E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPUL-E-ALAM, Logar Province, Afghanistan – Exactly one year since the ban on gays serving openly in the military was lifted, here’s a different way of gauging how the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” is playing out: How good is the media access to gay soldiers?
The short answer: It’s still a work in progress.
Ultimately, we got our story for NBC’s Nightly News. We spoke with a dozen or more gay or lesbian soldiers and airmen – both on relatively safe rear guard bases, but also on the front lines.
That wouldn’t have happened without the approval of military commanders and the cooperation of our “minders” – the Public Affairs Officers who were our liaisons to a gay community which, only months ago, still had to socialize covertly.
But it was an uphill, two-week battle, full of last minute changes and disappointments. And while in the end the military let us tell the story, we often felt, along the way, that some commanders simply didn’t want us snooping around such a sensitive issue for fear of opening a massive can of worms.
Reconciling ‘two lives’
For instance, the sudden cold feet of a young, gay combat engineer – who did not want to be named, based in eastern Afghanistan. Even though he had told his story to the national media before, he had never been publicly identified, and he canceled our interview just as we were to chopper out to meet him.
It turned out, like many gay soldiers, he had lived two separate lives. In this soldier's case, his private, gay life and his “normal” life with a wife and child back home. He had never “come out” to his wife or family.
But he faced an even bigger problem: By admitting to a gay relationship while married, he would also violate U.S. military laws against adultery, which can result in a dishonorable discharge. It made me realize how complicated the coming-out process can be for gay and lesbian service members.
As a Plan B, I made a quick call to see if we could set up a military embed on a large base in northern Afghanistan. Could we spend a couple of days with U.S. soldiers over Thanksgiving and get their story out to loved ones and our viewers? I asked.
“That shouldn’t be a problem, Jim,” was the answer from the very can-do Public Affairs Officer I spoke with.
“Good,” I replied. “And while I’m up there I’d also like to ask some soldiers a few questions about how the lifting of the ban on openly gay service members is going in their units.”
After a long pause, I heard: “I don’t think I’ll mention that to the boss.”
“Fine,” I said. “It was just a thought.”
A few hours later the same PAO left a text message: “Request not granted – sorry, Jim. The boss thinks it’s too unsafe up here right now.”
Photo Blog: Two women share first kiss at US Navy ship's return
Slow ripple effect
There were other setbacks, usually a result of that gap “between two lives” – straight and gay, civilian and military. Many gay soldiers still choose NOT to tell their story rather than be caught in the collision.
It’s only been three months since the repeal took effect in the field, and the ripple from that change still has a long way to travel, despite the real freedom from the fear of being discharged from the military that all gay soldiers we spoke with now enjoy.
One example, the same military policeman who had no problem showing his face on-camera during a gay “coffee hour” at Bagram Air Field, canceled a more personal one-on-one interview the next day near his work station. An articulate soldier with a macho swagger, the MP apologized for the change of heart. But he hadn’t yet come out with some of his colleagues and wasn’t yet ready to do so.
A year ago the U.S. military was almost evenly divided over the lifting of DADT during war time. But we saw huge strides forward in retraining soldiers to deal with a new reality: Gays always served with honor during war and made their country proud, only now they’re able to do so without having to hide or lie.
Still, old habits die hard.
After conversing with gay male and female service members – many of them officers – at one of the “coffee hours,” our PAO was driving us back to our sleeping quarters when an overhead light caught the condensation on our front windshield and one word, written hastily by someone’s finger, appeared for all of us to see.
“Fags.”
“Idiots!” belted out our PAO, excoriating his own comrades.
And I thought to myself, “Now that’s the reality check.”
Leave a Comment:
So what? Good for them, they aren't required to announce that information. Normal people don't go around making those kinds of proclaimations, gay or straight, nor are they required to. The repeal of DADT doesn't mean they lose their right to privacy.
Well stated....
