Military and Gays.....

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Anne Flaherty, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 18 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Top Army and Air Force officers said Tuesday they would be reluctant to overturn a 17-year policy that prohibits gays from serving openly in the military without more time to ascertain it won't hurt the services.

"I do have serious concerns about the impact of a repeal of the law on a force that is fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight and a half years," Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey told Congress. "We just don't know the impacts on readiness and military effectiveness."

As Casey cautioned the Senate Armed Services Committee against moving too fast to repeal the law, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz made similar remarks before the House.

The carefully crafted comments indicate reluctance among the military's senior ranks to act anytime soon on President Barack Obama's plan to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

Obama says the policy is wrongheaded and should change. Defense Secretary Robert Gates agrees but wants to move slowly, and has ordered a lengthy assessment on how to lift the ban without affecting troops and their families.

Officials expect the study to be complete by the end of the year, but that it could be several more years before the repeal is fully implemented.

In the meantime, congressional Democrats are debating how to advance the issue. Some party members are reluctant to repeal the 1993 law, while others want an immediate moratorium on dismissals.

The testimony by the service chiefs is considered crucial to the debate. As the top uniformed officials in each service, the chief is in charge of recruitment and preparing troops for deployments. If the policy on gays is overturned, they would have to decide how to implement the changes.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, already has said he thinks the law should be changed because it forces gay troops to compromise their integrity by lying about who they are.

On Wednesday, lawmakers will hear from Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway, who is said to be an opponent of lifting the ban, and Adm. Gary Roughead, who is chief of naval operations.

At Tuesday's hearing, Schwartz said he was concerned there is "little current scholarship on this issue" and wants to wait until Gates finishes his assessment.

"This is not the time to perturb the force that is, at the moment, stretched by demands in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere without careful deliberation," Schwartz told the House Armed Services Committee.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which advocates to repeal the law, said it's important to note that Casey and Schwartz didn't oppose Gates' study on how a repeal would be implemented.

"There will continue to be differences around the margins, but at the end of the day, I think the chiefs will salute" the president and other leadership, Sarvis said.

Casey said he would oppose legislation being considered by Sen. Carl Levin, the committee's Democratic chairman, that would force the military to immediately suspend dismissals. Levin, D-Mich., says he wants a moratorium on firings under the law until Congress and the Pentagon can agree on how to repeal the law.

Among the questions likely to be answered through broader legislation is whether the military would recognize gay marriages and extend benefits to gay partners.

Casey and Army Secretary John McHugh said a moratorium on "don't ask, don't tell" would put existing cases in legal limbo and introduce confusion.

"This process is going to be difficult and complicated enough," Casey told Levin. "Anything that complicates it more, I think I would be opposed."

McHugh, a former New York congressman and Republican, said he would support a repeal if that is what the president and Congress decides.

[Long Duck Dong]

they need more time to make sure a change would not hurt the services ????


try looking at a number of the armies and armed services around the world that have already worked out that gays. les and bis in the army do not hurt the service

I served proudly in the nz armed forces along side gays and bis that I would trust with my life and have them watching my back any time..... its some of the heteros that I would never trust with the same job....

what the us armed services are not saying... its they wish to avoid issues like * friendly fire * or * accidents during live round fire *

I remember during a exercise, our sawbones ( medic ) pulled a pack of tampons out of his kit, and a few of the guys laughed about him carrying them and what was he, a closet girl... and the guy just shrugged and said, nope, but you lot will be if you get shot cos I am shoving one of those into you, just like the ladies have to, to deal with the bleeding.... and besides, the ladies do not die from their bleeding so you guys need to toughen up a lil

I still think about that day and laugh.... cos that guy proved that we have more in common than we think, and that yeah, even hetero guys can end up using tampons...lol

[tenni]

"I do have serious concerns about the impact of a repeal of the law on a force that is fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight and a half years," Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey told Congress. "We just don't know the impacts on readiness and military effectiveness."


Although it may be argued that each country's military has some unique qualities, the fear that there would be an impact on readiness and effectiveness may be determined by examining countries where GLBT have been part of the military in an open manner for years. Perhaps, comparing what might be unique about the US military that would make them less effective than those countries who state that acknowledging GLBT has no major impact. That is not to say that there might be some signs of prejudice and bigotry but it may be no greater than suspecting that some are GLBT in the military.

