NationStates Jolt Archive

I really hope that Obama can get rid of this stupidity. When someone is doing their job and doing it well, the last thing they should have to worry about is hiding their sexuality.

It is in Kansas, though.

http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/02/22/a-kansas-national-guard-member-returns-from-iraq-to-a-girlfriend39s-kissand-a-discharge/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main%7Cdl5%7Clink3%7Chttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.propeller.com%2Fstory%2F2009%2F02%2F22%2Fa-kansas-national-guard-member-returns-from-iraq-to-a-girlfriend39s-kissand-a-discharge

It is in Kansas, though.

That's all that needed to be said, sadly.

I really hope that Obama can get rid of this stupidity. When someone is doing their job and doing it well, the last thing they should have to worry about is hiding their sexuality.
What if hiding their sexuality is part of the job?

It's not like USAF and USN aren't good enough to blow anyone into oblivion without these soldiers. Maybe their job is to disprove the notion that US is gay.

Ah, Kansas, the State that Didn't Evolve.

What if hiding their sexuality is part of the job?

There is absolutely no reason that it should be.

It's not like USAF and USN aren't good enough to blow anyone into oblivion without these soldiers. Maybe their job is to disprove the notion that US is gay.

What?

Ah, Kansas, the State that Didn't Evolve.

It's like a real time primordial ooze!

It's like a real time primordial ooze!

Well, it IS sticky, disgusting and unintelligent.

*sigh*

Yeah, Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a monumentally asinine policy, and I can't wait until it's scrapped.

That said, as far as Kansas-bashing goes, while I am a Missourian and am thus intrinsically obligated to mock Kansas whenever possible - this sort of thing is happening all over the country, not just in flatter-than-a-pancakeland. I am disgusted at the coworker that somehow felt the need to report the "homosexual misconduct," though. What an asshole.

*sigh*

Yeah, Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a monumentally asinine policy, and I can't wait until it's scrapped.

That said, as far as Kansas-bashing goes, while I am a Missourian and am thus intrinsically obligated to mock Kansas whenever possible - this sort of thing is happening all over the country, not just in flatter-than-a-pancakeland. I am disgusted at the coworker that somehow felt the need to report the "homosexual misconduct," though. What an asshole.

When it's scrapped, neocons will be pissed! :D

It is in Kansas, though.

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.

Well, it IS sticky, disgusting and unintelligent.

It's a state full of Jimmy Whichard from King of the Hill!

*sigh*

Yeah, Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a monumentally asinine policy, and I can't wait until it's scrapped.

That said, as far as Kansas-bashing goes, while I am a Missourian and am thus intrinsically obligated to mock Kansas whenever possible - this sort of thing is happening all over the country, not just in flatter-than-a-pancakeland. I am disgusted at the coworker that somehow felt the need to report the "homosexual misconduct," though. What an asshole.

Let's start a band called Homosexual Misconduct, and tour the bible belt.

Let's start a band called Homosexual Misconduct, and tour the bible belt.

Will band members wear outlandish and provocative outfits?! Maybe rainbow color clothes with strap on as cod pieces...

There is absolutely no reason that it should be.
Well, yes, their job is to have a family of five at home, a white blonde wife with a curly hair, the older son brought up to be a soldier, the younger son a factory worker, the daughter a waitress and a good wife in the future. Be the role model.

But failing that...


What?
The US of A is widely regarded as completely gay.

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.
Are you talking about the same USA we're talking about? As far as human rights abuses, there are far worse countries, ya know...

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.

Trolling, flamebaiting, which is it? Hmm... Such a tough choice...

Are you talking about the same USA we're talking about? As far as human rights abuses, there are far worse countries, ya know...

Here in the US, we do have the most important human right I can think of - when we see an issue like this, we can and do, call the government on it. And, when enough people get fed up, it will change.

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.

Your ignorance is showing.:$

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.

This coming from a Swede, whose country has institutionalized slavery and murder of the human spirit on a scale unprecedented in history.

I mean, I know they make us Gentiles pay to use JDate, but still...

Seriously, though, I'm afraid Don't Ask/Don't Tell is a compromise that's going to have to stay around for awhile. Right or wrong, there is still a very strong disapproval of homosexuality throughout much of the United States, especially among those demographic groups that are more inclined to join the military. Until those attitudes change, this policy is going to have to stay since, you know, the US needs a military regardless of how much gay-bashing is going on.

What was so wrong with Don't Care, Don't Care anyway?

This coming from a Swede, whose country has institutionalized slavery and murder of the human spirit on a scale unprecedented in history.

I mean, I know they make us Gentiles pay to use JDate, but still...

