LGBT

Don't Ask, Don't Tell Revisited

|

Democratic Rep. Martin T. Meehan yesterday said he will introduce legislation repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that allows homosexuals to serve in the armed forces…. 

A 2005 Government Accountability Office report says more than 10,000 members of the armed services, including 750 service members with specialties "critical" to the war on terror, have been discharged since the policy was implemented….

The bill, "Military Readiness Enhancement Act," has 109 co-sponsors, including three Republicans. Nonetheless, it faces opposition from many lawmakers, including House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton, Missouri Democrat.

"It's not going anywhere," said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a group that opposes allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. "Even the Democrats I've talked to don't want to touch this bill. It's very straight-forward, people who are homosexual are not compatible with the military's standards of service."…

A December 2006 Zogby International poll found that 73 percent of military service members were "comfortable" serving with homosexuals.

More here.

NEXT: Contributors

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “people who are homosexual are not compatible with the military’s standards of service.”.”

    fuck you, Elaine. Go give yourself a lame nickname. Fuck you.

  2. “It’s very straight-forward, people who are homosexual are not compatible with the military’s standards of service.”…”
    Umm, every gay man/lesbian I know can pick up a gun. Just because you’re gay doesn’t mean you can’t fire straight.

  3. “Democratic Rep. Martin T. Meehan yesterday said he will introduce legislation repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that allows homosexuals to serve in the armed forces….”

    NotGonnaFuckingHappen. Sorry.

    “A December 2006 Zogby International poll found that 73 percent of military service members were “comfortable” serving with homosexuals.”

    If by “serving with” they mean “laughing when a ‘homo’ gets his skull bashed in.”

  4. I think this is the opportunity for the liberals to use gay rights as a wedge issue for a change. They’re letting their ideology interfere with national defense.

    I picture an ad like the “Disappearing Equipment” ad that was run against John Kerry, except instead of a B-2 vanishing, it’s the soldier running ammunition up to his buddy in a foxhole.

  5. Hmmmm…..you can handle incoming artilery rounds but a gay man in your unit just makes you uncomfortable?

  6. This is just another vast right wing conspiracy! to kill off homosexuals. Now they will be “Enticed” to sign up, ship off, and die in the desert.

  7. Now they will be “Enticed” to sign up, ship off, and die in the desert.

    Not with those ugly new uniforms that have been foisted on the Army they won’t ๐Ÿ™‚

  8. “Don’t ask, don’t tell” always seemed like a reasonable compromise to me.

  9. Dan T.,

    Imagine if you could lose your job if any of your coworkers learned that you had a wife or girlfriend. In the meantime, they all talk about their wives and girlfriends, and occasionally ask you about yours.

  10. So, here we are, a nation that considers itself to be the most civilized in the world, and we’re discriminating against homosexuals in the army. It’s almost tantamount to the African-American Civil Rights movement – minus the lynchings and violence. Forget the fact that they might be among the toughest, most intelligent, most driven individuals this country has to offer…forget that they might be willing to place their life in danger to save our “great nation”…forget all that…they’re gay. Obviously, they are the biggest threat to the military since blacks & women were allowed to join.

  11. I’ll just parrot the SF guys over on Blackfive.net:

    “If I am lying by the road bleeding, I don’t care if the medic coming to save me is gay. I just hope he is one of those buff gay guys who are always in the gym so he can throw me over his shoulder and get me out of there.”

  12. Dan T.,

    Imagine if you could lose your job if any of your coworkers learned that you had a wife or girlfriend. In the meantime, they all talk about their wives and girlfriends, and occasionally ask you about yours.

    I’m not saying it’s the ideal, only that it’s a reasonable compromise.

  13. I don’t know how it is throughout the military, but in the small slice of the Navy I experience in the mid-90’s, there were q couple of gay people assigned to our ship. Everyone knew they were gay (including the CDR). Nobody seemed to care.

    Which is as it should be.

