Go back
House votes to repeal DADT

House votes to repeal DADT

Debates

zeeblebot

silicon valley

Joined
27 Oct 04
Moves
101289
Clock
28 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

a true test of the Democrats' principles!

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
28 May 10
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

I remain ashamed that this paragraph is part of my nation's law:

(15) The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.


And disgusted that anywhere near 40 Senators would insist on retaining it.

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
I remain ashamed that this paragraph is part of my nation's law:

(15) The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.


And disgusted that anywhere near 40 Senators would insist on retaining it.
True. In fact, I think it a good idea if all the soldiers engaged in sexual relations in a time of war or preparing for it. In fact, lets bring in the babes and have coed barraks!! 😵

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
True. In fact, I think it a good idea if all the soldiers engaged in sexual relations in a time of war or preparing for it. In fact, lets bring in the babes and have coed barraks!! 😵
Thanks for the moronic comment.

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
True. In fact, I think it a good idea if all the soldiers engaged in sexual relations in a time of war or preparing for it. In fact, lets bring in the babes and have coed barraks!! 😵
Do you propose not allowing women in the military? Only heterosexual men? With blonde hair and blue eyes, too?

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
Clock
29 May 10
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Do you propose not allowing women in the military? Only heterosexual men? With blonde hair and blue eyes, too?
My only point here is that sexual relations is not allowed in most companies, so why should it be allowed on the battle field? There should be zero tolerance for any sexual relations on the battle fied.

Having said that, sexual relations do occur in the corporate world even though it may not be allowed by company policy. The same can be said of the military. However, one way to reduce the likelyhood of this happening is to remove temptation. That would mean not intermingling the opposite sexes or those who were attracted to the same sex. Perhaps the "gays" could mingle with those of the opposite sex?

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
My only point here is that sexual relations is not allowed in most companies, so why should it be allowed on the battle field? There should be zero tolerance for any sexual relations on the battle fied.

Having said that, sexual relations do occur in the corporate world even though it may not be allowed by company policy. The same can be said of the mil ...[text shortened]... re attracted to the same sex. Perhaps the "gays" could mingle with those of the opposite sex?
DADT is not about sexual relations - at all.

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
Clock
29 May 10
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
DADT is not about sexual relations - at all.
Your right, it is about allowing gays in the military, no?

The question here is, what is the best approach to allow gays in the military if they are allowed in the military? Should they be coed with those who they are sexually attracted to? If so, then why not allow women to be coed with the men?

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
My only point here is that sexual relations is not allowed in most companies, so why should it be allowed on the battle field? There should be zero tolerance for any sexual relations on the battle fied.

Having said that, sexual relations do occur in the corporate world even though it may not be allowed by company policy. The same can be said of the mil ...[text shortened]... re attracted to the same sex. Perhaps the "gays" could mingle with those of the opposite sex?
The end of DADT would probably have no effect on fraternization rules in the military. There is no rule requiring celibacy in the military. The present DADT claims homosexuals are unfit for duty based solely on their sexual preferences. This is nothing more than invidious discrimination without a rational basis.

a
Not actually a cat

The Flat Earth

Joined
09 Apr 10
Moves
14988
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Whereas there's good precedent for homosexuality actually improving military efficacy. You guys should consider making it mandatory.

U

Joined
10 May 09
Moves
13341
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sh76
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/us/politics/28tell.html?hp

The President will sign this bill if it comes to him, his equivocations on this issue notwithstanding. I am not sure it will get through the Senate, however. It's possible the Dems could peel off a Snowe or Collins or Brown to beat a filibuster, but in such a precarious election cycle for the Dems, ...[text shortened]... redict that if DADT falls, in 10 years, people will be wondering what all the fuss was about.
Most polls show very large support for the repeal, so I suspect it's going to happen. From an anecdotal perspective... in my little corner of the military most service members are against it. I fully support it.

U

Joined
10 May 09
Moves
13341
Clock
29 May 10
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by whodey
My only point here is that sexual relations is not allowed in most companies, so why should it be allowed on the battle field? There should be zero tolerance for any sexual relations on the battle fied.

Having said that, sexual relations do occur in the corporate world even though it may not be allowed by company policy. The same can be said of the mil ...[text shortened]... re attracted to the same sex. Perhaps the "gays" could mingle with those of the opposite sex?
Sexual relation are only forbid among seniors and subordinates under the same chain of command, or if adultry is involved.

no1marauder
Naturally Right

Somewhere Else

Joined
22 Jun 04
Moves
42677
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Whereas there's good precedent for homosexuality actually improving military efficacy. You guys should consider making it mandatory.
http://andrejkoymasky.com/liv/fam/bios1/sacred01.html

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
Clock
29 May 10
2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Sexual relation are only forbid among seniors and subordinates under the same chain of command, or if adultry is involved.
So do you feel as though gays should be coed or treated like women in the military? Then again, what if the gays are coed together?

For the record, if men and women are allowed to have sexual relations in the military I would think that this would involve conflicts of interests and, therefore, am opposed to it. I am in no way suggesting that they should remain celebate, however, just that those who work together on the battle field should not have such distractions.

w

Joined
02 Jan 06
Moves
12857
Clock
29 May 10
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
[... in my little corner of the military most service members are against it. I fully support it.[/b]
Why?

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.