Seriously, though, I'm afraid Don't Ask/Don't Tell is a compromise that's going to have to stay around for awhile. Right or wrong, there is still a very strong disapproval of homosexuality throughout much of the United States, especially among those demographic groups that are more inclined to join the military. Until those attitudes change, this policy is going to have to stay since, you know, the US needs a military regardless of how much gay-bashing is going on.

Bad, bad move...

Fass, when you're responding to this one post, remember: First, do no harm. Then do some, if you want. :p

*Grabs the pop-corn*

If I've read this correctly, she was off-duty and off-work-premises when she kissed the girlfriend. Why is it even relevant to the military?

If I've read this correctly, she was off-duty and off-work-premises when she kissed the girlfriend. Why is it even relevant to the military?

The basic answer that applies to most cases of gay inequality: (many) Christians can't stand teh gayz having rights, and those Christians are a well-organized voting bloc.

Are you talking about the same USA we're talking about? As far as human rights abuses, there are far worse countries, ya know...

That's a bit like saying "there are far worse STIs out there than herpes". Sure there are. But you'll still have herpes. The human rights situation in the USA is a bit like that: sure enough, it's not China, but it still has the death penalty, pitiful discrimination protections (black people were barely even citizens into the 60s (the 60s!), gay people aren't even second class inhabitants in this the 21st century, as they lack even some of the basic rights foreigners of the "proper" sexual orientation have), lacks some of the rights a lot of us in the rest of the developed world take for granted (the right to life is but one, but the most central and fundamental) and so on... so you see, it's not exactly Canada, either.

Deflecting criticism of the glaring and, for what is supposed to be a Western country, horrendous shortcomings by comparing it to, say, Iran with whom it shares a penchant for allowing the government to kill citizens, doesn't gloss over the fact how low you have to set the bar for it to seem passable.

So, saying "it's only Kansas" is at best an untruth.

but it still has the death penalty,
Which is one reason The US is more civilized than Europe--because it treats creatures how they deserve, rather than buying into some irrational and barbaric lie about how those who violate the righs of others possess rights themselves.

pitiful discrimination protections (black people were barely even citizens into the 60s (the 60s!), gay people aren't even second class inhabitants in this the 21st century, as they lack even some of the basic rights foreigners of the "proper" sexual orientation have),
Banning discrimination by private groups--including businesses--is barbaric, because it is a violation of the sacred right of the individual to associate with whom he chooses (which necessarily includes the right to NOT associate if he so desires).

Discrimination by government is, of course, an entirely different matter.

lacks some of the rights a lot of us in the rest of the developed world take for granted
Most of those supposed "rights" are artificial, and have no rational basis, which means endorsing them is a sign of barbarism rather than civilization.

which is one reason the us is more civilized than europe--because it treats creatures how they deserve, rather than buying into some irrational and barbaric lie about how those who violate the righs of others possess rights themselves.

...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!

If I've read this correctly, she was off-duty and off-work-premises when she kissed the girlfriend. Why is it even relevant to the military?

Hmmm that is a very very good question.

*Gives slice of cheesecake*

...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!

Dont feed either troll. Let them battle without goading.


THUNDADOME!!!!

Looking at the comments it looks like the US has a lot of people who think like the Phelps

Looking at the comments it looks like the US has a lot of people who think like the Phelps

Please tell me you mean "Well, that bong threw a wrench at my career." instead of "God Hates Fags"...

*waves at Fass*

Actually, to my great surprise, I find myself agreeing with Fass, to some degree. Saying about the US "yeah, but we're better than Iran" is really a little bit like saying about a fantasy novel "yeah, but it's better than The Eye of Argon", or like saying a student graduated "in the top ninety-five per cent of his class". Compared to other Western nations, the US falls short in several areas, including overall quality of life, healthcare, education, civil and personal rights, and freedom from government spying. Thus, comparing it to dictatorial and unfree states not only dodges the issue, but implicitly groups it with such states, a grouping in which it does not belong (as many of the basic rights are still intact, despite trends of increasing social conservatism).

*waves at Fass*

Actually, to my great surprise, I find myself agreeing with Fass, to some degree. Saying about the US "yeah, but we're better than Iran" is really a little bit like saying about a fantasy novel "yeah, but it's better than The Eye of Argon", or like saying a student graduated "in the top ninety-five per cent of his class". Compared to other Western nations, the US falls short in several areas, including overall quality of life, healthcare, education, civil and personal rights, and freedom from government spying. Thus, comparing it to dictatorial and unfree states not only dodges the issue, but implicitly groups it with such states, a grouping in which it does not belong (as many of the basic rights are still intact, despite trends of increasing social conservatism).

Regardless of whether Fass's point in question here is right, it doesnt change the fact that his bit about every state in the US having virtually no human rights protection is just fucking ignorant.

the US falls short in several areas, including overall quality of life

No, it doesn't.