  14. VM, can’t you respond to someone with a different opinion without obscenities?

  15. Not to a bigot. But thank you for your concern.

  16. I’m not saying it’s the ideal, only that it’s a reasonable compromise.

    For who, Dan? Politicians? Because the whole notion just reeks of absurd discrimination.

    If the Zogby Poll is correct, and 73 percent of service members are comfortable serving with homosexuals, why bother keeping yet another stupid law?

  17. I can’t, and won’t speak for the military as a whole, or the people I serve with, but this active duty veteran and current reservist doesn’t give a flying shit what gender his comrades prefer to get it on with.

  18. Are you guys stupid?

    How are we gonna dodge the draft if they let gays in the military? I’m COUNTING on getting the gay boot when they come for me.

  19. I can think of a few really homophobic guys in my reserve unit, and they get teased to no end.

    We had a few guys (and way more than a few women) on active duty that were obviously gay, and nobody gave a damn, aside from a few idiots talking smack.

  20. Not suitable for the millitary’s standards of service…hmm, ok. Well thats an easy fix, CHANGE THE STANDARDS.

    You know, so they comply with that piece of paper.

  21. “You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”

    -Barry Goldwater

  22. Wingnut,

    I really think it is a generational issue. I know few people in the military and under the age of 40 who really care if they lets gays serve openly. Society has changed. Maybe 40 years ago the policy made sense but it doesn’t anymore. The whole thing has just become a football in the culture wars.

    Also, I have known a few people, mostly women, who seemed to play on the other team and all but one of them were not just good but great officers and no one cared that they were gay even though you had to be an idiot not to notice.

  23. Raot,

    There’s a difference between responding to someone who has a different preference in shampoo than you and responding to someone who wants to discriminate against large groups of people out of ignorance and bigotry.

  24. John,

    I agree, it is mostly a generational issue.

  25. For who, Dan? Politicians? Because the whole notion just reeks of absurd discrimination.

    If the Zogby Poll is correct, and 73 percent of service members are comfortable serving with homosexuals, why bother keeping yet another stupid law?

    I guess I’m pretty comfortable with letting the military decide for themselves who they want to admit. They know better than I do what works as far as morale, etc.

  26. I thought Goldwater was the best outspoken critic of DADT

    “Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar,” said Goldwater, who died in 1998. “They’ll be serving long after we’re all dead and buried.”

    He called “don’t ask, don’t tell” tell a compromise policy that hides the issue and undermines military readiness.

    He also attacked Clinton directly. “He’s the commander in chief. He’s suppose to say ‘Left Face’ and the military should all pivot. Anyone still looking sideways needs to go”

  27. It’s about time they brought this issue back up. The miltary is stretched thin enough as it is. They need more people, not less.

  28. My only concern is that we don’t create another victim group complete with complaints and law suits. Frankly I don’t care who you are having sex with and wouldn’t care if they applied don’t ask don’t tell to straight people. How about no one talk about their sexual proclivities?

  29. So, Dan T,

    If it’s bad for morale to allow women, jews, and blacks into the military, it would be okay to extend institutional bigotry to them as well?

  30. Dan T. has the intellectual and philosophical honesty of – well, a politician.

  31. “Military Readiness Enhancement Act”

    Was that the one that made sure everyone got their VIAGRA prescription on the taxpayer dime? You know, because if that’s what we need to do I will have to say that the cannabis and psilocybin works a lot better than the VIAGRA. Perhaps did you see Dr. Grinspoon’s oped in the Boston Globe? This magical herb can be used for many things. Also, psilocybin enhances visual acuity dramatically, and this could lead to more STRAIGHT SHOOTING recruits once we bring them home and rewrite the rules of the “basic training”.

    Personally, I am praying daily for the day or month or year or ten years when the de-nazification process of the United States of America is complete. This is a tribute to George Soros who is a GOOD PERSON and an excellent role model for super-rich people everywhere.