In the Canadian military same sex married couples live on the bases just as opposite sex married couples. It may be just aclimatizing to the reality. I suspect that the above statement is based on fear and perhaps even bigotry.

[tenni]

ARe you saying that your military is not capable of dealing with this issue effectively? All the money that your society spends on your military can not figure out how to deal with this issue? Where there is a will, there will be a way. Come on Pasa. How much different is a redneck Canadian hetero boy from a redneck USAmerican heteroboy?

Wasn't the same argument used to keep Blacks separate from Whites in the military for years?

[darkeyes]

Of course you do.

The above statement is based upon not knowing how hetero servicemen will react to finding out that the person they are roomates/bunkmates/showermates with is gay. It's a valid concern. And they don't want to find out while we're in the field. Also a valid concern.

I don't think they are saying 'no' as a long term answer. I read this as saying 'wait till we're not fighting two wars and can do this the right way.'

Pasa

Ther is a plethora of armies, navies an air forces out ther who hav no bar on gays... r u sayin that the US military hasn studied them an how things go wiv them Pasa? Cos me reckons they kno zactly wot 2 expect if an wen they finally get round 2 doin the rite thing.. an more or less how 2 deal wiv it...

[tenni]

I have a cousin who was a high ranking Canadian military person. I recall him telling me about the problems about how some men reacted to women in the military. Yes, there were some men that created problems. They were held accountable. He said that some men just couldn't get it through their head that women were equal to them. Education was the way to deal with it and if that didn't work then there were consequences for redneck men in the military.

Why not the same approach with GLBT in the military? What is right is right. It may not be perfect but you need to start now. You are way behind a lot of other countries. (I thought that the US liked being #1?) There will always be someone arguing that this is not the time to do something...because.....yada yada.

[TwylaTwobits]

Personally, I think the caution that the government is using, is ridiculous. There are plenty of people in the military who KNOW that the person they rely on to save their ass is not straight and they don't care. As long as their ass gets saved.


Now let's please not turn this into a country vs country thread. Leave that to the Olympics..oh yeah USA is still top on medal count :p

[12voltman59]

I have been following the case of a man who comes from my area who is set to be discharged after nearly 20 years in the US Air Force for one reason and one reason alone---he got "outed" as being gay---by a civillian.

Here are some stories done on the case by my local paper:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/dont-ask-dont-tell-policy-change-eagerly-awaited-by-area-air-force-officer-524598.html

http://www.daytondailynews.com/opinion/columnists/commentary-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy-costing-military-207155.html

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/136024.html?cxntnid=bn-052709&imw=Y

Here is an OP/ED piece where Lt. Col. Fehrenbach states his case:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/opinion/entries/2010/02/11/victor_fehrenbach_ridding_mili.html

It seems like in the case of Lt. Col Fehrenbach and others like him that have gotten some media attention----they had performed their duties in the service with the highest degree of professionalism, integrity, etc.--with the only factor changing is that they got outed in some fashion as being gay.

Gen Casey expresses his concern about what effect that changing DADT now would have---but the fact is---in many of the cases now going on---those who serve with the officers and enlisted people being booted for being gay often tend to say that the ones being booted were some of the best liked and respected people in the unit and their loss due to DADT certainly affected unit morale and such.

The services hardly let people leave right now when their enlistment contracts end if the person is deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan or let them retire--but they sure as hell will boot someone for being gay--and worst of all---as was noted in one of those articles---the services have in cases allowed people with felony arrests for things like drug possession, use and sales or worse because they need to fill the ranks--but yet they boot long serving, well trained and high quality, superior performing people because they are gay!!

Here is a story about "gangbangers" in the services--no problem with that apparently!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gqShQTSDCM

[FalconAngel]

Although it may be argued that each country's military has some unique qualities, the fear that there would be an impact on readiness and effectiveness may be determined by examining countries where GLBT have been part of the military in an open manner for years. Perhaps, comparing what might be unique about the US military that would make them less effective than those countries who state that acknowledging GLBT has no major impact. That is not to say that there might be some signs of prejudice and bigotry but it may be no greater than suspecting that some are GLBT in the military.