Please tell me you mean "Well, that bong threw a wrench at my career." instead of "God Hates Fags"...

Guess

jharris352
3 hours, 23 minutes ago

No one is afraid of homosexuals; we are disgusted by them

ericjguerin
3 hours, 15 minutes ago

You're a "pastor"? Really? What church? Then you have to be aware of all the pasages in the Bible that speak about fornication, masturbation and sex outside of marriage being sinful, right? Unless you are a "pastor" that believes the Bible can be interpeted as you see fit, like so many pastors do these days. Perhaps you belong to one of the Anglican or Methodist churches with gay leadership. Or maybe you proscribe to obamessiah's belief that Jesus' Sermon on the Mount allows for gay marriage? What ever the case, you are wrong. I am tired of people like you tryng to change this country from its so far successful course, as a country founded upon Christian beliefs, by followers of Christ. The men who wrote the Declaraton of Independence and the Constitution were not gay, buddhist, muslim, athiest, socalist, imperialist or communist. They were hard-working people who beleived in taking care of yourself and helping your neighbors when they needed it. And if you received that help, you did your best to pay it back, in full, with interest.

Regardless of whether Fass's point in question here is right, it doesnt change the fact that his bit about every state in the US having virtually no human rights protection is just fucking ignorant.

This is true. Human rights are protected in most of the US, just not as well as in some other Western nations (examples like Canada or Norway are usually brought up).

Guess

:(

I asked you please to let me have this one bit of fantasy that some people aren't such pricks. :p

Guess

For whatever reason, a bizarrely large proportion of the people who comment on internet news stories tend to be total wingnuts. We definitely do have total wingnuts in our country, but they don't seem to be quite as prevalent as those comments might lead you to believe.

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.
Uh, no, actually, it wouldn't. Not all states have the death penalty. Some states have gay marriage. Not enough yet, but some.

Your accusation is overly broad.

That's a bit like saying "there are far worse STIs out there than herpes". Sure there are. But you'll still have herpes. The human rights situation in the USA is a bit like that: sure enough, it's not China, but it still has the death penalty, pitiful discrimination protections (black people were barely even citizens into the 60s (the 60s!), gay people aren't even second class inhabitants in this the 21st century, as they lack even some of the basic rights foreigners of the "proper" sexual orientation have), lacks some of the rights a lot of us in the rest of the developed world take for granted (the right to life is but one, but the most central and fundamental) and so on... so you see, it's not exactly Canada, either.

Deflecting criticism of the glaring and, for what is supposed to be a Western country, horrendous shortcomings by comparing it to, say, Iran with whom it shares a penchant for allowing the government to kill citizens, doesn't gloss over the fact how low you have to set the bar for it to seem passable.

So, saying "it's only Kansas" is at best an untruth.

Your posts are becoming incredibly dated, as well as your use of deliberately vague and context-less generalisations. You only gave two actual examples in your whole 'argument', one that is completely irrelevant (the past has no baring on the present situation, if it did, Sweden would be really really really fucked). It's quite amusing that you claim that the 'right to life' is any sort of substantial right that is respected in any way other than a meaningless platitude in the vast majority (if not all) countries in Europe and the rest of the world. But sure the US has its problems, so does Sweden, so do many countries in Europe. Some in fact have far worse problems with human rights. This "lol my country is way better then yours" subjective bullshit is incredibly pointless and childish since for one thing you could easily apply arbitrary standards of human rights and intensely bash any country (yes, even Sweden). However, in the real world, nobody gives a shit about how superior some incredibly insignificant European country is.

Your posts are becoming incredibly dated, as well as your use of deliberately vague and context-less generalisations. You only gave two actual examples in your whole 'argument', one that is completely irrelevant (the past has no baring on the present situation, if it did, Sweden would be really really really fucked). It's quite amusing that you claim that the 'right to life' is any sort of substantial right that is respected in any way other than a meaningless platitude in the vast majority (if not all) countries in Europe and the rest of the world. But sure the US has its problems, so does Sweden, so do many countries in Europe. Some in fact have far worse problems with human rights. This "lol my country is way better then yours" subjective bullshit is incredibly pointless and childish since for one thing you could easily apply arbitrary standards of human rights and intensely bash any country (yes, even Sweden). However, in the real world, nobody gives a shit about how superior some incredibly insignificant European country is.



^This

Seriously, though, I'm afraid Don't Ask/Don't Tell is a compromise that's going to have to stay around for awhile. Right or wrong, there is still a very strong disapproval of homosexuality throughout much of the United States, especially among those demographic groups that are more inclined to join the military.

So?

Until those attitudes change, this policy is going to have to stay since, you know, the US needs a military regardless of how much gay-bashing is going on.

