This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
No More "Don't Ask Don't Tell"
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
ElhonnaDS
So the repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy has gone into effect. For those who are not familiar, there was up until recently a policy in the US military that service members who were gay or lesbian could not let the military know, or live in such a way that the military could find out, that they were homosexual, or they would be discharged. It also stated that they were not allowed to ask you if you were homosexual, so that any discovery of your orientation would have been voluntary or accidental, and not the result of any investigation they did. This policy replaced the original law, which was that you could not be in the military if you were gay. Now, service men and women can be completely open about their sexual orientation and not worry about a dishonerable discharge.
Article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/20/dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal_n_971406.html?ncid=webmail1
What are your thoughts on this, and on the original prohibition against homosexuals serving in the military?
Post by
Jubilee
I think it's great!
Post by
Patty
It seems about 50 years too late, at the least (even though I know the law was introduced only about 20 years ago).
Post by
xaratherus
It seems about 50 years too late, at the least (even though I know the law was introduced only about 20 years ago).
^ This.
Post by
OverZealous
It seems about 50 years too late, at the least (even though I know the law was introduced only about 20 years ago).
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I agree- I think it's ridiculous that the rule was ever on the books. They were getting pressure to change the rule against homosexuals serving in the military at all, because it was blatantly discriminatory and completely pointless other than to cater to people's homophobia. This was their "compromise" which amounted to "Fine, just don't tell us about it. We want to pretend you're not." It's kind of absurd that someone took the time to write that down, and pass it into law- it reminds me of a toddler with their fingers in their ears going "I can't hear you, I can't hear you, la la la la. You're not gay if I can't hear you."
So- congratz to all those who this is affecting. Hopefully, a number of people who lost their rank and livelihood will be eligible to get it back now, along with their educational assistance, pensions, etc.
Post by
asakawa
I've removed a couple of posts to try and avoid a derail. Apologies to those posters, I hope you understand.
I'd appreciate it if we could continue without further derailment.
Tricky subject, tread lightly people ^_^
Post by
xaratherus
I've removed a couple of posts to try and avoid a derail. Apologies to those posters, I hope you understand.
I'd appreciate it if we could continue without further derailment.
Tricky subject, tread lightly people ^_^
I understand. I should have reported it and moved on instead of replying.
I'd like to extend wedding congratulations to Lieutenant Gary Ross of the United States Navy for his marriage to his partner, which occurred in Vermont at 12:01 AM, one minute after this piece of discriminatory legal trash finally was swept into the dust heap of history.
Post by
Azazel
It seems about 50 years too late, at the least (even though I know the law was introduced only about 20 years ago).
This.
Gay people have rights too!
Post by
EdantheDwarf
I am from a many generation military family, I think it is great that is gone, so dose my mom. But my grandma is the one with the issue. She hates it. But she is old so. I was reading the base paper a few days ago and here were some of the things pointed out by a few of the grunts. " But a gay man can have a room with me and have a show, why can't I have a room with a women", there were a lot like that, but the one I loved was, " this is going to break up a lot of couples." the only way they that would happen is if they were gay.
Again I think this is great.
Post by
xaratherus
Just to respond to the arguments put forward (I know they aren't yours, Edan):
But a gay man can have a room with me and have a show, why can't I have a room with a women"
A gay man already
is
rooming with him - or he could be. So nothing changes.
"this is going to break up a lot of couples."
What is this crazy idea amongst some heterosexuals that gay sex is so absolutely irresistible that condoning it - or more accurately, not condemning it - is going to make
everyone
do it? It's just idiotic.
Regardless, if a relationship does break up over it, then the relationship probably would not have lasted anyway.
Post by
MyTie
"this is going to break up a lot of couples."
What is this crazy idea amongst some heterosexuals that gay sex is so absolutely irresistible that condoning it - or more accurately, not condemning it - is going to make
everyone
do it? It's just idiotic.