Actually, the problem with comparing the US military to other nations' military forces, where GLBT members are accepted, is that we have some pretty strong, puritanical prejudices to get over.
Here's some examples;

In the War of the Rebellion, Blacks were considered inferior to whites and were, for the largest part, prohibited from fighting.

In WWI, the only country that would allow black combat pilots was France.

All the way until Korea, units were segregated by color.

Up until just prior to WWII, in our entire history, women were not allowed to serve in the military at all.
They were allowed to be civilian nurses only (with the exception of the occasional Vivandiere during the War of the Rebellion).
And even after that, they were not allowed into anything approximating front line hospital (MASH) units until Korea.
This, of course, does not take into account the WWII cases of female civilian pilots who operated as basic CFI's for the Air Corp, nor does it include the WASP's, which were a separate class of pilot themselves and never saw combat, officially.

And Gays have often functioned as members of the military, but only in the closet.

And all of those changes were fought, tooth and nail, by society and the military.

I think that this is one of the last prejudices that we need to overcome in this country.


In the Canadian military same sex married couples live on the bases just as opposite sex married couples. It may be just aclimatizing to the reality.

Again, this is a prejudice based on our Puritan-influenced American society and it will take time. But, at least there is some progress.....slow, though it be.

[tenni]

Falcon
I would write that up until around WW2, that Canada and Britain probably had the same prejudice and discrimination in their military that was comparable to the US. In Canada, I believe that Blacks and indigenous people were not initially accepted into the military in 1939 but as the need for more soldiers increased they were conscripted. Some units remained segregated but other Blacks and Indigenous were integrated. Women in combat were not accepted until the 80's. So, Canada and maybe Britain were not that more progressive than the US. Maybe, the point might be not to accept a resistance for more progressive approaches. Don't accept their excuses or maybe Obama may be a one term President and bingo...nothing will change for another 13 years or so?

Gays and Lesbians have been able to serve openly in the Canadian military since 1992. Some might argue that eighteeen years is not that long but during that time same sex marriages also came in to existence since it began to be legally acknowledged in the early mid 2000's. Canada may be backstepping with tolerance of difference with our present regressive neo con government but I hope that these initiatives do not slip away. We have a very nasty government right now..in my opinion. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) that is stronger than your Bill of Rights as far as minorities getting equal treatment. However, this same nasty government seems to be trying to find ways around many things. I shiver if they con their way to ignore many rights. I know that you just went through such an abuse of power recently. In that sense it is funny how we often follow the US both positively or negatively in some areas. In others, with liberal governments and the Charter we have been ahead of the US. Keep urging change?

[dman82]

Tenni: I am bi and I spent 6 years in the US Military in the closet only to them. There may be alot of money spent but there is never enough to go around to get each soldier the right equiptment. It is all spent on trying to make new things work that they turn around and never use anyway. I served with guys that have and Vietnam Era equiptment to use.

Falcon: Women still are not allowed to serve in the Infantry, Navy Seals, Army Rangers, or Delta Force, because they don't want women on the front lines.

I love America and my freedom of speech, because I served for our basic rights as humans, but I fear my government. Besides how many people does it take to run this country? Should take one, like him or not, our Commander in Chief, Obama. But every Senator and Congressmen wants to throw their weight around and try to make make the rules. I say "Let him fuck up on his own if he is going to fuck up. Then you can clean up after his mess and get someone new in office."

[darkeyes]

Tenni: I am bi and I spent 6 years in the US Military in the closet only to them. There may be alot of money spent but there is never enough to go around to get each soldier the right equiptment. It is all spent on trying to make new things work that they turn around and never use anyway. I served with guys that have and Vietnam Era equiptment to use.

Falcon: Women still are not allowed to serve in the Infantry, Navy Seals, Army Rangers, or Delta Force, because they don't want women on the front lines.

I love America and my freedom of speech, because I served for our basic rights as humans, but I fear my government. Besides how many people does it take to run this country? Should take one, like him or not, our Commander in Chief, Obama. But every Senator and Congressmen wants to throw their weight around and try to make make the rules. I say "Let him fuck up on his own if he is going to fuck up. Then you can clean up after his mess and get someone new in office."