Indeed it does. It very much needs, for instance, people who speak Farsi and Arabic. Unfortunately, it has discharged quite a few people like that just for being gay, weakening the military.

Banning discrimination by private groups--including businesses--is barbaric, because it is a violation of the sacred right of the individual to associate with whom he chooses (which necessarily includes the right to NOT associate if he so desires).

Discrimination by government is, of course, an entirely different matter.

I don't agree with the first premise, but even if we take it for granted:

Are you under the impression that discrimination by the military is not discrimination by the government?


Uh, no, actually, it wouldn't.

Actually, in this case, it likely would. This is a military policy, not a state policy. Because of the don't ask/don't tell policy, she could have been reported as kissing her girlfriend anywhere in the world and it would likely have resulted in her discharge.

Don't Ask Don't Tell was nothing but an exercise in political pandering. It has no place in real military policy. It should be scrapped as soon as possible.

What was so wrong with Don't Care, Don't Care anyway?
nobody cared for it.

So?
So, things are going to go up shit creek really fast when the military changes policy such as to scare away quite a good chunk of its potential recruits.

Indeed it does. It very much needs, for instance, people who speak Farsi and Arabic. Unfortunately, it has discharged quite a few people like that just for being gay, weakening the military.

No one's saying it's a perfect solution. Until popular attitudes change, I don't think there will be one. Maintaining the status quo, however, is simply the least bad. When it's a choice between changing the rules in a manner that'll piss off probably around 50% of potential recruits, vs. getting rid of a relatively smaller number of people who simply (however understandably) didn't want to follow that rule, the decision seems simple.

I don't agree with the first premise,
Then you're wrong.

Are you under the impression that discrimination by the military is not discrimination by the government?
Of course not.

But at the moment I don't see a superior alternative.

This isn't the fantasy world, where there are always perfect "solutions" to every problem. In the real world, sometimes you have to make trade-offs and choose the least objectionable from a set of imperfect alternatives. This is one of those situations.

But at the moment I don't see a superior alternative.

You're right. YOU don't see a superior alternative.

So, things are going to go up shit creek really fast when the military changes policy such as to scare away quite a good chunk of its potential recruits.



No one's saying it's a perfect solution. Until popular attitudes change, I don't think there will be one. Maintaining the status quo, however, is simply the least bad. When it's a choice between changing the rules in a manner that'll piss off probably around 50% of potential recruits, vs. getting rid of a relatively smaller number of people who simply (however understandably) didn't want to follow that rule, the decision seems simple.


Then you're wrong.


Of course not.

But at the moment I don't see a superior alternative.

This isn't the fantasy world, where there are always perfect "solutions" to every problem. In the real world, sometimes you have to make trade-offs and choose the least objectionable from a set of imperfect alternatives. This is one of those situations.

wait a minute wait a minute, lemme make sure I have this straight. Bluth "taxation is slavery so we have a duty to resist oppression by force!" Corporation is arguing that it's...ok for the government to stop someone from having the job he or she wants?

That's it, Poe.

This would happen in any state in the USA, which lacks basic human rights protections across the board.

I would agree partially with that Fass: the United States is terribly backward as far as "developed" countries go. Still, I believe "basic" human rights exist here, such as freedom of speech.

So, things are going to go up shit creek really fast when the military changes policy such as to scare away quite a good chunk of its potential recruits.

I highly doubt it. Most members of the military are well aware that they already serve with homosexual soldiers and no recruits are given the impression that no one they bunk with could possibly be gay.

The only thing this would change is that those soldiers would actually still be able to live their own lives without fear of a dishonorable discharge.

Regardless of whether Fass's point in question here is right, it doesnt change the fact that his bit about every state in the US having virtually no human rights protection is just fucking ignorant.

No, just hyperbole. Scandinavia is one of the most progressive areas in the world; at least 3/4 of the globe lacks basic human rights in comparison to it.

I just lost ten minutes of my life reading the responses to that article. My brain actually tried to crawl out of my ear to escape.

I just lost ten minutes of my life reading the responses to that article. My brain actually tried to crawl out of my ear to escape.

How... masochistic of you.

How... masochistic of you.

I don't know why I do these things to myself, except that I get a perverse thrill in being pissed off by stupidity and wanting to punch people's teeth out.

Also, your icon cracks me up every time I see it. :D

Well, it IS sticky, disgusting and unintelligent.

Best summation of Kansas I've ever read. If I had to go from New Mexico to Iowa, I'd take the extra time to drive around it.

That said, as far as Kansas-bashing goes, while I am a Missourian and am thus intrinsically obligated to mock Kansas whenever possible - this sort of thing is happening all over the country, not just in flatter-than-a-pancakeland. I am disgusted at the coworker that somehow felt the need to report the "homosexual misconduct," though. What an asshole.