It seems that there is a segment of the media and GLBT community which expected thousands of service members to jump up and hold press conference after press conference proclaiming their sexuality....now the focus is to "root out" and find any and every hint of anti-homosexual bias......
replytoj001
I don't understand why would anyone wanna to tell the world they're a pervert. I shake my head everytime a person who chooses to be gay comes out because they are only placing themselves in "mental solitary confinement". No one wants to sit and hear about their numerous failed same-sex relationships, their same-sex bedroom habits or who else is gay. Most families will not allow their homosexual family member to bring their partner home for dinner on the holidays or call to ask how are things going so really what's the point? LMAO
Anyone who needs to make a living knows that perversions are better kept BEHIND closed doors. No matter how many laws are passed or how many psychologist are paid to say homosexuality is not a perversion it will always be viewed as a perversion by society because it is a serious deviation from the norm.
This is another fair reminder that homosexuality will not be tolerated within societies "social constructs" regardless how many laws are passed.
Don't mind Donald, he's barely literate. Pity him.
@trip*toe*fan
So we meet again. Can you please explain this topic as it relates to our last topic. If human beings are born gay then why in the devil would any homosexual hide their perversion when it's okay to tell everyone?
Because hateful people like you make life miserable for them. Sort of like how southern whites made life miserable for your ancestors. But now can you explain to me why a man who probably faces ignorance and discrimination based on his race--or at least has relatives that did--would turn around and spew ignorance about people based on their sexual orientation? Seems like the height of irony to me.
@trip*toe*fan
Race is not a choice, Homosexuality is a subconscious or conscious choice based upon environmental factors. HUGE DIFFERENCE!! Furthermore, I am not spewing ignorance, I am merely stating reality. What world do you live in? or better yet what rock are you living under? Do you envision some alternative universe where homosexuals are just gonna be able walk up to a heterosexual and ask him/her on a date and them just say "no thanks" without looking at them like WTF just happpened or them sit in the same room and them(heterosexuals) not think that the homosexuals are really not perverts LMAO? I'm sorry this world is not some perverted euphoric place were lions mate zebra's. GET REAL!!
Well sexual orientation isn't a choice. You refuse to accept that genes and biology are behind sexual orientation, which is fine. We're all wrong about something in life. You just picked this issue to be wrong about.
Right. You're not being ignorant, you're just equating homosexuality to lions mating with zebras.
Oh I'm still waiting for your intellectual critique of that 2010 Swedish twin study. You seem pretty shy about talking about it, probably because of all the big words in the paper. Remember sound 'em out as you go.
@ trip*toe*fan
Right. You're not being ignorant, you're just equating homosexuality to lions mating with zebras
I'm showing you how ridiculous you think. Maybe this will be a wake up call with REALITY!!
Donald, the reality is that the vast majority of scientists accept the idea that homosexuality isn't a choice and that genetics and biology are responsible. Also the reality is that you are woefully ignorant, barely literate, and horribly hateful. You represent the worst in society.
All someone has to do is read your rambling posts on here and they'll know what you're about: hate and ignorance.
Since you show no signs of getting any smarter, I'm going to stop responding to you. I'm putting you on ignore and I hope people like you go the way of the dodo bird.
@trip*toe*fan
There is no consensus amoungst physcholoist or scientist so you are wrong. Look up the word consensus and you will find it means agreement. The more you know the less you look like a fool.
This cuts both ways. You claimed above that it is an environmental factor. Since you also say that there is no consensus, then using your rationale quoted above, then you're wrong too.
Bizarre... that's the same argument my racist father used to spout against interracial marriage.. I'm sure you're real proud of that.
It was bull@!$%# then and it is bull@!$%# now.
Or just letting them know bigots such as yourself cannot return them or their civil rights back to the stone age.
Donald Price, that statement answers it's own question.
Yet you insist on revealing yourself by posting here.
It doesn't matter if it IS a choice, as the Constitution protects us in our choices -- including YOUR obvious choice to be a clueless bigot.
