Don't Ask, Don't Tell Deemed Unconstitutional

Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: Chris S wrote: In the modern world and  hopefully more tolerant world, sexual preference should have no bearing on whether military or federal parties agree or disagree. Either soldier I would be proud to stand next to in a line of battle. They deserve medals just for showing up for their country regardless whether they are gay or hetero or where they are going and why? Democarts may not agree on Iraq etc but every soldier has the governments full backing. The army should not decide on sexual preference either, that is wrong, they just need to spend their budget dollars more wisely in managing ' digs"   ps: Non citizen/permanet resident POV You would stand next to a gay solider, fine.Would you shower with one? That tells us more about your fears than about the wisdom or lack thereof in the resolution. My fears?  I don't fear gay people.Should women and men in the military shower together?  Why or why not? No. Not all men in the shower would be gay, though. It's a different scenario. It's complex. But I would've guessed freedom would be first for you, wouldn't it? What freedom is there if one's forced to hide behind a curtain of secrecy, behind a lie? It'd be better then if there was a requisite to join the army: "be straight". See my previous post.  When you join the military, a good bit of your freedoms go out the window.  That's why I'm opposed to the draft.  You know what you are getting into.  Don't like it?  Work elsewhere.

Good. Then you agree with the requirement. "Be straight". It has to be written I think.

You are forcing people to lie. You know what happens when men get together? They talk about "manly stuff". All gays in the army will have to pretend they're something else, and everytime they do, they're lying, to protect themselves.

Nobody is asking "free gay sex in the army. Let soldiers f**k each other". But if a soldier wants to say "sorry I'm gay man" that should be his right. Everywhere.

JLocke wrote:   Epignosis wrote:   Bullsh*t. The military doesn't enable you to express yourself.  The military teaches you to march in step, wear the same clothes as everyone else, and be on a strict schedule.  If you sign up, you become a clone when you wear those army greens.  And that's an important aspect of being a solider.  Did you know religious soldiers aren't allowed to proselytize while they are deployed?  Should they be allowed to be who they are in the course of military duty? I'm not saying we should let the gays go have gay sex whenever they feel like it while in the service. But to lie about who they are? Surely you can see the difference, here. It's not about expressing yourself, it's about feeling comfortable in your own skin during your service time. I guarantee you that a few closeted gay soldiers had a lot more inner torment going on than their openly straight brothers in arms. You don't think that can affect how you perform or your self-respect?

You missed what I just said.

An aspect of being in the military- which people voluntarily sign up for- is conformity.  If you can't handle that, you don't belong.

Epignosis wrote: JLocke wrote:   Epignosis wrote:  Bullsh*t.The military doesn't enable you to express yourself.  The military teaches you to march in step, wear the same clothes as everyone else, and be on a strict schedule.  If you sign up, you become a clone when you wear those army greens.  And that's an important aspect of being a solider.  Did you know religious soldiers aren't allowed to proselytize while they are deployed?  Should they be allowed to be who they are in the course of military duty? I'm not saying we should let the gays go have gay sex whenever they feel like it while in the service. But to lie about who they are? Surely you can see the difference, here. It's not about expressing yourself, it's about feeling comfortable in your own skin during your service time. I guarantee you that a few closeted gay soldiers had a lot more inner torment going on than their openly straight brothers in arms. You don't think that can affect how you perform or your self-respect?  You missed what I just said.An aspect of being in the military- which people voluntarily sign up for- is conformity.  If you can't handle that, you don't belong.

Nobody is asking for soldiers to be able to question orders or -in this case properly used- "whine" about their food or the early hours they have to wake up at. But they shouldn't be forced to lie about who they are.

I insist: put the requisite in the army invitations and rules and we'll all be ok. If everybody is required to be hetero, then no gay can enlist or he'll have to lie by his own choice.