Sad but true. When even California shames us, it's truly...... shameful.

Seriously, though, I'm afraid Don't Ask/Don't Tell is a compromise that's going to have to stay around for awhile. Right or wrong, there is still a very strong disapproval of homosexuality throughout much of the United States, especially among those demographic groups that are more inclined to join the military. Until those attitudes change, this policy is going to have to stay since, you know, the US needs a military regardless of how much gay-bashing is going on.

That's certainly how we did it when we abolished slavery and ended segregation, all right.

Which is one reason The US is more civilized than Europe--because it treats creatures how they deserve, rather than buying into some irrational and barbaric lie about how those who violate the righs of others possess rights themselves.

You know, whatever quip I might have had for Fass and his disdain for the U.S. just withered away in the face of that sentence. This is why Northern California needs to secede--so I don't have to answer to the same nationality as people with such primitive ideology.

I don't know why I do these things to myself, except that I get a perverse thrill in being pissed off by stupidity and wanting to punch people's teeth out.

Also, your icon cracks me up every time I see it. :D

It's ok. Sometimes I like to read Conservapedia. We all go through such phases.
Clone high was fucking win. I'm so glad someone else knows it!

I would agree partially with that Fass: the United States is terribly backward as far as "developed" countries go. Still, I believe "basic" human rights exist here, such as freedom of speech.

Yea, you guys should really buy the human rights expansion pack. It adds gay marriage and it fixes that bug that gives women less pay than men for equal work.

It's really worth the price.

You know, whatever quip I might have had for Fass and his disdain for the U.S. just withered away in the face of that sentence. This is why Northern California needs to secede--so I don't have to answer to the same nationality as people with such primitive ideology.

Come live with us. We have bunk beds and apple juice.

So, things are going to go up shit creek really fast when the military changes policy such as to scare away quite a good chunk of its potential recruits.



No one's saying it's a perfect solution. Until popular attitudes change, I don't think there will be one. Maintaining the status quo, however, is simply the least bad. When it's a choice between changing the rules in a manner that'll piss off probably around 50% of potential recruits, vs. getting rid of a relatively smaller number of people who simply (however understandably) didn't want to follow that rule, the decision seems simple.


Don't be silly. This is the same flawed "logic" opponents of desegregating the army used. But it didn't happen. Yes, some bitched and moaned about it, but then they just got on with their work and got over it. People join the armed forces for many reasons, but being protected from the scary queers isn't one of them. There will be absolutely no impact on recruitment if DADT is repealed. Now, getting involved in pointless wars on the other hand...

Come live with us. We have bunk beds and apple juice.

Well I'm sold!

It's a state full of Jimmy Whichard from King of the Hill!

Are there enough legs in the whole region to kick those asses repeatedly?

No, just hyperbole. Scandinavia is one of the most progressive areas in the world; at least 3/4 of the globe lacks basic human rights in comparison to it.

I'd rather the ballsy, angry, slightly backwards US than the cold, unfeeling, "If we can't prove it in court, she wasn't actually raped. Fucking whore" Sweden.

I'd rather the ballsy, angry, slightly backwards US than the cold, unfeeling, "If we can't prove it in court, she wasn't actually raped. (...)" Sweden.

So...

Due process is...

Er...

Okay, can someone take over? I have a big "does not compute" sign here...

I'd rather the ballsy, angry, slightly backwards US than the cold, unfeeling, "If we can't prove it in court, she wasn't actually raped. Fucking whore" Sweden.

*hugs.*

oh god I'm going to be surrounded by these neanderthals soon...should I proclaim out loud that I love to suck dicks just to see what happens?

if I was her I would of gone out swinging

Guess
ericjguerin
3 hours, 15 minutes ago

You're a "pastor"? Really? What church? Then you have to be aware of all the pasages in the Bible that speak about fornication, masturbation and sex outside of marriage being sinful, right? Unless you are a "pastor" that believes the Bible can be interpeted as you see fit, like so many pastors do these days. Perhaps you belong to one of the Anglican or Methodist churches with gay leadership. Or maybe you proscribe to obamessiah's belief that Jesus' Sermon on the Mount allows for gay marriage? What ever the case, you are wrong. I am tired of people like you tryng to change this country from its so far successful course, as a country founded upon Christian beliefs, by followers of Christ. The men who wrote the Declaraton of Independence and the Constitution were not gay, buddhist, muslim, athiest, socalist, imperialist or communist. They were hard-working people who beleived in taking care of yourself and helping your neighbors when they needed it. And if you received that help, you did your best to pay it back, in full, with interest.


Ohhhh, that is so going on Fundies say the Darndest things.

So, things are going to go up shit creek really fast when the military changes policy such as to scare away quite a good chunk of its potential recruits.