You still provide NO factual, reliable, peer-reviewed data to support your claims that homosexuality is a choice; all of the reliable data supports the opposite conclusion. You insist on using circular logic to "prove" your claims, further eroding your already-low credibility.
In addition, your constant arguments that homosexuality is a "perversion" is simply YOUR opinion, NOT fact, and therefore hardly worth consideration, since you have shown us how "informed" your opinions are -- NOT.
Maybe homosexuals hide the fact they are homosexuals because of bigots? If anything there are plenty of comments on this article to justify that.
I'm a man married to a woman, but neither of us has any issues hearing about failed same-sex relationships and bedroom habits . . . or, rather, we are no more or less put out by such than we are by hearing about anyone's failed heterosexual relationships or bedroom habits. Our interest and tolerance is based on whether the story is any good.
Not my experience at all . . . and as someone working in theater, I would venture to say that about 30% of the people we know are gay. Seems that, if there were a pattern, we would have noticed it by now.
All of the open gays I know are gainfully employed (for the most part; again, since we work in theater, being "between jobs" is pretty common).
But a consistent deviation; homosexuality, however it is measured, occurs at nearly identical rates across all cultures (regardless of whether it is accepted or not; it's as common in theocracies like Saudi Arabia as in liberal democracies like the Netherlands) and even across all mammalian species.
Social constructs tend to vary depending on occupation, group identity, etc. It's not looked upon poorly (indeed, it's barely noticed at all) in the arts, for instance (and this has been the case in the arts for centuries), or among, say, Quakers or Nichiren Buddhists. Your mileage, as they say, may vary.
I get hit on by gay men all the time (even now, as I near 40). I generally take it as a sign that I'm hot. And in my "alternate universe," this is hardly unusual. Why should it be any different from a woman hitting on me and my saying, "No thanks, I'm married"?
Don't suppose any of us could just take the higher road and thank these people for defending the Constitution of The United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic right?
....*shrugs* Just a thought.
The Reporter is out of line, especially with the first one who is also married. There is enough stress with him being away from his family over in Afghanistan. There is a lot of stress on all the families. The last place the family needs to find out is over the media. That is his private life. He will do what he needs to on his terms, not msnbc's, or any other media type. If the Soldiers need your assist, I am sure they, or their families will ask.
There are some that like to share their sex lives, then there are others that believe in privacy in and out of the service. Respect the soldier who is willing to place his or her life on the line for us. Their lives, peace of mind and safety is more important then any story, especially during the holidays.
Merry Christmas USA armed forces, we are all proud of you and grateful.
That married soldier is a bad example. He wouldn't come out in the civilian world, either.
But, repealing DADT was never about REQUIRING gays to come out. It was simply about allowing them to serve even it was learned that they were gay.
Well if i had chose the Homo/ Lesbo lifestyle I would not want to tell anyone either.
based on your post, most people wouldn't want to hear anything from you. hate is never something you look for.
Well, (comma) If I (capital) had chosen (past tense) to get my GED.........
Desdefmar, his "argument" reveals his character -- or lack of it, in this case.
Because most military members simply do not care........this is a social issue, hyped and spun up by many with an agenda.......
replytoj001
good to hear that "most military members do not care", since many homophobes predicted the collapse of our military.
and do you blame people for for wanting to "hype and spun up" the "minor" matter of equality? I know its crazy that some people actually want the same rights that everyone else has, but there you go..
Anybody who believes that most of the military doesn't care is sadly not in the military. The reason that I will not encourage my children to serve is due to the constant treatment of the military as a social playground. Up to date gays have always served. Gays have served honorably. However, the majority of the folks who serve are not and will never be. Will this help recruiting? No. Those who support this new measure hate the kind of people who actually volunteer for the military... Christian's, OrthodoxJews.... I don't remember the generals beating up congress demanding more openly gay recruits. I suppose improving the military is an after thought
The military is sworn to uphold and defend the US Constitution -- and Christians and Orthodox Jews are NOT the only ones protected by our Constitution, especially since we are a secular nation, not a theocracy.