Do you want to retain freedom of not hun? One man running the country? I think not. Remember Hitler? And Uncle Jo? Do you wish to live in a democracy or not? You cannot elect people to a legislature and then prevent them from legislating.. the legislature is a check on the executive during its term of office.. on our behalf.. and we are a check on them whenever there is an election... such is representative or parliamentary democracy..

[dman82]

Dark Eyes I mean congress and senate shoud be there to clean up after him. Not to boss him around. And I did say that in my last post. There are too many congress men and senators that are getting paid too much to do jack shit while our economy and budget suffers. I did my time in the military so that I can say fuck congressmen and senators advise the President like you are paid to, don't try to do his job. And next time Dark Eyes read and understand the entire post before replying.

[darkeyes]

Dark Eyes I mean congress and senate shoud be there to clean up after him. Not to boss him around. And I did say that in my last post. There are too many congress men and senators that are getting paid too much to do jack shit while our economy and budget suffers. I did my time in the military so that I can say fuck congressmen and senators advise the President like you are paid to, don't try to do his job. And next time Dark Eyes read and understand the entire post before replying.

As I understand it the founding fathers created a balanced democracy where no part of government could become too powerful. They had enough of overpowering Godlike government from this side of the water. You had a revolution to achieve it, and if I was alive then I know which side I would have been on..

You may well be right about your senators and congressmen. We say the same very often about our parliamentary representatives. Senate and Congress are not merely advisors and neither should they be. Of course that is a part of their function, but not all. I understood very well what you wrote so don't be such an insulting pompous ass. I understood from the words your wrote. What you have posted now I understand also.. and gell the two posts, you say nothing which changes my reading of either.

You seem to forget that the president is the servant of the people, not its master. The elected bodies of your country are also servants of the people, and as such it is, or at least should be, their job to ensure that no President abuses his power.

I'm not quite sure you have gotten to grips with this democracy lark, sweetheart.. maybe you should read up about what representative democracy actually means and is in your country..

[tenni]

dman82
From my perspective you seem to have mentioned four topics in this post?
a/ bi men in the military
b/ poor equipment for the military
c/ women in the military
d/ your government structure


I see two of these topics relating to this thread. You mention fear of your government. Is that as a bisexual guy or fear about how your government is presently working? Do you think that because women are not permitted on the front lines that the same may end up applying to gays and bisexuals?(sort of a phobia reaction?)


Tenni: I am bi and I spent 6 years in the US Military in the closet only to them. There may be alot of money spent but there is never enough to go around to get each soldier the right equiptment. It is all spent on trying to make new things work that they turn around and never use anyway. I served with guys that have and Vietnam Era equiptment to use.

Falcon: Women still are not allowed to serve in the Infantry, Navy Seals, Army Rangers, or Delta Force, because they don't want women on the front lines.

I love America and my freedom of speech, because I served for our basic rights as humans, but I fear my government. Besides how many people does it take to run this country? Should take one, like him or not, our Commander in Chief, Obama. But every Senator and Congressmen wants to throw their weight around and try to make make the rules. I say "Let him fuck up on his own if he is going to fuck up. Then you can clean up after his mess and get someone new in office."

[FalconAngel]

I forgot to mention the Tuskeegee Airmen (WWII) in my chronology of military prejudice and segregation.

Thanks, Realist for pointing that out to me.

The real point of all of that, is that many of the same things and kinds of things were said about allowing Blacks and women to serve in our military. So far, the puritans, racists and sexists have been wrong. So what makes them think that they are right about gays in the military?

Kind of makes you think, doesn't it.

[FalconAngel]

Falcon
I would write that up until around WW2, that Canada and Britain probably had the same prejudice and discrimination in their military that was comparable to the US. In Canada, I believe that Blacks and indigenous people were not initially accepted into the military in 1939 but as the need for more soldiers increased they were conscripted. Some units remained segregated but other Blacks and Indigenous were integrated. Women in combat were not accepted until the 80's. So, Canada and maybe Britain were not that more progressive than the US. Maybe, the point might be not to accept a resistance for more progressive approaches. Don't accept their excuses or maybe Obama may be a one term President and bingo...nothing will change for another 13 years or so?

Well, one of the differences in our two countries is the influences that were part of what built them.