No one's saying it's a perfect solution. Until popular attitudes change, I don't think there will be one. Maintaining the status quo, however, is simply the least bad. When it's a choice between changing the rules in a manner that'll piss off probably around 50% of potential recruits, vs. getting rid of a relatively smaller number of people who simply (however understandably) didn't want to follow that rule, the decision seems simple.


I'm willing to bet that every single country which has repealed it's bans on gays in the military have had people giving the same arguments. In fact, I remeber them from 9 years ago when they got rid of it in the UK.

You know what happened? Nothing. There was no big outcry, no massive drop in recruitment, nothing. Why? Because NO ONE CARED. Frankly I think it's insulting to the members of the US military to assume that they will throw a hissy fit if they realise the guy they are serving with likes cock instead of pussy. Most of your allies have openly gay servicemen/women and I've never heard of it being an issue when the US has to serve alongside them.

The military is, by it's nature, a conservative institution. It fears change (unless it's better ways of blowing their enemies up :P) and has to be dragged kicking and screaming into it. But it handles it, it adapts and in the end it realises that it's not that bad.

Strange. Id want to review the investigation results. My guess is she said she was a lesbian during the investigation. don't ask don't tell dismisses being seen kissing or holding hands as not enough evidence for discharge(even going to a gay strip club or having a gay magazine is not sufficient evidence ), though it is enough to begin an investigation.
By and large the solider either has to admit to it or be caught in the act (being walked in on in on base barracks is common enough even for straights)

I'd rather the ballsy, angry, slightly backwards US than the cold, unfeeling, "If we can't prove it in court, she wasn't actually raped. Fucking whore" Sweden.

So...

Due process is...

Er...

Okay, can someone take over? I have a big "does not compute" sign here...

Let me try:
So...

Due process... and having to prove the defendant's guilt in a court of law before convicting them...

are bad?

I'm willing to bet that every single country which has repealed it's bans on gays in the military have had people giving the same arguments. In fact, I remeber them from 9 years ago when they got rid of it in the UK.

You know what happened? Nothing. There was no big outcry, no massive drop in recruitment, nothing. Why? Because NO ONE CARED. Frankly I think it's insulting to the members of the US military to assume that they will throw a hissy fit if they realise the guy they are serving with likes cock instead of pussy. Most of your allies have openly gay servicemen/women and I've never heard of it being an issue when the US has to serve alongside them.

The military is, by it's nature, a conservative institution. It fears change (unless it's better ways of blowing their enemies up :P) and has to be dragged kicking and screaming into it. But it handles it, it adapts and in the end it realises that it's not that bad.

I've got a good buddy in the Air Force who lives on-base and spends his days completely surrounded by military personnel. The stance of every single person he knows is,

"They'll give us billions of dollar's worth of equipment and training that is specifically used to kill people, and they'll trust us to put that equipment and training to proper use, yet they think we'll all flip our shit if a homo walks in the room.

Double. You. Tea. Eff."

The actual servicemen and women don't give a shit. If anything, my buddy says that a straight woman has a much rougher time serving than a gay man has.

I've got a good buddy in the Air Force who lives on-base and spends his days completely surrounded by military personnel. The stance of every single person he knows is,

"They'll give us billions of dollar's worth of equipment and training that is specifically used to kill people, and they'll trust us to put that equipment and training to proper use, yet they think we'll all flip our shit if a homo walks in the room.

Double. You. Tea. Eff."

The actual servicemen and women don't give a shit. If anything, my buddy says that a straight woman has a much rougher time serving than a gay man has.This. ^

What's really heartbreaking is the stories you hear about gay soldiers who are totally "out" to their squads and stuff, and nobody gives a rats ass about it, but then those same gay soldiers come back home and get told that their partners can't have benefits. They can't get the housing or health care or any of the other shit that is provided for the FAMILIES of vets.

Homophobes act like if DADT were repealed then suddenly there'd be all these fags in the military. Wake up, jackasses...they're already there. They're already serving. They're serving even though they are denied equality under the law. They serve and help protect your families, even knowing that THEIR families are regarded as trash, and THEIR families will be denied benefits.

The gay individuals who serve in the military right now are making a bigger sacrifice than most of us would be prepared to make. I know I wouldn't do it. No fucking way would I put my body and my life on the line for an organization that told me my partner can't get a goddamn dental plan.

Let me try:
So...

Due process... and having to prove the defendant's guilt in a court of law before convicting them...

are bad?

He's referring to Fass's comments in the "rape victim jailed" thread. No one was really arguing that due process is bad, but given that false reports of rape are exceedingly rare, and that the accused rapist has already been convicted of two similar rapes, it makes rather more sense to think the victim isn't just making up a story about getting raped when she was twelve because it's so damn fun, especially not solely on the basis of the highly conclusive evidence that "in a video of her, Fass thinks she sounds bitchy."