    Now, back to the EM ESS EM choking on Pat Robertson’s protein shake.

  32. When the 54th Mass. heroically charged Fort Wagner their efforts – though not successful – ended up changing a lot of minds about the utility of black soldiers. Maybe something heroic needs to happen re: gay soldiers*.

    *I’m sure that homosexual soldiers have done heroic deeds prior to know, but they apparently haven’t been heavily publicized.

  33. Dan T., I have a feeling that you wouldn’t give the same deference to a private employer. So why so with the military? Or are you planning a bait and switch?

  34. Oh my, did I ever need to edit that last posting before I sent it. ๐Ÿ™‚

  35. John,

    “How about no one talk about their sexual proclivities?”

    Do you or any of your coworkers have pictures of wife or kids on their desk?

  36. I guess I’m pretty comfortable with letting the military decide for themselves who they want to admit. They know better than I do what works…

    The sad part is that you wouldn’t even think of adopting this same philosophy in regards to people and their personal behavior — like smoking or eating “unhealthy”. Those are some pretty interesting lines you draw

  37. Dan T., I have a feeling that you wouldn’t give the same deference to a private employer. So why so with the military? Or are you planning a bait and switch?

    You’re right, I wouldn’t. I guess I see the military as being a place where people by definition are not treated fairly or justly – I mean, soldiers kill and risk being killed.

    I just want the military to be effective, I’ll leave my idealism to less vital institutions.

  38. Dan T.,

    I guess I’m pretty comfortable with letting the military decide for themselves who they want to admit.

    No, that is the job of the Congress. See Art. I, sec. 8. Since it is the job of the Congress and the Congress is made up of the representatives of the people and the regulation of the military is within the job description of the Congress it is ultimately up to the people to decide the issue, and not the military. The military works at the behest of the sovereign, who are the people.

  39. I’m thinking that the military has at least two wars other than the culture war to fight. It would certainly be interesting to see Congress line up on the question of which of these wars was more important.

    Because if the military’s #1 campaign is supposed to be holding the line against gays in the culture war then, quick hint folks, you’re gonna needs some of those troops back from Iraq real quick, ’cause you’re losing this one.

  40. “…in the small slice of the Navy I experience in the mid-90’s, there were q couple of gay people assigned to our ship. Everyone knew they were gay (including the CDR). Nobody seemed to care.”

    Pretty much the same in the Navy I knew in the ’70s & 80s too. It was “don’t ask, don’t tell” long before the Clinton’s came along.

    I did have a guy that worked for me busted for being gay and given the boot (he got an honorable discharge, though I assume a bad re-enlistment code) when I was a young sailor and the leading petty officer of a weapons repair shop. However, being gay is not the real reason he was busted; just the only thing that NIS could nail him with. What really happened was his boyfriend was a dental tech & stole a bunch of dope from the dental pharmacy. They had the dental tech cold for the theft and being a doper. The guy that worked for me got booted real quickly, but that was because he was a missile tech. Dope & the kind of weapons we worked on do not go together. This pair also lived with a cook & a marine from the ship’s marine detachment. The cook eventually got the boot, though it must have been a year or more before he actually left. The dental tech got the screws for stealing the dope. The marine was allowed to stay aboard until his enlistment was up about 18 months or so later. The jarheads wouldn’t let him stand guard on the weapons anymore, but he was the MARDET’s compartment cleaner. The grunts protected this guy from any harm and harassment from everyone.

    Anecdotal yes, but I have worked in or with the Navy for over thirty years now and this incident is the only time I have ever heard of gay guys getting hammered for being gay. And it was not really about being gay, but stealing dope.

  41. “John,

    “How about no one talk about their sexual proclivities?”

    Do you or any of your coworkers have pictures of wife or kids on their desk?”

    Well Mr. Sex Offender, I certainly dont’ want to hear about yours.

