AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Free Dating

Gays Being Open In The Military....

posted 5/29/2010 10:44:17 AM |
4 kudosgive kudos what's this?
    report abuse
  casuallylooking


Okay, I am pissed. I mean really pissed.

I read somewhere on the computer the other day, (NO, I can not post the link because I don't remember where I read it) and then I saw it on the news, that they are trying really hard to get rid of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" rule in the military. Gays could openly serve their/our country without having to lie or worry about the truth being found out.
But some are still opposed to it saying gays should not have that right.
What?!? Excuse the hell out of me, but aren't they fighting to protect everyones rights... including the people who don't want to allow them theirs?

Could someone just please explain to me why it really makes a difference if someone risking their life for others is gay or not?

OUR military, be they straight, gay, bi or haven't figured it out yet....are out there every single day risking their lives for US, so that we can continue to live life as we choose.

Of all of our soldiers who have body parts missing or other injuries that will never allow them to be the same again, or the ones who have come back in body bags because they defended this country to their death, Did it really in any way matter which gender they preferred to have as a partner?

Did that change the fact of what they did? The life they lost or the loved ones left behind in moarning?
No, it didn't. and it just sickens me that others judge them and want to tell them they can't be who they are.... but if they do it quietly they can still risk their lives for them.

A bigot is a bigot is a bigot. Although they are entitled to their opinions as much as I am mine, why won't they allow others to their lifes without hiding it or trying to shame them?

To ALL who have ever been....are now ... or ever will be military risking your life for me, for my daughter, my grandchilden and those I love, from the bottom of my heart, I THANK YOU!!!
OohRah!!!

Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)

   read more blogs!

Blogs by casuallylooking:
Daddys Pride...
A Long Drive, But Well Worth It........
Running Away To Assisted Living.....
Sexuality...What Is It To You?
Where Do You Allow Food In Your House?
Gays Being Open In The Military....
Is Disappointing Sex A Deal Breaker?
Is Emotional Attachment Cheating?
Rewards For Arrrests...
Not Sweating The Small Stuff...


Comments:

post a comment!

Lisa46

May 29 @ 10:50AM  
yeah what she said!
dmbchick420

May 29 @ 10:52AM  
I don't understand it either. My husband is a Marine and I asked him about it and it's because it's a "distraction". Distraction for whom? Who gives a shit? I mean....if you are a straight man in the military, how is it a distraction to know there is a gay man around? Who cares?

It's because the straight people are not comfortable with it and cannot accept it....that's what I think. Maybe they are worried some kind of "gay rays" will pierce their skin and somehow make them suddenly gay
ThePurpleProphet

May 29 @ 10:56AM  
The don't ask don't tell rule was sent to recruiters around 1990, while I was still in. I can't beleive it took 20 years to fix.
casuallylooking

May 29 @ 11:01AM  
I asked him about it and it's because it's a "distraction"
ONLY because some allow it to be. Too many people are usually afraid of things they don't understand or are different than their beliefs.

Maybe they are worried some kind of "gay rays" will pierce their skin and somehow make them suddenly gay
I've got quite a few gay friends and if that really worked I know one who would be extremely happy. She has been in love with someone for a lot of years and that girl is straighter than an arrow.
Maybe I should tell her about that gay ray thingy...

Ewe_Wish

May 29 @ 11:40AM  
I know that in the beginning part of the dont ask dont tell rule was to protect the gays...........gay bashing had been a problem in the military.............probably as dmb said they were afraid of the gay rays.............but as usual our military designed a rule that did the complete opposite of what it was suppose to do.

But let's look at it in another view..........gay men have always been portrayed as wimpy, sissy...........flowery..........now anyone with a half of a brain knows that this is not the truth..........but I could see where a bunch of macho men (no not all men in the military are macho acting.....but some are) wouldn't want to serve with someone they thought would sit down and cry instead of fight along with there side. You want to blame someone for this ..............blame the media who portray gay men as sissys.

Then look at how the media portrays gay women...........butch, tough........ball breakers......and thats how they look at a lot of the women of higher rank in the military..............and of course again that isn't true.

Our military needs to realize that sexual orientation has nothing to do with how they serve our Country. Look how long it took for African Americans and the Native Americans to be allowed to serve with the white population of the Military. Being Gay in the military is going to take a while to be accepted............do I think its right..............FUCK NO!!!! I think anyone........of any color, religious belief, or sexual orientation should be treated with the same regard and respect that anyone else in the military should be treated........and that is with our respect and love............I don't care who they are...........what they look like ..........they deserve..............and they damn well should be able to expect our gratitude for serving our Country.............
B9CC1D

May 29 @ 11:45AM  
Occasionally, the United States has allowed "poster boys" like Matlovich to be the face of gays in the military. But what about others?

