U.S. Supreme Court allows gay military ban for now

Get rid of DADT now!

And the US takes a giant leap back.

Wow, just wow... What else can you say to something like that?

And the US takes a giant leap back.

It's more a case of your beloved Obama pushing the nation back, since with an executive order he could easily overturn a ruling like this. He played so many people. But they wanted to be played.

Get rid of DADT now!

I'm happy with it.

And the US takes a giant leap back.

This depends entirely on your perspective.

It's more a case of your beloved Obama pushing the nation back, since with an executive order he could easily overturn a ruling like this. He played so many people. But they wanted to be played.

Actually, I don't think an order like this would be constitutional. It would directly contradict a federal law that is still in effect. Personally, I think DADT works well. However if people feel so strongly against it. They should go through congress to repeal it. Not try to force their will through the courts. In a few more years, if the country goes the way its trending, congress will be able to repeal it, regardless of who is in power.

They will try to manipulate anything and everything they can get their hands on. They are are called gay, but they are not happy, they were born getting turned on by each other, which would be the end of the human race, and if you are in a foxhole, trying to focus on the VC, on Alqaeduh etc..when you are also worried if your foxhole buddy may have a crushing hard on and ready to make you a new rectum well, this will not help out in the war against terrorism. I could be wrong but it would be better for gays to rape all the Arab terrorists in Guantanamo, but then again, these guys might actually really like this kind of thing.

They should go through congress to repeal it. Not try to force their will through the courts. In a few more years, if the country goes the way its trending, congress will be able to repeal it, regardless of who is in power.

Yes, let's leave the courts out of it. The country has been getting incrementally liberal with regards to moral issues for the past 50 years - with the resulting social wreckage apparent to all. However, should the policy be repealed, then heterosexuals should be given equal treatment and be allowed separate personal space from those that are openly gay/lesbian just as women and men are. Currently, men and women are kept separate in billeting, showers, etc. The same should be the case for heterosexuals and homosexuals to the greatest extent possible. The bottom line is that men and women are kept separate due to sexual attraction. Most woman wouldn't want to be forced to shower with a man anymore than most heterosexuals would want to be forced to shower with a homosexual. Yes, there are plenty of heterosexuals who would love to be able to have coed bed rooms and wash rooms, but most everyone can agree that there is good reason to keep a separation. It's best for military cohesion and just plain common decency.

when you are also worried if your foxhole buddy may have a crushing hard on and ready to make you a new rectum well, this will not help out in the war against terrorism

That statement doesn't make much sense at all. Most of one's time in the military isn't spent shooting at the enemy. It's going through the routine things like guard duty, training, etc. Let's apply solutions for those problems and not to this non-issue.

And the US takes a giant leap back.

Oh Smith get over it. Just because they don't do it your way doesn't mean it's backward. This is typical over reaction by a biased liberal lefty. DADT is a good solution. It respects the privacy of the gay person. And I don't want to know. So I won't ask. And they can keep their mouth shut too. After all it was Clinton who put this into effect and all were happy then.

That statement doesn't make much sense at all. Most of one's time in the military isn't spent shooting at the enemy. It's going through the routine things like guard duty, training, etc. Let's apply solutions for those problems and not to this non-issue.

I agree.

I could be wrong but it would be better for gays to rape all the Arab terrorists in Guantanamo, but then again, these guys might actually really like this kind of thing.

This is just so wrong, I'm not sure how to respond. While I'm sure there are homosexuals who are rapists...

No, not going to continue. Suffice it to say, its wrong. Very Wrong.

Most woman wouldn't want to be forced to shower with a man anymore than most heterosexuals would want to be forced to shower with a homosexual.

Since there are already gays in the military(that just don't say their gay) do they not already shower together? In armies that allow gays to serve, I haven't read of them having a problems? If gay wants to go to war and die for his country, why should they have to hide who they are?

It's best for military cohesion and just plain common decency.

Again, there are already gays in the military, has it effected military cohesion so far?

I think too many people still have M.A.S.H. on their brains and how a certain person was presented in that series.

Gays are not the problem perse, IMHO, but more people that are not secure in their own sexuality and orientation.

Humanity always looked down on 2 man together(for most parts except some ancient cultures that accepted gay relations), yet at the same time has had no problems with 2 women being together.

IMO, the media has done gays and lesbians a misservice how they were presented and it gave people a wrong image of them that still haunts them today.

And I agree DADT is a step back for a country that is supposed to be stronghold of freedom and a world-leader.

And I agree DADT is a step back for a country that is supposed to be stronghold of freedom and a world-leader.

Actually, DADT is a step forward from where the country was before. Maybe you don't remember, but previously gays were banned entirely. So revealing your sexuality, or having it revealed meant an immediate discharge. DADT allows gays to serve, so long as they keep their orientation to themselves. Since when it comes down to it, its no one elses business, I agree with this policy. It allows people to serve, who previously could not, while keeping people who feel strongly against homosexuality, happy.

Molenir.

Except that previously the US Military had the Draft and there was no choice to serve or not.

Now it is a Military of VOLUNTEERS and if people are uncomfortable to serve with gays they got the FREEDOM not to sign up or leave.

That is why I say it is a step backward.

Good_Jorb:

Since there are already gays in the military(that just don't say their gay) do they not already shower together?

You are missing the point. The don't ask don't tell compromise allows homosexuals to hide the fact that they have a sexual attraction to other of the same sex. Imagine if it were somehow possible for a man to join the military while passing himself off as a woman (or a woman passing herself off as a man). Wouldn't the women that discovered that they were living with a man in their room or barracks be justifiably upset? If this fact is hidden from them they wouldn't know that their privacy was being broached. Like a peeping Tom surreptiously watching a person through their bedroom window. Don't heterosexuals have a right to privacy also?