  42. What about a guy who is into animals or dead bodies or kids? He thinks and dreams about getting it on with them. Should he have to keep quite about it? When others talk about sex with their wives should he have to keep quite about the flock of sheep, the dead person or the 8-year-old he dreams about? Should he be “punished” for telling?

    I’m trying to point out that his ability to shoot has nothing to do with his ability to serve in the military without causing problems.

  43. Haze Grey,

    I had a paralegal who worked in my office who put up a website offering gay sex for money. He got some rich guy to send him several 1000 dollars in return for a meeting. The guy got tot he meeting and decided the old rich guy wasn’t his type and wouldn’t go through with the sex. The rich guy filed an Article 139 fraud claim with his commander wanting his money back since he didn’t get the sex he paid for. The paralegal got a nice homosexual discharge when he should have been court-martialed.

  44. John,

    My only concern is that we don’t create another victim group complete with complaints and law suits.

    So not upsetting the status quo is more important than upholding principles like equal protection and the rule of law?

    Since you’re writing from a us.army.mil email address, can we assume that this is the official position of the US Army?

  45. “What about a guy who is into animals or dead bodies or kids?”

    Those are all illegal. Further, if the guy just talked about having sex with kids and didn’t have any child porn or ever act on it, I don’t know of any legal basis to kick him out of the military.

  46. No, that is the job of the Congress. See Art. I, sec. 8. Since it is the job of the Congress and the Congress is made up of the representatives of the people and the regulation of the military is within the job description of the Congress it is ultimately up to the people to decide the issue, and not the military. The military works at the behest of the sovereign, who are the people.

    You’re correct, my point was not to imply that the military should have free reign to do whatever the want, only that if we’re considering a policy and the top brass say that it will hurt the military’s effectiveness then I think that point of view should be considered.

    The military excludes people for all sorts of reasons that would be considered unfair or a violation of civil rights if done by a private company.

  47. “So not upsetting the status quo is more important than upholding principles like equal protection and the rule of law?
    Since you’re writing from a us.army.mil email address, can we assume that this is the official position of the US Army?”a

    Of course it is not the official position. Of course the ban on gays is dumb. That said, don’t think for a moment that real criminals who deserve punishment won’t say “the military is picking on me because I am gay” as a way to avoid punishment. See the two examples above.

  48. Sex Offenders Union,

    Since you are using that goofy tag on this comment thread, I have to ask:
    Are you clamoring for pedophiles to be allowed into the military? Don’t you think those poor Iraqi children have enough strife to deal with?

    Do you have photos of Dakota Fanning on your desk?

  49. “What about a guy who is into animals or dead bodies or kids?”

    Those are all illegal. Further, if the guy just talked about having sex with kids and didn’t have any child porn or ever act on it, I don’t know of any legal basis to kick him out of the military.

    I’m just saying that if he “telled” about being a “sexual deviant” (illegal for now but who knows about later. I think being gay was illegal at one time.) he should not be surprised when he gets negative results.

  50. And his ability to fight would not even come up.

  51. John,

    So not upsetting the status quo is more important than upholding principles like equal protection and the rule of law?

    So, no answer on this, eh?

  52. *I’m sure that homosexual soldiers have done heroic deeds prior to know, but they apparently haven’t been heavily publicized.

    This is going back a far way, but how about the last stand of the Theban Sacred Band versus King Phillip of Macedon?

  53. Crassus,

    Heh. I was thinking of U.S. military history.

  54. Anyone else remember all those Marines that got busted making gay porn at Camp Pendleton back in the 90s?

    I’m sure they weren’t all pogues.

  55. “Well Mr. Sex Offender, I certainly dont’ want to hear about yours.”

    That’s BROTHER Sex Offender, buddy! I’m up for Treasurer this year.

    ๐Ÿ˜‰

  56. Ohnes!

    Crassus, Grotius. we need gaius for all the ingredients of our “Roman Sandwich”

    ๐Ÿ™‚

  57. VM | March 1, 2007, 4:27pm | #
    Ohnes!

    Crassus, Grotius. we need gaius for all the ingredients of our “Roman Sandwich”

    ๐Ÿ™‚

    Just make sure to use lots of olive oil. Extra Virgin preferably.

