@MikeinSC: It isn't just stuff like that. A straight soldier can talk about his or her wife or husband over the watercooler, can share base housing with them, can bring them to official functions and so on. This is hardly offensive stuff but is completely forbidden to homosexuals in the services.
@damnboyadvance: Then they'd have to ban things like the arch of swords and wearing military uniform at your wedding. Otherwise it's still discriminatory, as heterosexuals in the military can be perfectly open about their sexuality in a military setting in a way that gay people can't.
@Rockdalf: Like I said before, you're just bringing up arguments that were used against desegregation in the 40's and 50's and against integrating women in the 80's and 90's. They weren't compelling then and they aren't compelling now. If a serviceperson feels the need to commit a crime after the repeal of DADT they can get they ass to Leavenworth and follow it up with a BCD. You still get thieves in the military and the justice system seems to manage. And his argument wasn't a straw man, it was a perfectly relevant analogy.
@Rockdalf: Again, we're back to the point where you point out crimes, and advocate punishing the victims. Tell me what makes sense about this? Do you also think that rape victims have it coming because they shouldn't look so sexy, or people shouldn't own cars so it's their own fault that they get stolen? Where's the logic or common sense here? DADT does not protect homosexuals. It protects those people who couldn't stay in the job if they had to serve alongside the openly gay.
@Rockdalf: You aren't saying anything at all. I'm not sure even you know what you're trying to say. The arguments you're trotting out are the same ones people pulled out of their arse during desegregation of the armed forces, which took place some time prior to the civil rights movement you seem to think America should wait for. It didn't make any sense then, and what your saying doesn't make any sense now. Do I expect high standards of soldiers, sailors and aircrew? Damn right I do, they aren't flipping burgers at mickey d's or making tea for local council meetings. If they don't make the grade they can get another job where their failures won't put the lives of others at risk. And DADT is a ridiculous and discriminatory policy with absolutely no redeeming value that demeans the integrity of the United States armed services, not a plaster slapped carelessly onto a graze. Don't try to trivialize it as some imperfect solution to a problem; there's no problem for it to even solve.
@Rockdalf: So your response is to punish the guy who's doing his job perfectly well, and not the guy who can't live up to the standards required of him? Eminently sensible.
@TheSeductiveMoose: Not a problem at all. And let's be honest, "Attitudes toward and the role of homosexual combatants in the armed forces of ancient Greek city states" is hardly at the top of many school curricula.
@TheSeductiveMoose: You're right, its unlikely that it wasn't practiced, it just wasn't openly accepted like it was in some city states. When he'd defeated the Sacred Band at Chaeronerae, Phillip the second said the following as a rebuke to Spartan criticisms of them: "Perish miserably they who think that these men did or suffered aught disgraceful." We can deduce from that that the Spartans must have been pretty vocal on what they thought of them.
@Rockdalf: If I may be frank, that is utter bollocks. You are quite free to express your sexual orientation in the US military, provided that you are heterosexual. "Loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage" are all facets of discipline. You can't tell me that someone who fears that another man who will give up his life for his country may look at him in the shower and therefore expects him to keep his sexual identity a secret on pain of dismissal shows that man any loyalty or respect, thinks first of duty or selfless service, or has honor, integrity or personal courage? @TheSeductiveMoose: Actually, they weren't, or they operated their own form of DADT. They professed to hate the practice. You're thinking of the Sacred Band of Thebes, who interestingly were instrumental in defeating the Spartans in several key battles and establishing Theban independence from Sparta.
" I can't believe people haven't looked further than skin deep at this. There is another reason we have don't ask/don't tell and it's sadly because of the rampant homophobia that saturates our nations. If a soldier makes fun of another soldier because of sexual orientation, the offended soldier might not be so "battle friendly" the next time his help is needed. The army is all about uniformity and openly being gay would create a lack of cohesion within a large percentage of soldiers, so they merely ask that you don't openly express it. Same goes for straight people, because sexual is irrelevant to your job, which is a soldier 24/7. If everyone was loving and understanding about sexual orientation, there would be no need for Don't Ask/Don't Tell. In short, the bill will be repealed when the mentality is right within our military. I don't think lawmakers in California are able to discern when the time is right. "
That's a terrible argument that bases itself on the idea that the American military is fundamentally unfit for purpose as it can't grasp the most basic military virtue, which is discipline.
Log in to comment