There are some odd couplings in the military due to benefits for married couples. For example:
Let's say a gay man in the military wants to get married, and let's say he knows a gay woman in the military who wants to get married. They will sometimes marry each other, for the benefits, but live with their homosexual counterpart. Now that homosexuality is 'ok' in the military, then there is no reason for the homosexual man to stay married to the homosexual woman, since the homosexual man can just go get married to the other homosexual man and still collect benefits.
So, in a way, there will be some relationship re arranging within the gay military community.
Post by
Pwntiff
Just because DADT is out, doesn't mean the federal govt. is recognizing same-sex marriages.
Post by
xaratherus
So, in a way, there will be some relationship re arranging within the gay military community.
Probably not. The repeal of DADT does not alter the effect of DOMA, and so marriages between same-sex couples will still not be recognized by the military in the form of military benefits.
The difference now is that if someone finds out that the person is homosexual, they can't be discharged solely for that reason. But that leads to other problems: Adultery might be considered "conduct unbecoming an enlisted person", and that could probably be considered adultery.
Having dealt with this particular argument elsewhere numerous times, I can say with some surety that the situation that you're indicating isn't what the person has in mind. There really are large segments of the shrinking minority of people who oppose homosexuality and marriage equality who believe that a removal of legal restrictions against homosexuality will lead to formerly heterosexual people suddenly "becoming gay".
Pwntiff beat me to it. DADT is gone; DOMA is still (unfortunately) in force.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Having dealt with this particular argument elsewhere numerous times, I can say with some surety that the situation that you're indicating isn't what the person has in mind. There really are large segments of the shrinking minority of people who oppose homosexuality and marriage equality who believe that a removal of legal restrictions against homosexuality will lead to formerly heterosexual people suddenly "becoming gay".
I wasn't aware of that. I don't really get involved in the discussion either way. I am personally opposed to homosexuality due to religious reasons. I am personally opposed to the federal recognition of any marriage (homo or hetro), due to my desire for true separation of church and state.
As to people turning homosexual due to legislation: this is the first I've heard of it. It doesn't seem likely to me.
Post by
Pwntiff
One of the elements of adultery under the UCMJ is "wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person." It could be argued that so long as a legal spouse doesn't have a problem with the extramarital relationship, it isn't adultery.
However, a fraudulent marriage for benefits would be punishable so the adultery argument is somewhat moot.
Post by
Magician22773
" But a gay man can have a room with me and have a show, why can't I have a room with a women"
Whenever I hear something that stupid I say "Don't flatter yourself". I really don't get how so many people can think being gay means you want to have sex with everyone of the same gender when being heterosexual doesn't mean you want to have sex with everyone of the opposite gender (and who the @#$% would want to sleep with a bigot anyway?).
It's great that it's been repealed, but I'm sure it's still not a nice place to be if you're gay based upon how I've heard people get treated in the past.
Regardless of where you side on DADT, or homosexuality in general...this IS a legitimate concern, that has never really been addressed in a logical way.
As a straight male, I am sexually aroused by females...and moreso by particular parts of their body. For that reason, the military, and most other organizations segregate housing of opposite sexes.
Now, when you advocate gays in ANY situation where communal housing, showering, and sleeping are concerned, you are infringing on my right to privacy. You cannot logically argue that it is OK to house a gay man and a straight man together, unless you are OK with housing men and women together.
I personally have no probelm with anyone that is willing to serve and protect their country. But i do believe that this issue should be addressed....but honestly, I dont know how.
Post by
Monday
Now, when you advocate gays in ANY situation where communal housing, showering, and sleeping are concerned, you are infringing on my right to privacy. You cannot logically argue that it is OK to house a gay man and a straight man together, unless you are OK with housing men and women together.
This was actually one of the main reasons why I was somewhat opposed to the repeal of DADT.
Post by
Jubilee
Now, when you advocate gays in ANY situation where communal housing, showering, and sleeping are concerned, you are infringing on my right to privacy. You cannot logically argue that it is OK to house a gay man and a straight man together, unless you are OK with housing men and women together.
This was actually one of the main reasons why I was somewhat opposed to the repeal of DADT.
Gay people are gay whether they tell you or not.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.