  58. Seriously, John, do you get why “no one should talk about their sexual proclivities” isn’t adequate here?

    We’re not talking about something people do for kicks, or what techniques they use during nookie. We’re talking about “What did you do over the holidays?” and “Got any kids?” and “I’m seeing my girlfriend during leave, how about you?” and “Who’s this guy Steve who keeps leaving messages for you?” – normal conversation fodder for any workplace, completely unrelated to Penthouse Forum-style narratives.

  59. I’m sure that homosexual soldiers have done heroic deeds prior to know, but they apparently haven’t been heavily publicized.

    Well there’s Sgt. Leonard Matlovich who won the Bronze Star in Vietnam, and several more recent cases. The MSM does publicize these cases, but the public seems to forget.

    Also, it is possible that there are many service members who have made the supreme sacrifice for our country, but whose homosexuality remained unknown.

  60. I’m not saying it’s the ideal, only that it’s a reasonable compromise.

    Sure Dan, I mean, you can only catch teh ghay if you know the guys a fag, right?

    No, no Dan. Just kidding. I know you don’t mean it and are just being a contrarian douche bag. Carry on.

  61. Uhm – joe – I hate to tell you this, but get a bunch of young, bored people standing watch in the middle of the night, and well.. everything gets discussed… everything…

  62. I hope there comes a day when people don’t immediately jump to animals, dead people and kids whenever gay right issues come up. You might as well say “Well, what about someone who wants to fuck strawmen? Huh?” I’m confident that the military can deal with these things should they arise.

  63. I don’t care who people in uniform fuck, as long as the person they are fucking is not their superior, their subordinate, or a member of their unit. But if they choose to fuck anyone in those three groups, then throw the book at them (specifically, the UCMJ).

  64. “Well, what about someone who wants to fuck strawmen? Huh?”

    I am so going to steal that.

  65. I’d just like to note that Grotius was a Dutchman, not a Roman. ๐Ÿ™‚

    These days he is best known for his thoughts on jus ad bellum. A lot of folks have viewed him as advocate of peace, but it is probably more appropriate to view him as an advocate of an aggressive foreign policy where punishment of unjust internal policies by foreign states can be a justification for war.

  66. Strawmen are hot!

  67. I was not trying to compare being gay to being a necrophiliac. I was just saying that if you “tell” others about behaviors or desires that they many find deviant, especially sexual things, you should not be surprised when there are problems. A unit with a member that all other members think is a weirdo freak will not be as efficient as possible. Right or wrong makes no difference. Simply keep your weird wants to yourself and everyone will pretend that you are normal. That has been my experience anyway.

  68. Either I hit the wrong button or my post disappeared, but a few posts ago I tried to call for a revival of the Theban Sacred Band in the U.S. military. Establish some all-gay units of elite warriors, and let their deeds change public opinion. Soon, “gay” and “tough, fearsomely effective warriors who get the job done” will become linked in the public mind.

    To be effective, these units would need to be both very gay and “out there” and also very gung-ho ass-kicking fighters.

    “Thank God for the 69th Flaming Airborne!”

    “Here come the Pink Berets!”

    That’s what Americans need to hear.

    I think I might be serious.

  69. Soon, “gay” and “tough, fearsomely effective warriors who get the job done” will become linked in the public mind.

    Except that unit doesn’t actually get anything done because they’re too, uh, busy.

  70. Thanks, Gro ๐Ÿ™‚

    BTW: the “Anon A Moose” wasn’t this moose.

    Rhywun – that unit doesn’t get anything done because of the units in the unit? Or the unit of the guy in the unit is in the guy in the unit?