For the most part, stories of honoring gay veterans are uncommon. Interspersed in our daily routines as an amusing story, meant to let people know that while they do exist, they are a minuscule part of our grand nation.

And maybe that's what some people want: To be remembered as "the good soldier" and not as "the gay soldier".

But the 2000 Census showed that our homosexual veterans now number more than a million strong. Men and women that have fought, bled, and died for our land are far more numerous than simple human interest stories relate, and they deserve the respect that their service to our country has earned.

This weekend, among all weekends, we need to honor and respect the giants whose shoulders we sit on. Even if it is a quiet respect. I believe many of them would appreciate that.
theSkwirl

May 29 @ 2:05PM  
I'll admit I don't understand it either. You are what you are.. it's not a choice.. it's not a disease.. it's certainly not communicable.. get over it.
B9CC1D

May 29 @ 2:18PM  
It's certainly not communicable.

I dunno about that. I have known a few homosexuals, male and female, that like to play the game of "shift the straight person's paradigm."
Sunshine79

May 29 @ 3:29PM  
I don't give a fuck it your gay, purple, transgender, etc......It's wrong to deny someone the right to fight for our country, regardless of what their 'preference' is. It's pure discrimination at it's best.
RJ53

May 29 @ 5:14PM  
Maybe some of these people who are afraid of gays being a distraction are not all that comfortable in their own sexuality.
sugarnspice005

May 29 @ 5:59PM  
I think it's stupid to not let gays join. I agree with the majority here...they want to fight for and serve their country, I see no problem with it. And, as far as I'm concerned....what a person's sexual orientation is shouldn't even be a factor when signing up for the military.

Yep...
A bigot is a bigot is a bigot.

So true!
ShadowMale

May 29 @ 6:15PM  
I know that in the beginning part of the dont ask dont tell rule was to protect the gays

Indeed. And I'm confused as to why people have turned this one so far upside down.... oh wait... human nature, of course. Don't ask, don't tell is NOT an anti-gay policy by design. It was meant to allow gays to serve as long as they don't go around shouting out they are gay. The reason was because this did indeed happen in the past, and it was indeed a distraction. How much of one? I dunno.... but the theory behind the policy wasn't to tell them they can't serve, but rather so they could serve like everyone else without having people ask them if they were or not (DON'T ASK). However, that whole section has been ignored by most, and it has become the DON'T TELL policy to the mainstream media, and the polititians using it as a political stepping stool.

Now, does the policy work as intended? Obviously not anymore.... so we are told. Is it to everyones liking? Is anything? Questions whose answers will never satisfy the people as a whole.

Now moving on to my personal opinion. I don't care if gays serve in the military, so long as they are qualified. Here enters the problem though. Anytime a group, any group, wins something like this, you have those that like to push the envelope to bounds beyond reasonable limits. You will indeed have those that will complain that the only reason they were denied entrance to the military was becuase they were gay. Certainly not because they were unfit, mentally unstable, or any number of reasons that keep ANYONE from currently entering. Certainly not.

So now you have to lower your standards (this has happened before actually, and the military is getting weaker). At some point, you will end up with.... well... with what Saddam had defending his country. I bunch of unconcerned, poorly trained soldiers with no loyalty. History has proven that is never a good thing.

So my word of caution before joining just any old bandwagon to express your desire for any group of people to have their rights heard: Be sure you're on the wagon that is for EQUAL rights, not MORE rights. This is very important.

Now that I said that... I'm gonna mess you all up, by saying that we DO NOT need new legislation for this. That is right. We already have the two documents that states they have the right to serve. What documents? The same two that formed this country in the first place. The Declaration of Independance, and the Constitution. It clearly states that ALL CITIZENS of the US have equal rights.

Now all you need is a Judge with a fucking spine, to enforce the documents we ALEADY have in place, and everything is fine. Adding new paperwork to fix an issue already addressed in a primary document is a waste of time and money better used on other issues. Besides that, its just fucking stupid.

And that.... is how feel about that.
B9CC1D

May 29 @ 7:59PM  
At some point, you will end up with.... well... with what Saddam had defending his country. I bunch of unconcerned, poorly trained soldiers with no loyalty.

So the elite Republican Guard, the guys that we have yet to actually oust from Iraq, are "poorly trained...with no loyalty"?

When a group of a quarter million troops (U.S. Regulars, Reserves, and Mercenaries) who have superior armaments and a regular supply train fail to remove 140,000 troops who's equipment is at least 10 years out of date and without a regular supply infrastructure...well I'd say they are considerably loyal and well trained.

