wounded, heroic gay soldier too gay to serve - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-13-2005, 10:00 PM   #151
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 08:46 AM
Maybe when you have three years of experience as a moderator on this forum, I'll take suggestions from you.

Until then, I'd sure be curious to know your opinion on the issue of rape and sexual harassment by heterosexual service members in this thread.

Right here.
__________________

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 04:06 AM   #152
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:46 AM
I give this policy less than ten years of survival.

The 1st Sgt here has not addressed most questions asked. I do not believe he is going to.

Our NATO allies have successfully adopted policies which allow gays to openly serve. There is no reason we cannot as well other than our own fears and prejudices. Apparently it is more important to some that they do not know if a person is gay or not. Apparently the GAY soldiers serving in the armed forces have so far been able to control the "LOOKS" that the 1sgt thinks will happen if suddenly the policy changes. If they are able to control themselves now, they will be able to control themselves if they are allowed to come out of the closet.

The logic is astounding to me. Somehow, if they are forced to live secret lives, the soldiers are protected from them. It is rediculous.

I take comfort in the fact that a majority of Americans are opposed to this practice. It gives me hope that the policy will change, and it will change before I leave this planet. More and more our society IS becoming more tolorant.

Hopefully we can get some people into the service who can make the future more bright for gay soldiers.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:25 AM   #153
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby


And Martha, your comments have brought nothing to the discussion except confirm my feelings about liberal thought in general. Thank you
And what are those feelings, that you can't defend yourself against them?

This conversation has gone in circles, you've avoided questions, changed your stance, and really haven't brought anything to the debate. This has actually confirmed some feelings I have about conservative's views on homosexuality. I'm honestly surprised it's still going.

Dread and Irvine you've done a great job.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:40 AM   #154
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby
Irvine if you could send me the link about the interpreters I would like to read it please.

And Martha, your comments have brought nothing to the discussion except confirm my feelings about liberal thought in general. Thank you

i think it's sad when you take disagreements and turn them into means of reinforcing stereotypes. i see you've already decided Martha is a "liberal" even though you know nothing about her, nor do you, i think, even understand what that word actually means. of course, the word "liberal" is now a slur conservatives use against anyone who doesn't tow a hard-right line, and it's a word that only has meaning in such a context.

anyway, here's the brief news release about the interpreters. i also posted excerpts from a more in-depth washington post article a few pages back.

straight from Lexis Nexis:




Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
The New York Times

January 14, 2005 Friday
Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Column 2; National Desk; Pg. 21

LENGTH: 90 words

HEADLINE: National Briefing Washington: Gay Linguists Dismissed From Military

BYLINE: By John Files (NYT)

BODY:


The military has discharged 20 service personnel who spoke or had studied Arabic for being gay since 1998, according to new data from the Pentagon. Gay rights advocates argue that the dismissals run counter to a critical shortage of translators and interpreters needed for the war on terrorism. Pentagon officials had previously reported that nine Army linguists, including six trained in Arabic, had been discharged under the military's ''don't ask, don't tell'' policy from the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, Calif. John Files (NYT)
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 10:47 AM   #155
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 209
Local Time: 05:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


And what are those feelings, that you can't defend yourself against them?

This conversation has gone in circles, you've avoided questions, changed your stance, and really haven't brought anything to the debate. This has actually confirmed some feelings I have about conservative's views on homosexuality. I'm honestly surprised it's still going.

Dread and Irvine you've done a great job.
Bonovox, Its easy to dismiss me in the way you have. I have answered many questions that have been put before me here. Many of my questions and comments have been avoided as well. I'm not gonna answer Pax or Martha's question because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. As a moderator of this forum, I would expect Pax to keep his "eye on ball" and not go off on a tangent. If I haven't brought anything to the debate, then it wouldn't have been a debate at all. Just a group of ppl agreeing on everything, which sounds sort of scary to me. It amazes me how many of you here so quick to label me, but when I use a word like "liberal" I'm immediately admonished for labeling. I don't label myself a conservative, because I don't subscribe to any particular doctrine and refuse to drink the kool-aid either end of the political spectrum is dishing out. The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.

Martha, I apologize for calling you a liberal if you aren't. I did make that assumption and it was wrong.

Irvine, I respect your opinions and you seem to be one of the few in this thread who has been able to have a civil, well thought out post here. I look forward to reading more of your thoughts on other subjects. I know eventually you and I will find some common ground on other matters. I have been enlightened by some of your posts, and they have made me think. Thank you.
__________________
Abomb-baby is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 11:02 AM   #156
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:46 AM
one other example i'll give of the negative effects of "don't ask/tell" came up in a great article in the WP a few weeks ago about a DC police officer who is the GLBT coordinator for the department (in most big cities, they have small units that are trained to deal with the specific needs of most American city's sub-groups, like Latinos, Muslims, etc.)

one example that came up was a domestic violence call. one man had beaten up his partner to the point of semi-serious injury. however, this man who had been beaten didn't want to press charges because if it got out that he was a victim of domestic violence, and the perpetrator was another man, he would lose his job at the Pentagon.

imagine that reality.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 12:07 PM   #157
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:46 AM
Still no response to the fact that our NATO Allies have been able to do it....and Americans have successfully served with gay foreign troops.....

