US Senate votes to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

[Hoover]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121801729.html

[Kwesi]

'bout time. I know it won't happen but I'd laugh if there was a US Military coming out party .

[fenderhutz]

This is a double edge sword trust me. I have a close family friend that was gay in the military. As much as I personally believe a person has no reason to hide their preference, this is going to mean a good deal more bars of soap in the socks at boot camp. The military isn't an open court like civilian life and they take care of things (or brush things under the rug) as they see it appropriate.

[jonathan_matos5]

im all in favor of a dont care policy on this matter.

not apathetic to the issue, i feel the govt should not care about the sexual orientation of the military.

[rr5025]

About time. Maybe the ignorant fools who hate gays for no reason other than that a book or their parents told them to will actually gain a realistic, non hateful view of gays.

[Staccato]

Some US military commanders quoted in the news have referred to distractions that can be caused by gay troopers in a war zone.

Then, on the other extreme there are those that did not volunteer to serve in the military, or serve with US forces in combat-that choose to shout their personal opinions on 'gays in the military' from the highest civilian rooftop.

It's easier for some of us to relate to the potential distraction factor for men/women in US combat units rather than the problems of reinventing of protocol and/or regulations for our troops worldwide?

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by fenderhutz

Not trying to start a bad thread or anything. Our countries pseudo values are based on a book that condemns it. So yes, it won't be accepted for a very long time, regardless of legality. I won't say "ever", but a long time.

I don't know how old you are or how close you live to a major city, but the further you get away from a major city and the older the demographic the less it is accepted.

I live in rural country and used to work in the city and still work with those on the city. It's a totally different environment less than a 90 minute drive outside of DC.

A sad, harsh, but true reality. Indeed.

I highly doubt it will be a long time. I think it's really just a matter of the older generation dying out.

[Cabazon]

Originally Posted by warwick.hoy

Also,...how is this not a political thread.

It's more of a thread on laws governing the US Military.

I don't think that's political, even if it was politicians who passed the law.

[TOOL460002]

Originally Posted by fenderhutz

Not trying to start a bad thread or anything. Our countries pseudo values are based on a book that condemns it. So yes, it won't be accepted for a very long time, regardless of legality. I won't say "ever", but a long time.

I don't know how old you are or how close you live to a major city, but the further you get away from a major city and the older the demographic the less it is accepted.

i dont understand the correlation between older people farther out from major cities not approving of a particular demographic has to do with the makeup of our military. also, our country is based on a lot of things, one of which is religious freedom. this book you are picking and choosing from also has plenty to say about slavery, and its not particularly current.

Originally Posted by JimB52

I'm pretty sure there were similar thoughts when the military ended segregation.

a gigantic +1

some people will start to get it, and some people never will. no one has the right to serve in our military. you certainly can be denied. i dont think there is going to be a mass exodus due to this policy change.

from what ive gleaned and heard from friends that have served, a good soldier follows the chain of command. assuming the commander in chief signs off on this, it would be a direct order. perhaps we can weed out the soldiers that cannot take an order, or who are so concerned with prejudice that it becomes difficult to perform their duties.

[stratovani]

One thing most here don't seem to understand, and that is under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (as well as all militaries worldwide) a subordinate is obliged to obey a lawful order from his superior. Here's a scenario where a squad is on patrol, and a couple of soldiers are openly gay (the names are hypothetical, of course):

Sgt. Smith: "We need someone on point. Recommendations, Cpl. Anderson?"
Anderson: "Sure, Sarge. Send Jones here on point."
Sarge: "Jones, you're on point! On the double!"

Now in a column of troops, the pointman's job is to draw enemy fire. Sgt. Smith and Cpl. Anderson know Pte. Jones is gay, so he'll get point duty every time. And Jones can't disobey without consequences, since it's a lawful order.

This is why I'm against being openly gay in the military. My point is that gays will always get the dirtiest, most dangerous jobs, like digging latrines or getting a stuck H-bomb in a bomb bay unstuck.Now I'm not gay, and I personally have nothing against them, but if I was a gay young man about to join the military I'd damn well keep my mouth shut.

[Kwesi]

Originally Posted by stratovani

One thing most here don't seem to understand, and that is under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (as well as all militaries worldwide) a subordinate is obliged to obey a lawful order from his superior. Here's a scenario where a squad is on patrol, and a couple of soldiers are openly gay (the names are hypothetical, of course):

Sgt. Smith: "We need someone on point. Recommendations, Cpl. Anderson?"
Anderson: "Sure, Sarge. Send Jones here on point."
Sarge: "Jones, you're on point! On the double!"

Now in a column of troops, the pointman's job is to draw enemy fire. Sgt. Smith and Cpl. Anderson know Pte. Jones is gay, so he'll get point duty every time. And Jones can't disobey without consequences, since it's a lawful order.