I don't want to threadjack, though, so you probably ought to take the argument over to that thread. :)

He's referring to Fass's comments in the "rape victim jailed" thread. No one was really arguing that due process is bad, but given that false reports of rape are exceedingly rare, and that the accused rapist has already been convicted of two similar rapes, it makes rather more sense to think the victim isn't just making up a story about getting raped when she was twelve because it's so damn fun, especially not solely on the basis of the highly conclusive evidence that "in a video of her, Fass thinks she sounds bitchy."

I don't want to threadjack, though, so you probably ought to take the argument over to that thread. :)

please, she was a fucking whore and you know it.

please, she was a fucking whore and you know it.

.....you know, if almost anyone else had said this, I would have eviscerated them.

Consider yourself lucky, mister. :p

please, she was a fucking whore and you know it.

Things Neo can post that would get me banned.

Things Neo can post that would get me banned.
It's weird, isn't it? The mods around here seem capable of grasping things like "context" and "sarcasm."

These NSG mods are quite unlike our Earth-mods.

It's weird, isn't it? The mods around here seem capable of grasping things like "context" and "sarcasm."

These NSG mods are quite unlike our Earth-mods.

inorite?

It's weird, isn't it? The mods around here seem capable of grasping things like "context" and "sarcasm."

Apparently not. I would say they play obvious favorites.

Apparently not. I would say they play obvious favorites.

well, sure, I mean, they are probably biased against people who have admitted to intentionally trolling the forums, across multiple names, all of which have been deleted.

Like you're doing now, for example.

Apparently not. I would say they play obvious favorites.
Well then GOOD NEWS!

You don't have to stand for it. Take your ball and go home, forthwith!

well, sure, I mean, they are probably biased against people who have admitted to intentionally trolling the forums, across multiple names, all of which have been deleted.

Like you're doing now, for example.

Obviously, this isn't trolling. Or is making a natural observation trolling?

9 out of 10 of the names I've had here were deleted only because I let them go inactive.

Obviously, this isn't trolling. Or is making a natural observation trolling?

9 out of 10 of the names I've had here were deleted only because I let them go inactive.

That's a bit like saying, "9 out of the 10 times I got caught publicly masturbating, I managed to finish."

That's a bit like saying, "9 out of the 10 times I got caught publicly masturbating, I managed to finish."

you fucking win.

That's a bit like saying, "9 out of the 10 times I got caught publicly masturbating, I managed to finish."
I think I peed a little while laughing.

you fucking win.

I think I peed a little while laughing.

I merely work with what I'm given. :D

That's a bit like saying, "9 out of the 10 times I got caught publicly masturbating, I managed to finish."

Lol. At least you're creative when you're insulting.

Seriously, I've only been deated twice in four years of posting.

All the rest were closed when I failed to log in monthly.

Pretty good record if you ask me.

Keep on topic, guys. Hotwife, if you want to make an official complaint, you're more than welcome to do so, but we don't approve of you disrupting threads to make irrelevant points.

Ten-HUT! A-bout FACE! Quiiiiiicckk MARCH! Lef-ri-lef-ri-lef-ri ... Squad, HALT!

Soldiers of Truth, your target today is ... Post #1. The OP. Not Hotwife. Not Neo Art. Not the mods. The OP, right?

Ten-HUT! A-bout FACE! Quiiiiiicckk MARCH! Lef-ri-lef-ri-lef-ri ... Squad, HALT!

Soldiers of Truth, your target today is ... Post #1. The OP. Not Hotwife. Not Neo Art. Not the mods. The OP, right?
Sah, yes SAH!

Permission to restate my belief that DADT is, fundamentally, a federal order commanding the military to believe in Gay Cooties, sah?

Sah, yes SAH!

Permission to restate my belief that DADT is, fundamentally, a federal order commanding the military to believe in Gay Cooties, sah?

You can thank Clinton for that one.

You can thank Clinton for that one.
And to all the legislators who let him get away with it. And to all subsequent presidents who didn't (or haven't yet) removed it. And to every right-wing radio host who harps on how it is ESSENTIAL TO FREEDOM that we deny gays equal rights. And so on and so forth.

One of my many talents is that I'm capable of blaming as many as 6 billion people at the same time.

And to all the legislators who let him get away with it. And to all subsequent presidents who didn't (or haven't yet) removed it. And to every right-wing radio host who harps on how it is ESSENTIAL TO FREEDOM that we deny gays equal rights. And so on and so forth.

One of my many talents is that I'm capable of blaming as many as 6 billion people at the same time.

Then we can blame you?