In armies that allow gays to serve, I haven't read of them having a problems? If gay wants to go to war and die for his country, why should they have to hide who they are?

Not every country is the same. Do you think that Arab or African armies would allow homosexuals to openly serve in their military services? If it is the case that homosexuals should be allowed to openly serve in the military (as some are willing to die for their country) then they should be separated from heterosexuals just as men are separated from women to the greatest extent possible. The reasons for this are the same as for separating men and women. If you were to argue otherwise, then you should also insist that heterosexual men and women should be forced to shower and live together.

If homosexuals are allowed to openly serve in the military it will certainly cause problems with unit cohesion. The vast majority of those that currently serve in the military are conservative - that's no secret. These patriotic Americans - who are also willing to die for their country - have either religeous or other moral objections to homosexuality. You may not like it, but that is the way it is.

If your goal is to shrink the military and make it harder for President Obama to provide the troops needed for his surge in Afghanistan then getting rid of don't ask don't tell is a good way to do it. It is my belief that their well known animosity to the military is the principle reason for American Liberal's support for replealing don't ask, don't tell.

I don't see why it would cause problems with unit cohesion. It don't cause it in other work-places and they don't have DADT philosphy.

Being a soldier is a chosen profession like being an ancountant, carpenter, etc.

And I also recall a time when women were excempted from serving and similar reasons were given.

Soldiers need to ask themselves what is more important doing their job or worrying about someones sexual preferences, IMO.

Zenny11 at 12:22 PM JST - 14th November

I don't see why it would cause problems with unit cohesion. It don't cause it in other work-places and they don't have DADT philosphy.

OMG! But they have to get naked together. Gays may want a straight guy. Poor soul. How could a hetero possibly live with the fact that a gay guy may look at their naked body and want them?

have either religeous [religious] or other moral objections to homosexuality.

It is their job to serve and accept the rules. I did not like every rule when I served but I knew my duty.

It is my belief that their well known animosity to the military is the principle reason for American Liberal's support for replealing [repealing] don't ask, don't tell.

You have quite an imagination.

Many liberals have served honorably and definitely support gays being openly able to serve. I dare say you won't find any liberals who have "well known animosity to the military" either. It is all in your head. Of course the lying liberals of JT would never admit to the truth that must be in your head. Get real and get over it.

You may not like it, but that is the way it is.

Make sure you tell yourself that when gays can serve openly in the very near future. It is going to happen whether you and your ilk like it or not.

It is about equality; that's all.

Aaah, the old shower story.

Strangely enough never heard anyone asking for separate showers for gays at sports-clubs, public pools, work-places(many have showers as workers get dirty),etc.

Peeple get riled up because it is the military where all soldiers are supposed to be the best of "manhood", yet at other places it don't seem to matter.

Actually quiet funny.

goodDonkey:

Many liberals have served honorably and definitely support gays being openly able to serve. I dare say you won't find any liberals who have "well known animosity to the military" either.

I agree, many Liberals have served honorably - and of course, I never said that they haven't. That's just the straw man of your imagination working overtime. However, there are Liberal colleges that will not allow military training on their campuses but take money from Arabs that execute homosexuals. Liberal organizations take out paid advertisements calling a distinguished American officer that he is a traitor. A Liberal Senator tells this same officer that his testimony under oath is not truthful. There is just too much evidence to the contrary for you to defend the strain of anti-military hatred among Liberals.

OMG! But they have to get naked together. Gays may want a straight guy.

True - that's why women do not shower with men. By the way, I wasn't the one that first brought up the shower thing.

It is their job to serve and accept the rules. I did not like every rule when I served but I knew my duty.

I certainly didn't like all of the rules I had to follow either. I knew that going in. I also knew that the military wasn't going to force me to sleep in close quarters with women or homosexual men. Again, it is a well known fact that most people that join the military are conservative. If the military becomes a Liberal social experiment, then there will be a lot fewer people that will be willing to serve.

Make sure you tell yourself that when gays can serve openly in the very near future. It is going to happen whether you and your ilk like it or not.

You are probably right. The United States is in terrible social and financial shape right now. Divorces rampant, children born without fathers around, huge personal and public debt - I never thought I would see America in as pitiful shape as it is today. So, I wouldn't be surprised that at some point homosexuality will be completely normalized among this decline.

It is about equality; that's all.

No, it's about politics and moral relativism. Even people who say they support homosexual groups would find it disgusting to actually have sexual intercourse with a person of the same sex. But if it is the case that homosexuals are allowed to serve in the military - then just as men and women are not forced together to the greatest exent possible, heterosexuals should also be given the same respect. If straights are not allowed the same respect as women are given, then something is seriously unequal.

Wolfpack

It is easy to see where you are coming from. You find gays morally objectionable. You think laws should continue to discriminate for your and your ilk's pleasure. Too bad it is about equality and the overwhelming majority of people recognize that fact. It will soon be over; the homophobes lost. The military will not change one iota except in its diversity. Maybe the homophobes that will leave will be replaced by more qualified gays; you never know.

goodDonkey:

You think laws should continue to discriminate for your and your ilk's pleasure.

This isn't about me wanting to be mean to someone else for my own "pleasure" - nor is this about equality.

You have studiously avoided discussion of how it will be possible to integrate homosexuality into such a unique institution. It is my contention that is is only just that the military make separate accommodations for both heterosexuals and homosexuals just as it has been necessary to separate men and women.

Maybe the homophobes that will leave will be replaced by more qualified gays; you never know.

Again, I think that Liberals would like to do as much damage to the military as possible and this is one way of doing it.

goodDonkey:

I urge you to go to the military times web site to see the poll about how the service members themselves about how they feel about this issue. I would post the link for you but it is being blocked by JT.