This is why I'm against being openly gay in the military. My point is that gays will always get the dirtiest, most dangerous jobs, like digging latrines or getting a stuck H-bomb in a bomb bay unstuck.Now I'm not gay, and I personally have nothing against them, but if I was a gay young man about to join the military I'd damn well keep my mouth shut.

Whoa... are you serious? Could any TB military men confirm this? That sounds horrible...

[stratovani]

Originally Posted by Kwesi

Whoa... are you serious? Could any TB military men confirm this? That sounds horrible...

Kwesi, I was in the Canadian military myself, back in the mid 1970s, and I can assure you it was like that back then, not only in the Canadian military but in all militaries that I know of. I'll admit I can't really say for sure if things are still like that nowadays, but knowing how things were back then I'd be surprised if things have changed much, if at all.

[jp58]

Originally Posted by madmatt

I see bad things for the military now.
Since the military is a gung-ho type institution full of macho adrenaline addicts, Gays will never be accepted. They will be ridiculed and segregated depending on any situation.
Like it or not, Homosexuality will never be accepted as "Normal" or "OK".
Any guy who claims to be straight can never say "Oh, it is ok, there is nothing wrong with it..." To anyone who ever says that all I can say is: "Bend over and let's see how 'OK' it really is buddy".
And let's face it, straights generally do not like gays.
I see a lot of adversity amongst the ranks in the near future.

Originally Posted by stratovani

One thing most here don't seem to understand, and that is under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (as well as all militaries worldwide) a subordinate is obliged to obey a lawful order from his superior. Here's a scenario where a squad is on patrol, and a couple of soldiers are openly gay (the names are hypothetical, of course):

Sgt. Smith: "We need someone on point. Recommendations, Cpl. Anderson?"
Anderson: "Sure, Sarge. Send Jones here on point."
Sarge: "Jones, you're on point! On the double!"

Now in a column of troops, the pointman's job is to draw enemy fire. Sgt. Smith and Cpl. Anderson know Pte. Jones is gay, so he'll get point duty every time. And Jones can't disobey without consequences, since it's a lawful order.

This is why I'm against being openly gay in the military. My point is that gays will always get the dirtiest, most dangerous jobs, like digging latrines or getting a stuck H-bomb in a bomb bay unstuck.Now I'm not gay, and I personally have nothing against them, but if I was a gay young man about to join the military I'd damn well keep my mouth shut.

That's really sad.

[Simo98]

Originally Posted by stratovani

Now in a column of troops, the pointman's job is to draw enemy fire. Sgt. Smith and Cpl. Anderson know Pte. Jones is gay, so he'll get point duty every time. And Jones can't disobey without consequences, since it's a lawful order.

Realistically, this would only happen when the people in charge don't like gays, which is becoming less prominent (I hope).

If the people giving the orders are blatant racists, the gays wouldn't have a problem. Same with if they had a strange dislike for people taller than them, or with glasses, or even if they just didn't get along with someone under their command.

At least, that is what I would assume. If the person in charge is gay himself, there would be no reason for it to happen at all. But yes, it could cause problems.

[P. Aaron]

Does one join the military because of the unique opportunity it presents allowing individuals to showcase who they are, or is it that environment where individuals are broken down and transformed into teams of cohesive soldiers?

Have things changed there or something?

[knumbskull]

Originally Posted by P. Aaron

Does one join the military because of the unique opportunity it presents allowing individuals to showcase who they are

[EBodious]

Originally Posted by stratovani

... if I was a gay young man about to join the military I'd damn well keep my mouth shut.

that would be a soldier's personal choice instead of a policy mandate.

i remember when DADT was created by clinton. i remember thinking how crazy it sounded. this is the world's biggest military and its imposing a policy that sounds like it came from an elementary school playground. i am surprised it took this long to get repealed, but i look forward to seeing how things play out. what if.... the military just keeps on doing what's its doing....

....like nothing's changed.

[EBodious]

p.s. IMHO, mamatt has been quoted enough. can we ignore that comment now?

[GregC]

Originally Posted by P. Aaron

Does one join the military because of the unique opportunity it presents allowing individuals to showcase who they are, or is it that environment where individuals are broken down and transformed into teams of cohesive soldiers?

Have things changed there or something?

I don't think gay soldiers are interesting in "showcasing" who they are. My guess is they're tired of covering up every single thing related to their sexuality in order to avoid losing their jobs.

Straight soldiers, on the other hand, have a bit of a history of flaunting their sexuality.

[Dr. Cheese]

Now that homosexuality is permissable in the military, I expect the military to whatever it needs to do to make the policy stick. My father was in the military during the early days of integration, and he satisfied enough to make it a career. Racism certainly did not die, but the military made being an open racist jerk unacceptable for unit cohesion. They can do the same thing about sexual orientation.

As for those who say soldiers should keep their sexuality secret, I say hogwash. It is never the duty of the oppressed to make a bigot feel comfortable.