Then we can blame you?
From what I've seen, you already blame me and people like me for pretty much everything. Why ask for permission at this point? :D

From what I've seen, you already blame me and people like me for pretty much everything. Why ask for permission at this point? :D

Let's see - it was Clinton's idea in the first place, and I can assume you voted for him?

Close enough.

Let's see - it was Clinton's idea in the first place, and I can assume you voted for him?

If you'd like to assume that 10 year olds can vote, you go right ahead.

If you'd like to assume that 10 year olds can vote, you go right ahead.

Exonerated!

I blame your parents, though.

Exonerated!

I blame your parents, though.
Of course, for that to be reasonable you'll need to establish that the alternative candidate wouldn't have also passed DADT.

Seriously, look me in the eye and tell me that HW Bush and Bob Dole wouldn't have passed it.

Of course, for that to be reasonable you'll need to establish that the alternative candidate wouldn't have also passed DADT.

Seriously, look me in the eye and tell me that HW Bush and Bob Dole wouldn't have passed it.

*Looks Bottle in the eye* They wouldn't. They probably would have tried to keep a blanket ban on gays in the military full stop. None of the "liberal, gay-loving, it's ok as long as you don't talk about it stuff".

*Looks Bottle in the eye* They wouldn't. They probably would have tried to keep a blanket ban on gays in the military full stop. None of the "liberal, gay-loving, it's ok as long as you don't talk about it stuff".
Hm.

I stand corrected.

Don't be silly. This is the same flawed "logic" opponents of desegregating the army used. But it didn't happen. Yes, some bitched and moaned about it, but then they just got on with their work and got over it. People join the armed forces for many reasons, but being protected from the scary queers isn't one of them. There will be absolutely no impact on recruitment if DADT is repealed. Now, getting involved in pointless wars on the other hand...

To be fair, it might increase LGBT recruitment. As it stands, someone who might otherwise join the military will likely think twice, given that they could end up worse off than they started if someone happens to find out.

I suggest an addition to DADT. anyone reporting any homosexual activity (that is NOT in violation of any law... such as rape) is also booted out with no benefits because they cannot 1) keep their nose out of other people's affairs. 2) unable to hold trust in their fellow soldier. 3) unable to keep a flexable mode of thinking that is needed in today's soldier.

I really hope that Obama can get rid of this stupidity. When someone is doing their job and doing it well, the last thing they should have to worry about is hiding their sexuality.

It is in Kansas, though.

http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/02/22/a-kansas-national-guard-member-returns-from-iraq-to-a-girlfriend39s-kissand-a-discharge/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main%7Cdl5%7Clink3%7Chttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.propeller.com%2Fstory%2F2009%2F02%2F22%2Fa-kansas-national-guard-member-returns-from-iraq-to-a-girlfriend39s-kissand-a-discharge
It's simple. Just don't be gay.

Seriously, though, wouldn't a state guard unit be subject to state law?

It's simple. Just don't be gay.


Before I waste my time shredding this pitiful arguement, I feel it would be polite to ask if this is supposed to be serious.

Before I waste my time shredding this pitiful arguement, I feel it would be polite to ask if this is supposed to be serious.

since the next sentence starts with 'Seriously...' I doubt it's supposed to be serious. ;)

To be fair, it might increase LGBT recruitment. As it stands, someone who might otherwise join the military will likely think twice, given that they could end up worse off than they started if someone happens to find out.

Good point. I suppose I should've said it would have no negative impact on recruitment. It could certainly increase recruitment and likely would.

Apparently not. I would say they play obvious favorites.

And I refer you here: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8784670&postcount=7

See: Mod Oppression and Mod Bias.

Also, stop hijacking. If you have a problem, start a thread about it in Moderation.

He's referring to Fass's comments in the "rape victim jailed" thread. No one was really arguing that due process is bad, but given that false reports of rape are exceedingly rare, and that the accused rapist has already been convicted of two similar rapes, it makes rather more sense to think the victim isn't just making up a story about getting raped when she was twelve because it's so damn fun, especially not solely on the basis of the highly conclusive evidence that "in a video of her, Fass thinks she sounds bitchy."

I don't want to threadjack, though, so you probably ought to take the argument over to that thread. :)

Not that I really want to be on Fass' side here (or anywhere, really), but why the assumption that the false reports are exceedingly rare? Best info I could get from as close to a non-biased source I could find was the FBI 1996 report stating that it came out to about 8%. An interesting note to this is it does not include cases where the victim drops out or refuses to testify. I can't decide if people who decide not to testify would be more likely or less likely to be lying (i.e. either they can't stand to face their attacker or they don't want to lie under oath/risk committing another crime).

(info gotten from a Wiki reference, report is linked http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/Cius_97/96CRIME/96crime2.pdf)