No, but they make up most of the military. Besides, my issue is making the military better at making war. Ur issue is like u said. Whats best 4 the military is farther down ur list than mine.
And yet you cannot show how being fair to all of its serving members inhibits the military's ability to "make war".
And yet you cannot show how being fair to all of its serving members inhibits the military's ability to "make war".
Have u ever heard of the term "unit cohesion" how about "team work" I was never allowed 2 shower with the girls much to my dismay
And, we are not a secular nation. We have a secular government. Founded by those vile god worshippers? Any other weak arguments u care 2 make?
You are an INFLAMATORY IDIOT! You are also sexist, homophobic and few other words I am fairly certain you are too stupid to understand. You make a comment about your not being allowed to shower with girls... First off - they are women, adults! Second - I am pretty sure they don't want to shower with you as I would assume most women wouldn't want to. You answered the question above about why they separate the men and women - it is because of idiots like you. I cannot believe a moderator hasn't shut you down. You spew nothing but ignorance and hate. You really owe an apology to everyone reading this vine.
It always ends the same. I'm such and such. Quite a compelling argument. I am so hurt.
If anybody cared about the military and defense we might restrain our friends from making it a social playground for those set on making everyone accept homosexual life as normal. When did the military come to congress begging them for more openly gay servicemen? In the infantry I served in... Mostly rural hicks like me. Dont believe this helps recruiting from the bible belt. We may not be helping the effectiveness of the military but they will certainly be "accepting" and better dressed. Maybe we can decorate better the target's we need to destroy.
No one is trying to force anyone else to "accept homosexual life as normal" -- gays don't care about the acceptance of clueless homophobes like you; they just want equality, which they deserve as taxpaying citizens of the US.
Notice the insistance on fairness, equality..... Not, how can we kill our enemy better. The military ended racism long before we forced the democrats to. Serving openly is ur concern. My concern is the service.
How nice of you to make ASSumptions about me! In the first place, I'm not in the military -- but many of my family members are. In the second, I'm straight, but I support equality.
Fairness to all of its serving members can only be a good thing for the military, so if your "concern" really IS "the service," then you should be supporting this.
I believe the fact that u r not in the military was obvious. However, once again the service of gays was never the issue.
Also, John Wayne Casey paid his taxes. Sandusky apears 2 b current with IRS.
You compare two criminals with homosexuals, who are not breaking any laws just by being homosexual?
Do you KNOW the difference between apples and oranges?
Yes, thats why I had 2 use the shower 4 men. Not, the ladies shower.
Erinnj, r u not aware of the uncomfortable closeness with ur fellow soldier that is forced upon u in the military? Do u not see the issue of one man being thrilled with the close contact? It comes down 2 the absolute that there is seperate showers for the 2 genders. Why have that? Can u imagine the conflict? please think beyond ur placid world of "cant we all just get along?" UR acceptance of homosexuality is not as common as u believe. Only 30 years ago homosexuals were treated as a mental dissorder. Ask urself why AIDS spread in the gay population and not in the straight? The truth is uncomfortable and annoying 2 b sure.
Hmm .. would it be better if the military could run ads in the south that read "Join the Army ... beat a fag"?
What makes you think that allowing gays to serve openly, without lying, WON"T make the military better? If you look at large, successful companies you'll find that they have policies that encourage diversity, including protections for gays. That's because smart organizations realize that it is self-defeating to deprive themselves of the very best talent available simply because some people are not staight male WASPs. Getting the very best people ... now, that's the way to create an efficient military.
The last Corp I worked 4 didnt decide with whom I am 2 live with, dine with, and sleep with. Once again may I point out that the current issue is not if they can serve since they always have and will serve. But, must we protect cross-dressing? Hello?
