer this elaborate solution:

Screenshot




Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 9:35am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"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 **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#386 Oct 03 2011 at 7:02 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
"Shower Shortz". For the man who has nothing to hide...


...but still wants to.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#387 Oct 03 2011 at 7:28 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
If that's the problem, then the military should be restricted to straight, white, male property owners.

problem solved
____________________________
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.
#388 Oct 03 2011 at 7:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The batshit insane part of this is that people like Alma and Gbaji aren't arguing to expand or protect anyone's rights, they just want to "punish" everyone else.

No one has the "right" to look at your junk so they're not demanding co-ed facilities to expand the men's rights. They're not creating arguments for how co-ed facilities will benefit anyone. They're just engaging in some immature and petty fit of pique saying "If these guys are unhappy, YOU have to be unhappy!"

And they wonder why no one takes them seriously.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#389 Oct 03 2011 at 7:45 AM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
I couldn't really care less if a **** sees my snatch, anyway. I've just been catcalled (among other things) enough times by men with my clothes on that showering in front of them seems entirely unpalatable.

Dudes generally don't catcall other dudes.

Edited, Oct 3rd 2011 8:46am by Sweetums
____________________________
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.
#390 Oct 03 2011 at 7:48 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
So Alma's argument against the repeal of DADT is a child eating a ham sandwich that his mother let him eat, but dinner time approaches and mom doesn't take the sandwich and starts cooking dinner, but someone looking in from the street is enraged saying how the mom doesn't want the kid to have the sandwich?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#391 Oct 03 2011 at 8:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I think it's that the child is eating a sandwich and another child sees that sandwich so, to be fair, the mother has to pull out a sausage for the children to look at.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#392 Oct 03 2011 at 8:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,288 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I think it's that the child is eating a sandwich and another child sees that sandwich so, to be fair, the mother has to pull out a sausage for the children to look at.

Smiley: laugh
#393varusword75, Posted: Oct 03 2011 at 8:11 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#394 Oct 03 2011 at 8:12 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
Turkey sandwiches are superior.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#395 Oct 03 2011 at 8:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
I'm wondering what you got against ham sandwiches.

Antisemite.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#396 Oct 03 2011 at 8:23 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Dudes generally don't catcall other dudes.
Gay guys sure as **** do.
____________________________
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

#397varusword75, Posted: Oct 03 2011 at 8:24 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#398 Oct 03 2011 at 8:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
That's because they love the Jewish people. Try and keep up.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#399 Oct 03 2011 at 8:30 AM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Varus has a **** for Leviticus so if he were interested in following Biblical law, he wouldn't eat it either.
____________________________
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.
#400 Oct 03 2011 at 8:32 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
The biggest flaw in religious practices is that bacon and shrimp are awesome.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#401 Oct 03 2011 at 8:37 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Satan made them that way!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 40 All times are in CDT
BonYogi, Jophiel, Anonymous Guests (38)