So now you have to lower your standards (this has happened before actually, and the military is getting weaker).

I'd like to know what you mean by "weaker." If you examine the U.S. Roster billets you note an increase of over 10% in deployment over the last 20 years. There has been a definitive increase in funding. Weapons development has scheduled the deployment of the OCIW and radical redesigns (such as reactive armor) have resulted in significant arms technology.

Listen, I agree with you that the policy is outdated, but the reason we need new policy is because we have not even hit a public/national ERA; so how can a "law" be enforced when it's not even there?
B9CC1D

May 29 @ 8:03PM  
I don't give a fuck it your gay, purple, transgender...

I dunno...purple skin could be a sign something is seriously wrong.

Especially ... in this case! This is one dangerous case of the purples!
ShadowMale

May 29 @ 9:22PM  
So the elite Republican Guard, the guys that we have yet to actually oust from Iraq, are "poorly trained...with no loyalty"?

That is like saying our special forces and the regular army is the same thing. Special forces have always picked the cream of the crop, and therefore that point is rather invalid.

When a group of a quarter million troops (U.S. Regulars, Reserves, and Mercenaries) who have superior armaments and a regular supply train fail to remove 140,000 troops who's equipment is at least 10 years out of date and without a regular supply infrastructure...well I'd say they are considerably loyal and well trained.

Last I checked, the Republican Guard wasn't still fighting us in the name of Saddam, and failed to protect him. But again, even if they were hard to defeat, the regular army mostly tossed their weapons to the ground, and let us engage the RG rather effortlessly. And this, with out already weakened forces due to a shift towards reservist that train less than full timers. So I'm not sure where you're going with that.

I'd like to know what you mean by "weaker." If you examine the U.S. Roster billets you note an increase of over 10% in deployment over the last 20 years. There has been a definitive increase in funding. Weapons development has scheduled the deployment of the OCIW and radical redesigns (such as reactive armor) have resulted in significant arms technology.

And King Leonidas marched some 3000 or so troops to thermoplyae and defeated a much higher number of troops before falling. How does numbers mean for true strength? Hitler had a crap load of troops. But towards the end, they were poorly trained, unequipped, and low on moral. Did they win with their numbers? No. Numbers are only good if you have something to back it up with.

Listen, I agree with you that the policy is outdated, but the reason we need new policy is because we have not even hit a public/national ERA; so how can a "law" be enforced when it's not even there?

Again, the policy is in place. All you have to do is enforce it. The Constitution clearly states that all people are to be treated equally, and the federal government already has an equal oppertunity law. Why.... tell me WHY do you need to create more laws to address the same issue? Enforce the ones you have.
theSkwirl

May 29 @ 10:16PM  
Nope, it's not communicable. But, if someone is able to "shift your paradigm", then you weren't exactly "straight" to start with. BTW.. I don't believe that anyone is exactly "straight" or completely "gay". We all have the ability to sex up anyone. And if we are completely honest with ourselves, we've all thought about it.
casuallylooking

May 29 @ 11:17PM  
Now all you need is a Judge with a fucking spine, to enforce the documents
I have to agree that this would be a really good place to start.

I don't want more rights for anyone, be they any color, and gender or sexuality. I just believe they deserve the same/equal rights.
It also shouldn't matter about any of that on entrance exams and tests. If you can't do the job, you don't get the job. Period.

But, if someone is able to "shift your paradigm", then you weren't exactly "straight" to start with
That's pretty much how I view it.

Thanks for the all comments everyone...
tassie1

May 30 @ 12:17AM  
I guess they'd rather they just didn't kiss and tell.
flavorbuster

May 30 @ 9:16AM  
.if you are a straight man in the military, how is it a distraction to know there is a gay man around? Who cares?
A main objective in combat would be to keep the enemy out in front to avoid a rear attack .... In this case it would be a human bayonet.
Maybe they are worried some kind of "gay rays" will pierce their skin and somehow make them suddenly gay
A lot of women will not suck a dick or take one in the ass & in my defense neither will I as a straight male but my point is that straight males may be friends with gay guys in the closet & have no sexual relation whatsoever but afraid of that kind of thing leaking out due to peer pressure.
StraddleMyNose

Jun 1 @ 6:34PM  
I'm pretty much in agreement with Shadow on this one, except for the fact that I don't think the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is outdated. I think it should remain in effect in the military.

free dating | mission statement | testimonials | safety warning | report abuse | safe list | privacy | legal | 2257 | advertise | link to us

© Copyright 2000-2014 Online Singles, LLC.
OS-WEB01
Gays Being Open In The Military....