    *head explodes

  71. Most “out there” gay men that I know could not be described as ass-“kicking” by anyone, anywhere, at any time.

  72. I was just saying that if you “tell” others about behaviors or desires that they many find deviant, especially sexual things, you should not be surprised when there are problems

    Right…like anal sex, or having sex out of wedlock. That’s deviant behavior. But what I can’t understand are those freaks who like to suck toes. Now those people are wired wrong. Fucking toe sucking freaks.

    Those are some mighty vague and subjective standards you seem to be espousing.

  73. Most “out there” gay men that I know could not be described as ass-“kicking” by anyone, anywhere, at any time.

    I was going to say that too, but I know someone will chime in and say they know dozens of shit-kicking flamers… “I know this torch-singing drag queen who can rip a telephone book in half.” kind of thing.

  74. Chicago Tom:

    Sorry about the vague and subjective standards that I am espousing. They are not mine. I have just noticed that they seem to exist in this thing we call reality.

    Rhywun:
    I expect the chime in about the drag queen who could kick my ass to hit in 4..3..2..

  75. I’m just trying to help! We’ll never get anywhere if homophobic, stereotype-mongering archconservatives like Rhywun are just going to take potshots at all my constructive ideas!

  76. homophobic, stereotype-mongering archconservatives like Rhywun

    Ha ha ha! That just made my day.

  77. Stevo Darkly:
    To be effective, these units would need to be both very gay and “out there” and also very gung-ho ass-kicking fighters.

    I see your point and I agree that you are trying to help. Your idea is constructive (it is really).

    Go 69th Flaming Airborne! All two of you.

  78. Sorry about the vague and subjective standards that I am espousing. They are not mine. I have just noticed that they seem to exist in this thing we call reality.

    No, they are in fact yours. And not at all indicative of “reality”. You seem to be pretending that some of your perceptions/opinions are self evident and thus using them as an excuse to justify bigotry.

    Deviance and “abnormal” can include a rather large universe of behavior (sexual or other). And I would guarantee you that a unit full of men would not agree on what behavior qualifies as “deviant” or abnormal — unless you believe that a lowest common denominator type of standard should apply at which point you most likely be disqualifying more than just gays.

  79. Chicago Tom:

    They are not mine. I am not pretending my perceptions/opinions are self-evident. (are you?) At least I don’t think I am. How would I know?

    I agree that deviant and “abnormal” behavior is open to interpretation and that not everyone will agree on what is and what isn’t freaky.

    That said, I bet you can come up with two or three things that, if you professed to be into them, would cause people to avoid/hate/throw things at you.

    If you were into these things it would be in your own best interest to keep quite about it and not “tell”.

  80. If you did decide to “tell” and then complain about people treating you differently because of it I would have to say “Duh”.

  81. That said, I bet you can come up with two or three things that, if you professed to be into them, would cause people to avoid/hate/throw things at you.

    Sure…but those things would most likely be illegal and would most likely violate the rights of others. ie Molesting children or raping people. Gayness isn’t one of them. SO I don’t see what point you are trying to make…unless of course you believe that being gay is in the same ballpark as a child molester or a rapist. Do you?

  82. If you did decide to “tell” and then complain about people treating you differently because of it I would have to say “Duh”.

    Right…anyone who is “different” should hide the fact they are different. When soldiers bond and make friendships, the “different” ones should lie and pretend to be something they’re not. It’s their own fault for not hiding it.

    And chicks get raped because they dressed like sluts.

    The responsibility does not lie with the “different” person (whatever that means) to hide it, it is the peer groups responsibility to live and let live not worry about who gets the next person off.

    And it isn’t about “complaining” about being treated differently it’s about getting kicked out of the army.

  83. unless of course you believe that being gay is in the same ballpark as a child molester or a rapist. Do you?

    Nope. Here is an example of what I am trying to convey.

    I tell my coworkers that I am into screwing apple pies. {Not cherry pies, do I look like a sicko?) I tell them about the anticipation I feel while the pie cooks or the cheap thrill I get from buying a cheap slutty pie at the store. I am totally open about my desires. I know they will not judge me as that would be wrong.