Inglemann, it is very hard to take you seriously when you type like a texting teenager -- learn to type WORDS and spell them; it might give you just a little bit of credibility (doubtful, but worth a try).
And yet it seems to be much more common than YOU believe: currently, 53% of Americans favor marriage equality for homosexuals, while nearly 80% were in favor of repealing DADT (before it was repealed).
Yes, and when the medical community realized that there was never any evidence to warrant its consideration as one, it was removed from their lists of disorders and diseases.
Ask YOURSELF about doing a bit of research -- since you type like a 12-year-old, you can learn to do research just like they do. Currently, approximately 85% of all new HIV/AIDS cases worldwide are among the heterosexual population -- you can also ask yourself why this might be. As you point out (although in a very juvenile way), "the truth is uncomfortable and annoying to be sure" -- although it seems like it would be much more uncomfortable and annoying to people like you who like to make claims without facts to support them.
As I said, when you can learn to type like a grown-up, perhaps you will be treated like one.
How is cross-dressing (which, by the way, is also practiced by heterosexuals) protected? Repealing DADT doesn't change any regulations that apply equally to hetersexuals or homosexuals, such as those related to good conduct.
Sergeon General Koop and the CDC have testified that only 4% off all adult AID's cases could be traced to heterosexual contact worldwide. 2.3% in the US.
Inglemann, you do realize it is not 1989 anymore, right?
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5306a3.htm
From 2002 - "which indicated that heterosexually acquired HIV infections represented 35% of
all new HIV cases"
And since that was 10 years ago, there is probably a vastly different figure. But this is certainly enough to show that you are infected with "misinformation" and are attempting to spread it.
I am confused about this whole DADT thing.
I thought that DADT was repealed in its entirety. This article leads to the conclusion that it was just revised from DADT to YANRTSTYAG (You Are Now Required To State That You Are Gay).
Good grief. Instead of bemoaning the fact that soldiers aren't publicy discussing who they want to have sex with, let's rejoice.
What the soldiers are doing with their lives is boring. Lets talk about the one who wrote this article, Jim Maceda's sex life and habits, and his family.
Jim Maceda graduated from Stanford University in 1970 with a Bachelor of Arts in English. He then pursued post-graduate studies at the Paris Sorbonne. He is married to Cindy Lilles and has a grown daughter from a previous marriage with Teresa Horner He has made no personal statements on his views of gaty life.
Is He Gay? He has not gone public and said. Infact one cannot find much on him even though he has been a journalist for 30 plus years. Come on there Jim, we want to hear the juicy stories of your sex life. Are you Bi Sexual? Have you cheated on your wife? If so can we please have the details. Can we pry into your grown daughters relationships and plaster them all over the internet?
I noticed MSNBC made it difficult to post this. Is a persons privacy a one way street? Public, yes all the dirt. Reporter No? It's Private?
I could only find one Article on journalist and their private sex lives. Printed way back in 1996.
Are Journalists off limits and immune from stories on them?
only story found: "Sex Lives of Serious Journalists: He’s a Feminist, She’s a Real Man"
www.observer.com/2007/sex-lives-serious-journalists-he-s-feminist-she-s-real-man
I bet Ann Coulter has some juicy ones, I bet half of them do.
I can understand why some, probably most, homosexuals keep their sexual activities secret. It's the same reason adulterers and fornicators don't go around telling everyone. They know it's wrong and they don't want their families and friends to know about it.
Also, embarrassing issues make u a security risk. That's why homosexuals were denied security clearances.
They know it's wrong? Or they know they will suffer discrimination for it?
Those who r gay and r subject 2 blackmail by r enemies. A reality like financial duress....
Only closeted gays are denied security clearances. If one is "out", there's no potential for blackmail.
"It's the same reason adulterers and fornicators don't go around telling everyone."
I didn't know that was the reason. I thought it was because they didn't want to be beaten to death by a gang of rednecks.