While both have strong English influences, Canada has less of the Puritanical English influences and more influence from the French, than the US does. That may be a larger factor in the acceptance of multi-culturalism and such than either of us may realize.
Since the French have been, at least in the past 150 years or so, far more accepting of change than the English/British culture has been. The English just love to hang on to tradition, no matter how good or bad that tradition may be. That influence, or lack thereof, will affect the ease with which our two cultures either accept or don't accept that change.

While we are both from similar cultures, they are not identical cultures, so each culture will not behave quite the same.


Gays and Lesbians have been able to serve openly in the Canadian military since 1992. Some might argue that eighteeen years is not that long but during that time same sex marriages also came in to existence since it began to be legally acknowledged in the early mid 2000's. Canada may be backstepping with tolerance of difference with our present regressive neo con government but I hope that these initiatives do not slip away. We have a very nasty government right now..in my opinion. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) that is stronger than your Bill of Rights as far as minorities getting equal treatment. However, this same nasty government seems to be trying to find ways around many things. I shiver if they con their way to ignore many rights. I know that you just went through such an abuse of power recently. In that sense it is funny how we often follow the US both positively or negatively in some areas. In others, with liberal governments and the Charter we have been ahead of the US. Keep urging change?

All countries go through change that will affect something or everything in each country. What each country does as that change occurs, will affect the attitudes in that country. Whether for good or ill, change, being a constant state of all things, even governments cannot staunch the flow of change.

We have come a long way since the founding of each of our nations and that is promising, even if it is progress with some back-stepping and stumbling along the way.

[MarieDelta]

The problem is - it is the same old tune from the same old crew.

Yes we are fighting two wars. Wars which at the moment are exhausting our fighting men and women. Tours that are too long, and are repeated too soon. Combined with "stop losses" for critical occupations.

The gay men and women in our military - often get the rough end of the shaft.
There were lesbians serving under Eisenhower in WWII _ He asked one of the female company commanders to make a list and report each of the lesbians so that they could be put out of the service. I think her response was that's fine , but my name will lead the list. The secretary that was taking notes commented that the commanders name will be second on the list, my name will be first. Seems like most of the file clerks and nurses were lesbian._

The problem is partly in the application of DADT, it seems as if they are still putting people out like they were under the old rules. "If we get a whiff that you are gay, you are gone." It seems that they could be a lot looser with the application of that particular rule and it would solve some problems.


Now dont get me wrong, I'm not saying DADT is right, however maybe there is a middle step here? Don't change the policy (yet), change the application of the policy.

Just my opinion , of course.

[dman82]

dman82
From my perspective you seem to have mentioned four topics in this post?
a/ bi men in the military
b/ poor equipment for the military
c/ women in the military
d/ your government structure


I see two of these topics relating to this thread. You mention fear of your government. Is that as a bisexual guy or fear about how your government is presently working? Do you think that because women are not permitted on the front lines that the same may end up applying to gays and bisexuals?(sort of a phobia reaction?)

Dark Eyes read this one!

Well Tenni someone had said the Government spends alot on the Military. They do but it is on shit that never gets used or trying to create things and fix mistakes on those things. So money is spent on our military but I feel it is not always properly.
Women in the military, whoever you believe in bless them for being brave enough to fight for our rights. But with the womens equality act they should be able to be in some of these specialized units that only men are alowed. To me that is saying that women are equals to men just not in the military. I feel our lives are equal and if they want to be in that type of unit more power to them.

Gays les and bis in the military. At least they have the courage and guts to do it. Too bad there are too many judgemental assholes that are afraid of someone that is different or of their own hidden desires. All I basically said is I am bi and I was military. It sucked being in the closet to them but I had too.

As far as my fear of my government and this is where the stupid bitch Dark Eyes needs to understand "IT'S MY FUCKING OPINON! I SERVED MY COUNTRY SO I MAY HAVE THIS OPINION AND OTHERS MAY HAVE THEIRS!" The president should be the only one to pass laws and make decisions for the country as a whole. And I never said the President was to be master. Compair him to a parent, he got elected becasue he is suppose to know better for our country, kiss our wounds and make them all better. There are too many senators and congressmen telling him what to do instead of assisting by informing him of their states intrest. And the good thing about my country is that there are rights reserved to the states meaning the state can make rules and regualtions that fit properly for their state. Which is why Louisiana still uses a French based system and is the only state that does. But to get back on track, because of all these people trying to be president whe they aren't they could fuck something up so bad and we all wind up dead somehow. They may cut the wrong budget, health care, you name it. They can fuck things up for the lower class and not care as long as their back pockets are lined.