JLocke wrote:   Finnforest wrote:   To you other comment, I'd have no problem showering with anyone if I signed up for it.  I just think the military owns you when you enlist.  You can't have an army of individuals whining about their rights if you expect to maintain discipline.  YOu can whine once you get out. Being forced to hide the deepest part of yourself for fear of being kicked out of the service is a very serious issue for some. To call it 'whining' when someone speaks out about it is unfair.

Sorry you don't like the word, I think it's right on in this case.  The military is about the mission and the team, not the individual.  Nor should it start now. 

Off to bed...later

The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: The T wrote: Epignosis wrote: Chris S wrote: In the modern world and  hopefully more tolerant world, sexual preference should have no bearing on whether military or federal parties agree or disagree. Either soldier I would be proud to stand next to in a line of battle. They deserve medals just for showing up for their country regardless whether they are gay or hetero or where they are going and why? Democarts may not agree on Iraq etc but every soldier has the governments full backing. The army should not decide on sexual preference either, that is wrong, they just need to spend their budget dollars more wisely in managing ' digs"   ps: Non citizen/permanet resident POV You would stand next to a gay solider, fine.Would you shower with one? That tells us more about your fears than about the wisdom or lack thereof in the resolution. My fears?  I don't fear gay people.Should women and men in the military shower together?  Why or why not? No. Not all men in the shower would be gay, though. It's a different scenario. It's complex. But I would've guessed freedom would be first for you, wouldn't it? What freedom is there if one's forced to hide behind a curtain of secrecy, behind a lie? It'd be better then if there was a requisite to join the army: "be straight". See my previous post.  When you join the military, a good bit of your freedoms go out the window.  That's why I'm opposed to the draft.  You know what you are getting into.  Don't like it?  Work elsewhere. Good. Then you agree with the requirement. "Be straight". It has to be written I think. You are forcing people to lie. You know what happens when men get together? They talk about "manly stuff". All gays in the army will have to pretend they're something else, and everytime they do, they're lying, to protect themselves. Nobody is asking "free gay sex in the army. Let soldiers f**k each other". But if a soldier wants to say "sorry I'm gay man" that should be his right. Everywhere.

T, really?  You're kind of making yourself look silly, as though you haven't been paying attention.

You go from one extreme to the other.   Don't ask means you don't ask.  Don't tell means you don't tell.  This means when you are serving with someone else, you don't know if they are gay or straight.  This is not forcing anyone to lie.  It's forcing people to shut up about something.  What's wrong with that?  How do gay people have to pretend to be something they aren't?  In other words, what must they do differently in the course of their duties as soldiers than they would if DADT didn't exist? 

I asked a question that was conveniently ignored.  Here it is again:

"Did you know religious soldiers aren't allowed to proselytize while they are deployed?  Should they be allowed to be who they are in the course of military duty?"

In case you don't know, telling others about Jesus is a very important part of being a Christian.

Finnforest wrote: JLocke wrote:   Finnforest wrote:   To you other comment, I'd have no problem showering with anyone if I signed up for it.  I just think the military owns you when you enlist.  You can't have an army of individuals whining about their rights if you expect to maintain discipline.  YOu can whine once you get out. Being forced to hide the deepest part of yourself for fear of being kicked out of the service is a very serious issue for some. To call it 'whining' when someone speaks out about it is unfair.  Sorry you don't like the word, I think it's right on in this case.  The military is about the mission and the team, not the individual.  Nor should it start now.  Off to bed...later

My god, how can you simplify the issue like this? It's not like we're talking about someone being dishonest about their favorite color, we're talking about people being forced to stay silent about their very nature. How dare you call that 'whining'? You can give your case, and be sensible about it, but I don't see how this is as pointless of a complaint as you seem to think it is.

The T wrote: It's a tendency I notice. Any "liberal" complain is "whining". Every libertarian complain is "in liberty's sake". We're all the same bullsh*t amateur politicians choosing very carwfully which words to use that best serve our own interests.

