Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mcrain, Nov 30, 2010.

  1. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #1
    CNN

    Ok, does anyone expect the GOP to finally stop its opposition to eliminating DADT, or will they do everything they can to keep their wedge issue?
     
  2. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #2
    The GOP will always oppose things like this. They are a bunch of bigoted, frightened fairy tale following children.

    I blame the adults IE. Obama and the Demorcrats for not eliminating the program on day one of his administration.
     
  3. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #3
    When it came up a couple of months ago, GOP leaders only opposed it because this review was still pending.
     
  4. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #4
    Yes, but that was back when they assumed the Pentagon report on the subject would tell them exactly what they wanted to hear. Now that the military leadership have revealed themselves to be commie hippie godless queer-loving America-haters, expect major backpedaling. You'd better believe they are rushing to erect another goalpost.
     
  5. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #5
    An Open Letter to Republicans in Congress:

    Please end this ridiculous policy already. You may all go back to being a bunch of ****ing closeted homos after. There are plenty of other culture issues to keep the status quo.
     
  6. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #6
    I thought gays started crying when they held guns. And they would hate being in battle due to the lack of skin cream.


    ....


    Duh.
     
  7. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
  8. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #8
    hmmmmm, are you sure the concern wasn't that gays with a military kit fetish would start an orgy when given guns?
     
  9. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    #9
    Of course, how stupid of me. :)
     
  10. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #10
    As I suspected. From day one I wouldn't have enforced DADT... silly me for thinking President Obama would have spearheaded change in this area. Quick change. Believe me, I wasn't on this Obama bandwaggon but I thought he'd actually accomplish something simple like ending DADT with his Democratic majorities back in '09.

    link

    But hey, President Obama seems to be on board. McCain can't stall anymore, too. The troops, by and large, support ending DADT so let's get it done.
     
  11. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #11
    It should end, but you can bet that the Republicans will try to kill it. They want Obama to fail at everything. They do not care about what is good for the country. They only care for power. Don't believe me? Just watch.

    We love guns. We love anything that shoots. ;)
     
  12. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #12
    Next up on the agenda, replace Semper Fi with Fab-u-lous. :D
     
  13. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #13
    Nice. :D

    But why the negatives?? Put the gays is harms-way, and some might be killed in the process.

    Does this not advance God's will. :rolleyes:
     
  14. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Location:
    Hogtown
    #14
    everyone deserves equal opportunity if they are enlisting to protect our country ... sexual preference is hardly an issue when you are in a gun battle.
     
  15. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #15
    Dying for your political masters might be more apropos.

    But I would certainly prefer having a gay soldier, that might be interested in my ass, protecting it, than some macho yahoo.
     
  16. dscuber9000 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Location:
    Indiana, US
    #16
    Isn't it sad a study had to be done for this? How would gays hurt the military? Does John McCain seriously think the military is THAT bigoted?
     
  17. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #17
    And so you continue the stereotyping.
     
  18. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #18
    No, just calling a spade a club.

    In the battlefield, I would welcome a vested interest in my continued survival.
     
  19. skunk, Nov 30, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2010

    skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #19
    You might spend your time more usefully looking out for your comrades in arms whatever their sexual orientation.
     
  20. stevento macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #20
    I wonder if they'll make it retroactive. If DADT has been firing an average of two people per day since 1994, that adds up to over 10,000 given the boot just because of where they like to put their boot. bad joke. But seriously, if thousands of people lost their pensions and healthcare over this, then I wonder if they could get their pensions back.
     
  21. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #21
    This is beneath you.

    Time for bed.
     
  22. nospeed411 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Location:
    east coast
    #22
    Great whats next? Pink tanks:confused:... Natural selection will weed them out. Any portion of a society that can not reproduce obviously was not meant to and will cease to exist....

    Take for example the animal kingdom...do we seriously think homo creatures or a race of critters that had an abundance of homo members would last long? doubtful .

    My two cents like it or not. Facts are facts.
     
  23. bobber205 macrumors 68020

    bobber205

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oregon
    #23
    I get what you're trying to say. :)
    You're just saying that "worst case" it's still a good situation, fighting alongside a gay soldier.

    I haven't been in the military, but if I was fighting alongside a woman, my "macho" feelings would cause me to probably be more protective of her than of the men in the battle.

    Of course this is all conjecture. :p
     
  24. dscuber9000 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Location:
    Indiana, US
    #24
    Two flaws with your "facts":

    1. Gay people are not incapable of reproducing.
    2. Gay people do not have gay children. You don't pass along some gay gene.
     
  25. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #25
    Lol you may want to go back and actually observe a bit of nature before you post this crap again. What we call "homosexuality" is rampant in the animal kingdom.
     

Share This Page