And sorry to others that feel I am an ass for this. But Dark Eyes if you can not respect the fact I served my country and am intitled to my opinion of my governments major flaws, then you fail to see what freedom truely is. That is why I called you a bitch, I don't feel like you respect that fact. America is great because of our freedoms but try surviving here on low income with a horrific economy hearing of all the stupid shit the government is doing because senate or congress did something and the President didn't stop it.

[darkeyes]

I have never uttered a word of disrespect about you serving your country in whatever capacity.. so I don't have a clue why you have decided to have a go at me over that. I have questioned your understanding of representative democracy and how it works..and tried to explain why it is what it is... no more than that and you don't seem to have learned anything.. because what you are saying is that your President should have supreme power for his term of office and no one other than he should have any say in the laws and decisions which affect all Americans.. that hun is dictatorship..authoritarianism.. its how Hitler won power and we know where that led.. is that what you want for your country? If it is then you are going the right way about it...

.. you know nothing about me really, sweetheart.. but I will tell you I am a pacifist.. that is well known on this site, and is another little gem for you to get your head around and your teeth into..yet my pacifism will not stop me offering respect to any who stands up for his or her beliefs, civilian or military. I may hate violence and think war is futile and an unnecessary destruction of human life and the environment, yet many soldiers, sailors and airmen have selflessly sacrificed their lives for others in both war and peace... and not always their friends.. many have sacrificed themselves for those considered to be their enemy. How could I not respect that?? I may not like the machine, and may hate many of the things it does, but I do respect human beings.. at least until they prove to me they are not worthy of that respect..

[12voltman59]

Now dont get me wrong, I'm not saying DADT is right, however maybe there is a middle step here? Don't change the policy (yet), change the application of the policy.

Just my opinion , of course.

Actually--there are recommendations to put a sort of moratorium in place on DADT based discharges during the period they are going to be studying and re-evalutaing DADT and coming up with ways to move to a post-DADT military.

That only seems fair--it seems that Lt. Col Fehrenbach's discharge has sort of fallen into limbo because there is a growing consensus among policy makers to do away with DADT.

[dman82]

Dark Eyes shut the fuck up now. Once again you have failed to understand me. Im sorry I didn't make my opinon easy for idiots to read. It felt with the way you twisted my words you were disrespecting me and my opinion. I never once said I want dictatorship or worded anything to come off as I do. I am normaly a peaceful man but you are pissing me off by twisting my words like an immature little school aged child. You don't know me, where I come from, where I have been, or my current struggles. Why don't you move to America and try to live here being broke as hell and see how fast you want to see the government change. And tell you once again Dark Eyes my basic opinoin is that there are too many people trying to run this country and make it to where they are basically filling their own back pockets while screwing over the people they are serving and the President does nothing to stop it. Now please don't respond to me any more I am sick and tired of you downing my hard earned opinoin and trying to turn me into Nazi. Take a notice to the entire forum and see that I am the only one who has stated a view point freely admitting to having been in the US Military. All I wanted to do was make a view point from that prospective, not to have my words twisted and have some bitch try to make me into a Nazi.
To all others reading this im sorry you have to see this display. But I am defending myself because I feel she has completely degraded me and my opinion.

[darkeyes]

I have not tried to make you look to be a nazi.. I have questioned your understanding of representative democracy, and your understanding of what giving your president the power you wish him to have would mean... and some day, by doing what you wish, you would have a nazi in the white house sooner or later, with my bet being on the sooner...and then where would you be? Where would gay bisexual and transpeeps be? Germans by the millions gave Hitler such a mandate as you wish your president to have, and within a year the world began to hurtle down the road to ruin and destruction.. that didnt make all those millions nazi's, although many certainly were.. but it did make them naive..