Ho Hum.....

How does them not announcing they are gay Protect the soldiers?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 12:34 PM   #158
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 04:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby
I'm not gonna answer Pax or Martha's question because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.


Martha, I apologize for calling you a liberal if you aren't. I did make that assumption and it was wrong.

Actually, baby, I wear the Liberal name proudly.

And my comment has everything to do with the subject. You have stated your sexually-oriented discomfort in the presence of gay men, and then you wanted to know why the genders weren't mixed.

I think I addressed both of those in one statement.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 12:54 PM   #159
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 209
Local Time: 05:46 AM
I have responded. Go back and read my posts. Europe and America are very different places. To simply say, "it worked there, it can work here", is missing the point. Yes, we could implement the policy of allowing homosexuals to openly serve. It is theoritically possible. But at what cost? Do you want to lose some of your best soldiers because of it? The military is very good at doing things in their own best interest.But Europe and America are very different places. There are many things that are considered the norm in Europe that aren't in the US. Prostitution, drugs, driving 150 MPH on the autobahn, even smoking. In most of Europe, sex is looked at very differently than in America. We as americans are still very prudish publicly about sex. Some would call Europe more "progressive" Others would say they lack the moral fiber many in this country do. Until you get the majority of the military on board, I don't see the policy changing anytime soon, even if the statistics say the US population wants it changed.

Irvine, concerning the man who was beat up and didn't want to report it, I feel he had other options. I can't blame the military for this. I really don't think the military would have given a rats ass about the particulars of this matter. They would have still known he got beaten when did or didn't show up to work, so he still had to lie to someone about it. I really think he could have reported his partner without any repercussions. The military isn't the "Big Brother" many make them out to be in personal matters. I doubt highly there would have been anything besides a hospital report (assuming he utilized a military hospital). I think it is just convenient to blame the military for him not reporting this assault. Its makes good news and it tends to get ppl fired up.
__________________
Abomb-baby is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:03 PM   #160
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby

Irvine, concerning the man who was beat up and didn't want to report it, I feel he had other options. I can't blame the military for this. I really don't think the military would have given a rats ass about the particulars of this matter. They would have still known he got beaten when did or didn't show up to work, so he still had to lie to someone about it. I really think he could have reported his partner without any repercussions. The military isn't the "Big Brother" many make them out to be in personal matters. I doubt highly there would have been anything besides a hospital report (assuming he utilized a military hospital). I think it is just convenient to blame the military for him not reporting this assault. Its makes good news and it tends to get ppl fired up.

it wasn't about getting beaten up and medical care, it was being able to press charges.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:13 PM   #161
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 209
Local Time: 05:46 AM
I realise that. The military has very little jurisdiction in matters occuring within the public sector. This would have been reported to a municipal law enforcement agency where the military had NO jurisdiction. unless it occurred on a military installation, or the offender was a military member,Uncle sam wouldn't have much at all to do with it.
__________________
Abomb-baby is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:13 PM   #162
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby


Bonovox, Its easy to dismiss me in the way you have. I have answered many questions that have been put before me here. Many of my questions and comments have been avoided as well. I'm not gonna answer Pax or Martha's question because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. As a moderator of this forum, I would expect Pax to keep his "eye on ball" and not go off on a tangent. If I haven't brought anything to the debate, then it wouldn't have been a debate at all. Just a group of ppl agreeing on everything, which sounds sort of scary to me. It amazes me how many of you here so quick to label me, but when I use a word like "liberal" I'm immediately admonished for labeling. I don't label myself a conservative, because I don't subscribe to any particular doctrine and refuse to drink the kool-aid either end of the political spectrum is dishing out. The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.

Yes it is easy, for you've made it very easy. I really haven't seen much of a debate, I'm surprised certain individuals are still feeding this thread, but I guess it's a slow week in here.

And the questions raised by Martha and Pax have everything to do with this topic, you're avoiding them because it doesn't help your argument.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:27 PM   #163
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby
I realise that. The military has very little jurisdiction in matters occuring within the public sector. This would have been reported to a municipal law enforcement agency where the military had NO jurisdiction. unless it occurred on a military installation, or the offender was a military member,Uncle sam wouldn't have much at all to do with it.

but i believe that, if anyone in the army finds out that a co-worker is gay, either through slip of the tongue or police sheet or admission, then that person is discharged. it doesn't matter how you are outed, so long as it is out, then you are gone.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:44 PM   #164
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:46 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Abomb-baby
I realise that. The military has very little jurisdiction in matters occuring within the public sector. This would have been reported to a municipal law enforcement agency where the military had NO jurisdiction. unless it occurred on a military installation, or the offender was a military member,Uncle sam wouldn't have much at all to do with it.
Based on my experience as an MP that is not true.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:46 PM   #165
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 07:46 AM
I would rather have soldiers that are able to do their job next to me gay or straight I care not. If someone is a bigot and prejudiced and unable to perform their job because of someone elses sexuality, I would say get rid of them.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com