Simply because an issue does not affect you personally, then you can still be bright enough to realize it affects others. In this case, in a negative way. But, feel free to shit all over it and then start babbling about how everything we do in America is right simply because it's done in America. Would it help you to know it was a restriction from the Clinton era?
Yeah. Who cares about basic human civil rights? It's sooo 1960s.
__________________ In case we find ourselves starting to believe all the Anti-American sentiment and negativity, we should remember England 's Prime Minister Tony Blair's words during an interview. When asked by one of his Parliament members why he believes so much in America , he said:
"A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in... And how many want out."
I agree with the literal interpretation of your statement, not the sarcastic interpretation for which it was intended.
Like I said above, though, I'm glad to see it go. It should never have existed.
Yeah, it really does depend on the unit.
I knew a gay fella, we'll call him Randy, that worked for Cingular (Now called AT&T) with me that joined the military. He wanted to join because he looked forward, greatly, to being around "all those sexy young men" and also because he was patriotic. He found out quick fast an in a hurry that pretty much none of those men were his type and the military can be serious business. I told that story to tell this one: the concept of a "buff young men" is good in theory, but I do not think the majority of gay men join the military for "hook-ups." That's one reason I thought DADT was stupid to begin with.
I still think we spent too much time on it: both at the federal level and from our Media. It should have been a one day ordeal and that's it.
LMAO!
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Dec 19th, 2010 at 08:13 AM
How about the rights enjoyed by one citizen should not be up for debate, for even one day, moment or instant, by their fellow citizens? For far too long the reality of equal rights for homosexuals has been made a matter of public debate, by both parties. This is not a simple democracy. This country is a republic ruled by a constitution that was meant to change with the times and carry on the most noble aspects of it's own evolution. Leaving the rights of homosexuals up to their bigoted, ignorant, scared neighbors is a shameful aspect of this country. This is why the time you agree has been wasted on an issue that does not affect you is still important and relevant, even in these tough economic times. It might be a relic from the Clinton era, but let's not forget that before Don't Ask, Don't Tell, homosexuals were sought out and summarily tossed out of the military. It was a step forward at the time, despite being outdated in these days. Is this perhaps one of those moments where Mitt Romney would have yeilded to equal rights, or kept preaching his supposedly mormon-based bullshit? You can't agree with every perspective and then say your position is justified whenever any one of them comes up for debate. This is one of those instances where Mr. Romeny would not have been a better president. This is one of those moments where a congress Mr. Romeny would have supported would not be better than the position preached by the one that is in control for the moment.
Last edited by skekUng on Dec 19th, 2010 at 09:37 AM
You responded with far too much for such a simple statement.
I mean what I said and it is my opinion: it should have only taken one day to be done with this entire ordeal. We should not have spent as much time on it: it was wrong from day 1 and should have been repealed the first or second day in Obama's administration.
That's it.
I am not sure why you felt the need to write out a huge paragraph to address that one particular point in my post when your probably agreed with it 100%.
Read it, and then you'll see how right or wrong you are. Reading shouldn't be a problem for you. Besides, no one here is stupid enough to believe you don't read every word addressed to you. That makes about as much sense as the ignore button.
To be fair, I didn't read what you said either. Not out of malevolence, so much as general laziness. Plus, your posts are a little too diehard liberal, like Kandy's.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
Just wait 5-10 years from now when unemployment is 25-35% inflation is 20-50% (or more), oil is $400 a barrell the Mexican Drug war has completely spilled over into much of the US, Iran has possibly nuked Israel, there is a second Korean War, etc and see how much you give a shit about crap like DADT, gay marriage, abortion, etc
We need to set our priorities NOW or there will be no future for us.
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
That's a very strange thing to say, considering how little our Gov't gets done in regards to those issues even when it IS focused on them, regardless of civil rights.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
Maybe it´s a cunning plan by the extreme christian loonatics to get rid of gays, the next time there´s a war send in them first! The same way the military carreer folk concentrate mainly on poor urban black nieghbourhoods to get people to join the marines.
This is just the Gov't's way of trying to save face.
It will go down in the History books that America only lost the war on terror due to our soldiers being distracted by their treasonous gay comrades.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
That´s an interesting angle, never thought of that. I´m wondering what will happen if that religious nut, brainless, but hot lass, Palin gets voted in next time (so some similar sort). Will this be reversed?
DADT is already company policy at most places of business. Both telling and asking co-workers about specific sexual preferences is considered harassment.
If I asked a co-workers if they like their toes sucked I'd stand the risk of getting fired. Also if I told my co-workers that I liked to be bitten on my toes during sex my job would be at risk there too.
The military can't just fire people like a McDonalds can. Wasn't DADT just a way to deter unwanted sexual advances? Homosexuality isn't a race or gender, it's a sexual preference. Sexual preferences can be very powerful but that doesn't mean that they deserve respect like races do. If that were the case then child sex advocates should be allowed to marry children as a constitutional right. If a guy likes it up the butt more power to him but what's to gain in giving him special rights to share his sex life details with his co-workers. Giving details about sex with the wife can cost you your job anywhere in America if the wrong person hears you. Why should special right's be given to a specific sex story?
Because it's not special rights. Do you think that heterosexual soldiers don't sit around and talk about all the pussy they get (or wish they were getting), all the time?
Don't believe the fantasy world that King Kandy tells you about the military. Most soldiers are dudes who are ****ing bored at work 90% of the time, and they talk about crap all day long, sex included.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
Last edited by Tzeentch on Dec 19th, 2010 at 01:40 PM
KMC Community Forums
Dec 18th, 2010 11:20 PM