Fine you are proud of having been in the military.. you first raised that with me! I had no intention of taking issue with that, and still don't wish to discuss it, merely to query what you understand as being the responsibilities of your President, your Senate and House of Representatives.. How you can construe that as having no respect for your military service I havent a bloody clue. Many friends of mine on this site have served in the US military and we too argue like buggery about many things.. even war and pacifism.. yet we remain friends and I have the utmost respect for them as human beings..

..if you think I should shut me gob then that too is your right.. but equally my right is to open it heartily when faced with someone who seems to be unable to understand simple English and reads into things written I have simply never said... what I feel is not a lack of respect for you..it is a huge amount of frustration and exasperation at your apparent inability to read what is written and understand what it says...

[darkeyes]

I am going to try and draw a line under our little dispute, dman me luff.. what I have tried to get over to you is not any disrespect for you in any way. I support equal treatment for all in the military of all nations, and the rights of gay, bisexual and transgendered people to live openly as what and who they are for the entire length of their service. I believe in that whoever people are and whatever their job. No I do not like the military or its essential purpose, indeed my beliefs loathe it, yet I do not loathe those who serve, for they believe in the rightness of what they are doing. I may loathe many of the actions of the military but many are also worthy of respect.

What I have been trying to get over to you is that should your country go down the route you wish it to politically.. you will ultimately not achieve your aims and dreams.. you are much more likely to find the entire process put into reverse gear and return to a less tolerant society where people like us are persecuted and driven back into the closet simply to save life and limb..

I have explained, or at least tried to explain as clearly as I can, the purpose of my responses to you. As you believe what you do, and express what you have every right to say, let me retain and express my own beliefs and ideals.. they are pertinent to the thread, and they are forthright.. but by no stretch of the imagination are they disrespectful..:)

[tenni]

dman82
I find that your posts have some interesting contradictions. You write about the freedoms of your country but this thread is about how gays do not have the freedom to be public about their sexuality and still able to remain in the military? That is not being free. You might want to re examine how you have bought into the US myth about having freedoms. Dude....other countries' bisexuals and gays have freedoms that you do not have whether it being free to be public about their sexuality and remain in the military or same sex marriage. There are more if you opened your eyes and stopped buying into your government's propoganda. I mean yes you are freer if you compare yourself to Saudi Arabia or Iran but not as free as in other countries.

You write about you should be permitted to express your thoughts because you served in your military but tell darkeyes to "shut the fuck up"? Is it, "I have rights and freedoms but others do not and that is ok" as your premise?

[dman82]

dman82
I find that your posts have some interesting contradictions. You write about the freedoms of your country but this thread is about how gays do not have the freedom to be public about their sexuality and still able to remain in the military? That is not being free. You might want to re examine how you have bought into the US myth about having freedoms. Dude....other countries' bisexuals and gays have freedoms that you do not have whether it being free to be public about their sexuality and remain in the military or same sex marriage. There are more if you opened your eyes and stopped buying into your government's propoganda. I mean yes you are freer if you compare yourself to Saudi Arabia or Iran but not as free as in other countries.

You write about you should be permitted to express your thoughts because you served in your military but tell darkeyes to "shut the fuck up"? Is it, "I have rights and freedoms but others do not and that is ok" as your premise?

Well Tenni because of the don't ask don't tell policy I could not tell my fellow soldiers I am bi. I had tried to do that once before with someone I thought I could trust. He went to the company commander and I had to play it off as I was just playing a joke on him and never got the chance to tell him I was kidding. The US military holds that policy of don't ask and don't tell. I think it is screwed up because I felt free to be me well away from anyone I knew in the military, but once the uniform was on and I was around my fellow soldiers I had to be a different me.
I know then why join? I found out I was bi long after I joined. And thats an entirely different story. But I had family members that had been military, and to me it means honor, and duty. If I had to go help out hurricane survivors after the storm, or any other disaster survivors I would have. I may not agree with everything the military does, but I get why we have it to protect ourselves, and our friendly countries in times of need.
I realize I have been argueing with Dark Eyes and I am going to be the bigger person and just drop it after this. I was pissed with her because with how my words have been twisted. She has her freedom to think as she wishes but, I felt like she was saying I am a Nazi and want a Nazi country. Hell no! We as Americans have the right to impeach our Persident and get him out of office if we feel he is taking us down the wrong path. I know how my government is to be ran. Do I think it is being ran like it is suppose to? Again hell no.
My first reply I was going to make as my only because it was to be from a service members point of view who had to keep himself in the closet around other service members. I made one remark about my government and it got blown out of wack and somehow between Dark Eyes and myself we went completely off the orgoinal topic. To all other readers I am sorry. And to Dark Eyes lets just agree we don't understand eachother, only eachother, burry the hatchet, and if we want to talk or argue with eachother we don't do it like this. Nobody wants to see 2 people argue and bitch eachother out. We are 2 adults we need to act like it. Im sorry for things I said about you, and how I read you were talking about me. As I said we don't understand eachother and eachother alone.