    I have not described anything illegal nor have I violated the rights of others, and yet for some reason I am being treated differently than before. My presence seems to affect the team and I don’t like it. I just want them to treat me as “normal”.

    If only I hadn’t “telled” (is that a word?) on myself.

  84. Don’t take me wrong. I am not saying the people who think I am “different” are right or wrong. I’m trying to say that life is unfair and if you step in it on purpose you shouldn’t complain about the smell on your shoe.

  85. I was in the army when it was 10 % women and allegedly 10 % gay. I didn’t
    get hit on a single time by anyone. That seriously destroyed my self-esteem.

  86. Sorry jimmy. If you were into pie you would have scored for sure.

  87. Bobster should be conscripted into the Flaming 69th.

  88. Bobster should be conscripted into the Flaming 69th.

    Nope. I’m straight but my boyfriend could kick you ass!

  89. That should have been “so kick your ass!”

  90. Right…anyone who is “different” should hide the fact they are different. When soldiers bond and make friendships, the “different” ones should lie and pretend to be something they’re not. It’s their own fault for not hiding it.

    I agree with you even though you may have been being sarcastic.

    People should and do hide who they are from others. I do it and I bet you do it as well. My friends and buddies do not need, nor want, to know everything about me.

    If one has no secrets one probably have no friends.

  91. Bobster,

    You compare homosexuality to pie fucking.
    I have never heard of pie fucking save that a teen comedy once used it as a gag.
    Your argument seems to be the one that Homer Simpson used against homosexuality: “You know! It’s not… usual“.

  92. Your argument seems to be the one that Homer Simpson used against homosexuality: “You know! It’s not… usual”.

    I am not against homosexuality. I am indifferent towards it. I think that is what causes problems. You have to be for it or against it. The line is drawn and the teams are picked. Anyone who points out what he has observed is labeled and put on a team.

    You’re right, screwing pies is indeed a gag. Even so I would not hang out with someone who wore his “Pieism” as a badge. I would say he is not You know…usual

    Nice Simpson reference.

  93. You compare homosexuality to pie fucking.

    Not on purpose. I was just trying to come up with a “freaky” sexuality that met the requirement of not being rape or child molestation. There are many other options to explore if you wish. I bet there are people out there that are into pie though. I wonder if they have websites?

    In any case I will try not to judge the pie people no matter what my instincts tell me.

  94. Bobster,
    Favoring that an out homosexual not be allowed to serve in the military is choosing a side. It is agin’it.

    Let me review. You believe that an out gay man would be disruptive in the service, because other soldiers would be uncomfortable. According to the Zogby poll referenced above, you are incorrect about 73% of the men and women serving.
    Is your argument is that the other 27% have to be taken into consideration?
    I still say you are wrong. When the armed forces were integrated, I’ll bet that a lot of soldiers felt uncomfortable sharing the barracks with persons of color. The military got over it.

  95. Not on purpose, Bobster? The words typed themselves?

  96. highnumber:
    I am neither for nor against gay people serving in the military. If a gay man signs up to fight more power to him.

    If he wants to stay in the military though he better keep his sexual preferences to himself. Polls be damned, he knows being gay will get him kicked out. Shut up about it. (Yes he has to hide his real self. Sorry.) If he joins and then complains that the contract he signed on purpose, knowing its full ramifications is screwing him, why should I feel he has been wronged?

    QuietReaderGirl
    Not on purpose, Bobster? The words typed themselves?

    I did not mean to compare. I meant to describe. Sorry if I messed it up.

  97. Bobster,
    So you are unequivocally against an out gay man serving in the military because he would be a disruption, despite the evidence (Zogby poll, anecdotal comments posted by members of the military here) contradicting you.

    Open ass, insert head.

  98. Let me review. You believe that an out gay man would be disruptive in the service, because other soldiers would be uncomfortable.