Homosexuals aren't denied security clearances I don't know where you got this info. Also how exactly would they know if they are closeted?
http://www.fas.org/irp/gao/nsi95021.htm
"the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Secret Service have stated that sexual orientation is not a
criterion in granting security clearances"
thanks Just My 2 Coppers I didn't know they'd issued a statement on it FR sent btw
NP... research is my "thing" lol
I was going off my own and fellow gay soldiers experiences in getting clearances.
Closeted doesn't mean invisible or inactive. It wouldn't be uncommon for a thorough investigation behind a security clearance to turn up evidence that someone was gay, even if he/she wasn't out to family/friends/co-workers. And, they're the ones who would be subject to blackmail.
I knew that as well because of military acquaintances. However, nothing like having a black and white statement to zip the lips of the naysayers. lol
just my 2 coppers - true
Fags
Inhale one.
Also, no one argues the fighting ability of gays. Well, at least no one of any sense. IE: the Spartan culture was entirely bisexual. We r not a bi-sexual culture. Not yet anyway
There are people who perform heterosexual acts, people who perform homosexual acts, and the sensible bisexuals. Why does anyone care? Really, what's the deal?
Um.. really Bill4? Some people care because this care is long held. A large part of the world cares. In fact every culture in the world does. Every great western religion cares. Most people care.
I know of no great religion.
Bisexuality,that coupled with iv drug abuse has made aids"everyones' disease."thanks" Too bad you don't know of any great religions.Be thankful you live where you can say that
What is that supposed to mean? I am thankful for the freedom of religion. Nowhere in my previous statement did I show any disdain for freedom of religion. I was only pointing out that religion is, for the most part, horrible.
Yes, it's those Christian morals that really lessen my freedoms. But 4 the their annoying religious behaviour, the founding father might not have screwed up this freedom thing or something. What the
Oh yes Christian morality is so kind and peaceful:
Leviticus 20:10 (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Leviticus-20-10/)
Yes, A. Hamilton, B. Clinton, JFK, & Newt barely escaped with their lives. The Christains almost had their way. Once again may I add that gays have and are serving. This was not an issue that the military asked 4. If it was needed the military would have asked 4 (for) it. Deseg of the armed services was forced upon the Pol's by the military. Now, the crowd that cant find any place in the Fed budget 2 (to) cut except the military must handle this. The polls that r (are) listed above do not reflect the attitudes of the military population. Issue 2.... Only lately ( within ten years) has the military issued a purely PC statement declaring that sexuel orient. is not a factor in clearances. The proceeding statement doesnt mean that every gay will out themselves. Any person can b (be) manipulated by any information they want to keep a secret. Adultry, drug use..... Just because the military issues a statement 2(to) please their handlers doesnt change the reality. Issue 3. My wife would agree with most opinions stated above regarding the desire of women wanting 2 shower with me. The Army (2 wars) and age have left there scars and disfigurement. Issue 4... if my constant use of text abbrv. and how it annoys pleases me 2 no end.
May I also add, that the book of Leviticus is pre-christain. If it helps....
Admitting that your singular goal is to annoy is hardly an appropriate way to garner respect for what you say. You told a lie. (Gays cannot get security clearance) You were called on that lie and shown proof. And then go on to detail how the lie you told is still true because you still believe it. lol With all due respect, or none if unwarranted, that has got to be the stupidest argument I have ever heard.
Follow the logic - a person "outs" themselves as gay, they are captured and blackmailed with something... that they have already told?!
Or - a person stays silent about it, they are captured and blackmailed with what, exactly? Does the "other side" have some intel on who is gay and who isn't that the military doesn't? lol How would they know unless the gay person was already "out?"
And if they weren't already "out".. then how would the military know to deny them security clearance for being gay so that none of this even happened?!
Since you aren't wasting any typing time by spelling your words like an adult, that should give you a few minutes to at least think through your reasoning.
And yet is standardly used to "prove" that homosexuality is a sin... go figure.
Maybe they figure it is none of your or anybody elses business.