[tenni]

dman82
I don't know how this thread is going but I read your last post and now I do not see it in the thread?

Anyway, I just want to write that you have shown yourself to be an honourable man with your apolgy. I'm sorry for you that you experienced that near "outing" in the military. It must have been disappointing to realize that someone that you thought that you could trust would tell your superiors.

Again, you are a gentleman sir!

[Cherokee_Mountaincat]

Damn! I didnt realize that this was going to turn into such a blood bath! Ya'll chill and just agree to disagree and be done with it. Dman, altho I'm not happy with your actions I applaude that you later came back and apologised to Fran. If you had such strong opinions and Wording, you should have taken it off board. But thank you for being honorable and stepping up.

Fran, we love ya Babygirl. :}

Peace Keeping Cat....lol

[darkeyes]

Well Tenni because of the don't ask don't tell policy I could not tell my fellow soldiers I am bi. I had tried to do that once before with someone I thought I could trust. He went to the company commander and I had to play it off as I was just playing a joke on him and never got the chance to tell him I was kidding. The US military holds that policy of don't ask and don't tell. I think it is screwed up because I felt free to be me well away from anyone I knew in the military, but once the uniform was on and I was around my fellow soldiers I had to be a different me.
I know then why join? I found out I was bi long after I joined. And thats an entirely different story. But I had family members that had been military, and to me it means honor, and duty. If I had to go help out hurricane survivors after the storm, or any other disaster survivors I would have. I may not agree with everything the military does, but I get why we have it to protect ourselves, and our friendly countries in times of need.
I realize I have been argueing with Dark Eyes and I am going to be the bigger person and just drop it after this. I was pissed with her because with how my words have been twisted. She has her freedom to think as she wishes but, I felt like she was saying I am a Nazi and want a Nazi country. Hell no! We as Americans have the right to impeach our Persident and get him out of office if we feel he is taking us down the wrong path. I know how my government is to be ran. Do I think it is being ran like it is suppose to? Again hell no.
My first reply I was going to make as my only because it was to be from a service members point of view who had to keep himself in the closet around other service members. I made one remark about my government and it got blown out of wack and somehow between Dark Eyes and myself we went completely off the orgoinal topic. To all other readers I am sorry. And to Dark Eyes lets just agree we don't understand eachother, only eachother, burry the hatchet, and if we want to talk or argue with eachother we don't do it like this. Nobody wants to see 2 people argue and bitch eachother out. We are 2 adults we need to act like it. Im sorry for things I said about you, and how I read you were talking about me. As I said we don't understand eachother and eachother alone.

There was no need 2 apologise hun. Im a big lil girl and can take a gud slaggin...I was a lil exasperated cos u didnt seem 2 understand the points I was making. I only read as things were written and didnt twist, or at least didnt deliberately twist anything u said. I dont go out 2 deliberately antagonise normally unless people are totally out of order (which you were not let me say here) and didnt this time either. But you felt upset and irritated by what I said and how it was said, and if I dont regret those words, which were meant as debating points nothing else, I do regret any distress they may have caused you or indeed anyone else.

I am not sure we misunderstood either, but we certainly were not the greatest meeting of minds.. please dont get upset with anything I say. I can be quite inflammatory sometimes, and maybe even controversial (and nuts some would say), but its the idea I take issue with normally, not its messenger..:)

Please feel free to take issue with every word I write if u disagree with it.. I love debate and encourage people to take issue with me.. debate is how we move on in this world.. and I wont take it personally honest;)..