And some people can't have a discussion without raising homophobia, racism, or "intolerance" to get a leg up.  Read my first post.  I said I'm not against them serving.  My issue was about who makes the rules for the military.  Soon after, the homophobe word appears.  And we just go downhill from there.  

By the way Teo, I never said Libertarians don't whine.  Everyone whines sometimes


Edited by Finnforest - September 10 2010 at 23:48

 

Epignosis wrote: Don't ask means you don't ask.  Don't tell means you don't tell.  This means when you are serving with someone else, you don't know if they are gay or straight.  This is not forcing anyone to lie.  It's forcing people to shut up about something.  What's wrong with that?  How do gay people have to pretend to be something they aren't?  In other words, what must they do differently in the course of their duties as soldiers than they would if DADT didn't exist?  I asked a question that was conveniently ignored.  Here it is again: "Did you know religious soldiers aren't allowed to proselytize while they are deployed?  Should they be allowed to be who they are in the course of military duty?" In case you don't know, telling others about Jesus is a very important part of being a Christian.

You know that most soldiers in the military assume you are straight. This means that any down time you may have to chat with your buddies or talk about life, you're going to come at the conversation from a heterosexual point of view. Don't tell me that 'staying silent' is still implemented at times like these. ALl the straight guys can be themselves, but the gays have to either pretend to be straight, shut up and risk arousing suspicion, or simply admit it, and get sent packing.

Yeah, real even-handed way of going about things.


And I more or less addressed your question with another question. I touched upon the whole christian thing, just used in a different situation. Before I give you my direct answer, let me ask you: what reasons are given for the christian soldiers to not spread the gospel? What do they say is harmed by such an action?

Robert, army, lots of men, together. Questions about sex and related stuff will happen. Some men have to conceal what they are and even more, lie about what they are.

Not being able to proselytize about religion is not the same as saying "don't ask don't tell" about the same subject. A soldier can ask another about his beliefs and that's it. One thing is just saying who you are, another is proselityzing, which is, in a word, "selling". Telhe equivalent with sexual orientation would be "none is allowed to ask or request sexual favors" which could make sense.

I thought believing and doing Jesus' commands was important, more so than trying to sell him.

JLocke wrote:   Epignosis wrote: Don't ask means you don't ask.  Don't tell means you don't tell.  This means when you are serving with someone else, you don't know if they are gay or straight.  This is not forcing anyone to lie.  It's forcing people to shut up about something.  What's wrong with that?  How do gay people have to pretend to be something they aren't?  In other words, what must they do differently in the course of their duties as soldiers than they would if DADT didn't exist?  I asked a question that was conveniently ignored.  Here it is again: "Did you know religious soldiers aren't allowed to proselytize while they are deployed?  Should they be allowed to be who they are in the course of military duty?" In case you don't know, telling others about Jesus is a very important part of being a Christian. You know that most soldiers in the military assume you are straight. This means that any down time you may have to chat with your buddies or talk about life, you're going to come at the conversation from a heterosexual point of view. Don't tell me that 'staying silent' is still implemented at times like these. ALl the straight guys can be themselves, but the gays have to either pretend to be straight, shut up and risk arousing suspicion, or simply admit it, and get sent packing. Yeah, real even-handed way of going about things. And I more or less addressed your question with another question. I touched upon the whole christian thing, just used in a different situation. Before I give you my direct answer, let me ask you: what reasons are given for the christian soldiers to not spread the gospel? What do they say is harmed by such an action?

Well in this case, you don't have a problem with Don't Ask Don't Tell- you have a problem with DADT not being followed. 

As for sharing the Gospel...think about trying to share the Gospel with Muslims in Iraq.  The military even burned Bibles send to the Middle East. 

My thing is this: When you join the military (voluntarily) you give up who you are.  You become a piece of a unit, and you remain as such until you are done.

Notice that I nowhere said I agree with DADT...I just think, as Finn said, that the military should determine these guidelines, not judges (especially since many of these judges have no military experience).