And it is not a major liberal political issue to them.
Maybe they think that you are just trying to get ratings by creating publicity about
this so that the reporters and networks can make more money at their expense.
Possible,unlikely though. These folks r as pot smokers. They secretly seek approval 4 their beliefs and or actions. Until they convince, when they convince everyone else they themselves will be convinced that what they r doing is not wrong. Otherwise they would just do what they do and keep it 2 themselves.
inglemann - I take that you're talking about gay people in this post.
Homosexuals could give a @!$%# about you or anyone else's approval but we're going to be equal. That's all this is about we will keep fighting for our rights until we are truly equal. And most of the country agrees that gays should be equal 53% at last polling (Thats in dealing with DOMA).
You'd find it pretty damn hard to sit on the sidelines and be quiet if straight people were second class citizens
Never understood why sexuality is a concern of anyone but those engaged in the specific act. Anyone who has to or needs to know what someone's sexuality is, they're broadcasting far too much about themselves and their inferiority.
In a couple decades, the homophobes of today will look just as backwards and ignorant as the southern racists behind segregation looked in the 50s and 60s. Unfortunately, until then, we'll have to listen to their hate speech while they slowly die off and fall into the dust bin of history.
So take solace in the fact that, in the long run, ignorance loses.
Yes, then we will have 2 do something about people who oppose pedophiles, bigomy, and beastualist. They look really bad on us.
Here is why homosexuality is nothing like pedophilia and bestiality: consent.
Children are too young to consent to having a sexual relationship with an adult. So anyone who engages in such a relationship is essentially performing rape--which is immoral.
Animals can't consent, because they can't communicate and, for the most part, aren't at a level of consciousness that allows for such a thing as consent. So again anyone who engages in a sexual relationship with an animal, is doing so without the animal's consent. Again immoral.
In the case of bigamy, as long as every party involved is consenting, I have no problem. But if a bigamist wants to have sexual relationships with children or people against their will, it too is wrong.
Here is a nice cartoon for simple-minded people like yourself: http://www.buzzfeed.com/donnad/how-gay-rights-is-nothing-like-legalizing-beastali
If consent is the standard.... then many things consideredwrong would be right. I consent 2 being killed. I consent 2 having u chop a body part off....... I consent 2 own a light bulb of my own choosing. I consent 2 flush a toilet with a capacity beyond 1 gallon. See how that goes. One persons moral standard is not another's. We will continue to wrestle with moral standards. What is acceptable 2 u is not always with me. U impose ur standard because u dislike mine.
Scars left, indeed... Are you really implying that you cannot tell the difference between law and morality?
No one is imposing upon you to be gay. No one is even asking you to "accept" homosexualty... because, frankly, no one cares what your personal beliefs are. On the flip side, you don't have the right to force others to be straight... nor do you have the right to force anyone to accept your notion that homosexuality is wrong, because, frankly... other people's personal beliefs are none of your damned business.
We'll look back and wish all the barriers hadn't come down.
I see this pretty much as any relationship in the work place - it's probably not a good idea even if there's nothing saying you can't do it. And in this workplace, there's lots of heavily armed people who may or may not have the most enlightened way of thinking. Serving your country is a rush in itself. If you need more of a rush by putting it out there that you're not quite straight, more power to you.
As for me, I don't feel like it's a lie or that anyone's hiding anything as it is that there are bigger concerns for the time being. But on an equally concerning line, you as a soldier (any soldier) are taught to get the job done, period. If gay people bother you so much that you can't do your job, you need more training. But I guess it's those times when soldiers are not on the job and have time on their hands - that's when the real prejudice comes out. Seems like gay soldiers need to have more bravery than straight ones.