    I want to point out that this in not what I believe. What I believe is immaterial. Disruption is what the people in charge of the military say will happen.

    Mouthing politically correct statements is expected so it is provided for the polls. Politically correct behavior when the camera’s are off, may not match the PC statements.

  99. Open ass, insert head.

    I am simply not flexable enough.

  100. I wish all you pastry-fucking piesexuals would take your disgusting lifestyle back into the closet at Tippins where it belongs.

  101. What if I hired you to work for me and tell you that if you smoke cigarettes you will be fired. I tell you that I would not test your blood or urine (Don’t ask). I tel you not to smoke in front of me or the other workers (don’t tell)

  102. crap.

    I hit submit by mistake. Finish my last post on your own.

  103. highnumber

    You are right to resist my orders. I can be bossy.

  104. I was just trying to come up with a “freaky” sexuality that met the requirement of not being rape or child molestation.

    Your example would be more relevant if pie-fuckers made up ~5% of the world’s population, could only get it up for pies, could only form romantic relationships with pies, and would drop everything to come to the aid of their pies.

  105. I have two primary problems with DADT. First off, our military isn’t exactly rolling in money, not to mention being involved in conflicts in multiple places. Discharging soldiers discovered to be gay makes no financial sense. Soldiers, especially in a modern military are too damn expensive to train.
    Second off, my partner of six years would really like to join the Guard (and he is one hell of a shot). Unfortunately, I am disabled and on his company’s domestic partnership health plan. That counts as “telling” as far as the military is concerned. Since we can’t afford to take me off of his health plan he couldn’t join up even if he could hide everything else about our relationship.

  106. “..could only get it up for pies, could only form romantic relationships with pies, and would drop everything to come to the aid of their pies.”

    I thought I was alone. Knowing that there are other people who would drop everything to come to the aid of their pie validates me. I feel like I have a family.

    You have touched me in a place I wanted to keep secret.

  107. The funny thing is that there have been gays in the military since there has been a military. It is odd that it is a big deal to some people who someother people sleep with.

  108. “Keep your fork, there’s pie.”

  109. jiddy:
    LOL.

    Audrey B:
    LOL again.

  110. bobster is so incoherent and fucked up that could this be the newest incarnation of Juanita/Jane?

    Also, as others have noted, calling homosexuality merely a sexual practice – not living and loving and sharing and growing – shows that you have a strange view of relationships in general.

    For you, the 14 seconds (aggregate) time you have sex during the week should underscore that fact. All the other aspects of a loving relationship take up a much larger portion of the relationship’s time.

    So if you call individuals who are in a caring, supportive, loving, caring, trusting, growing relationship, “freaky”, I think you’ve shot your last blank in this discussion.

    Oh – check out the first comment on this thread. Take that to heart. (and visit the site, clicky on my name. You’ll like it)

  111. VM:
    I think I called having sex with apple pie “freaky” not homosexuals. I’m sure I do things that some people would call freaky. It is not necessarily a bad thing.

    Incoherent and fucked up?
    Really? Nobody else complained of that. I’ll try harder to be coherently non-fucked up.

  112. I’m sorry, Bobster. I can’t hear what you’re saying. I’m washing dishes and there’s mad soap suds popping all over the place. Mad suds, yo.

    DADT is a total failure of a policy, for many of the same reasons why prostitution is illegal; it forces gay soldiers into a metaphorical black market and thus outside the protections afforded to ordinary individuals. If you’re a gay soldier and suffering harassment because of same, there’s no way to get the situation corrected without outing yourself and thus being in violation of DADT.

    By its very nature, the DADT policy creates an unsafe environment. Simply screening gay folks out at enlistment, while loathsome and discriminatory, would be an improvement over the trap of a policy that is DADT.

  113. Bobster,
    I may agree with the Moosemeister, but I’d rather say you are confused and repressed.

  114. I may agree with the Moosemeister, but I’d rather say you are confused and repressed.

    Okay. Thanks.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.