If it was me, I wouldn't tell. But as I said, if you want to, more power to you. Being gay or straight is only a small part of the entirety of a person's being. There's a world of more important things that occupy the other 99% of our lives. I don't know why it's such a big issue. I would proudly stand beside any one of you on the basis that you are a respectable individual. What goes on in the most intimate part of anyone's life is none of my business and I really don't care to put that much thought into it (unless you're a rapist or something and then I'll just have to kick your butt). Just be part of the team, serve well, live a good life and I'll be proud to be on the same team. God bless and Merry Christmas to you all.
It's the visceral disgust that needs no training or indoctrination to be present.
Whatever the hell THAT means....
Very respectful and mature outlook. Makes me sleep better at night knowing you are out there. Thank you:-))
Lifting Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell doesn't obligate anyone to tell; nor does it sanction flitting about singing showtunes. This seems like a non-story. Ending DADT means that no would-be participant in the American military would be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation. A soldier still has to conduct himself/herself in a manner becoming a soldier. And if, in so doing, that soldier wishes either to maintain privacy OR to disclose his or her sexual orientation, well, he or she may do so according to temperament.
Sometimes it seems the bar has gotten really, really low for what constitutes a "story."
Why do the bigots make so much of a deal out of this.
I love the people who keep saying that the army never wanted this when every single person I've talked to doesn't give a @!$%#. To all those who keep talking about how they should be separated for being gay.... please stop thinking that gay people want to have sex with you! Deflate your damn ego and realize most homosexuals wouldn't touch you with a 40 foot pole. In response to the military issue it's called being professional and respectful in the workplace.
I came out when DADT was repealed but that was my personal choice and these other soldiers/marines/airmen/seamen will choose when/if they come out. It is no ones choice but their own and that's how it should be, that was what repealing DADT was all about.
To all of those out there who have a homophobic view against GLBT, We don't care we don't give a flying @!$%# what you believe. If you hate us go ahead and hate us. But we will be damned if we let you legislate us into second-class citizens. We will have the same rights as every other person in this country, you can fight us on this fact but the country disagrees, 53% are for DOMA repeal and it continues to grow.
Most of the folks I served with were homophobs. I am 1. If u get rid of the homophobs u will have 2 fight with merc's. Also, if u r a homophob doesnt mean u want 2 beat a fag. Talk about stereotyping. Also I would love u 2 source the poll that 53% r for repeal.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx
I was discussing the military not marriage. If we find popular support for don't ask don't tell then I can suppose you will support said policy?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/145130/Support-Repealing-Dont-Ask-Dont-Tell.aspx
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/10/AR2010111007381.html
Guess we will never find that out. The first link is for public support; the second link is a story where even the Pentagon shows there is minimal impact to the military with the repeal.
Inglemann - I'll say it again no one and I mean no one I have met from my entire Brigade(who are from the south mostly) give a @!$%#. I am out and it hasn't affected moral or cohesion in the slightest. Stop with that bull@!$%# most in the military don't care. or did you also forget that the military polled itself before DADT repeal could go into affect and that it was only repealed when the military found it would not affect cohesion or moral for the majority of the Military.
And yet when WTF pointed out
you responded
So I provided you the link.
Of course, since you were proven wrong, naturally you claim that you were not talking about that in the first place.
Who could concentrate on a battle when the person who is supposed to cover your a*s is only checking it out. Those da*n friendly fire accidents are terrible. Who wants to fight along side a man who refuses to wear mens clothing or a lady who insist on it.
Then it is a good thing for America that you don't serve in the armed forces since it is obvious your limited hold on reality presents a hazard. By the way, they ALL wear uniforms so...
Reality is, some of these people open their mouth about being gay and they get what's cuming. lol
dnftt
"It turned out, like many gay soldiers, he had lived two separate lives. In this soldier's case, his private, gay life and his “normal” life with a wife and child back home. He had never “come out” to his wife or family."
This man is not gay, he is BiSexual (or a hypocrite). He takes it any way he can get it. In his case, the Armed Services have to get rid of the adultery regulation. He also hopes his wife does not find out because he is afraid she will be less understanding than his comrades in the military.