- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


You know what I don't get.....

July 15th, 2005, 06:47 PM
America fights for freedom, and says everyone is eqaul, right. Then why do they kick out homosexuals, out of the military??? I have heard some comments such as " If their sex life consists of that, how can we trust them with our lives?" " What kind of comment is that. my MIL is homosexual, and I trust her not only with my life, but my entire family's lives as well!!!or "If they can't keep their pecker in their pants during thier contract, then they aren't going to protect anyone." What???? How is that any different than a heterosexual???? Is there a difference????

I can see having a law about things while on duty or in uniform, but not in the privacy of their own homes!!!! It is pathetic if you ask me.

Sorry about my rant. It is just something that I don't agree with. Sorry if it is offending. It shouldn't be, I am not supporting anything......

July 15th, 2005, 07:15 PM
*Can open, worms everywhere!*

Here goes another long thread.....~lol~

July 15th, 2005, 07:20 PM
One of the reasons I've heard is that when an individual hasn't publicly come out of the closet yet, he or she is vulnerable to someone blackmailing them into committing acts of treason (spying) to keep their secret. However, in this day and age, that just doesn't hold water. I mean, look at Clinton! He was heterosexual, but wouldn't the same reasoning apply to him? Couldn't he have been vulnerable to blackmail? Hmmm, wonder what he would have done to prevent the scandal that shook the nation? :rolleyes: In interviews now, he laughs about it. I think the female warriors getting pregnant on the front lines are a bigger problem than homosexuals.

July 15th, 2005, 07:22 PM
Karin, you crack me up! I helped open that can! Ewwww! Worms!

July 15th, 2005, 08:08 PM
I just think that everyone should be allowed to serve, and it shouldn't matter what their sexual orientation is. As long as they aren't in uniform, or disgracing the military at all with their actions. We are all supposed to be equal, but they are discriminating agains one's sexual prefferance. I just don't see why that law is still around..... I know plenty of homosexuals that would be better in the military, that some heterosexuals. Oh well. I was just wondering if there is really a just cause for that law or not. I asked hubby about it in an email, but he hasn't been able to read his email yet today. I am hoping he has an answer...... Just me being curious, to why they would have such a law, and if there is an actual good reason for it or not..... really....... :rolleyes:

Hey, worms aren't that bad...... My sister, now 15, used to kiss everyone she found when she was a tot!!!! We were raised as country girls, so we tend to love snakes, frogs, toads and bugs!!!!! lol

July 15th, 2005, 08:40 PM
One of the reasons I've heard is that when an individual hasn't publicly come out of the closet yet, he or she is vulnerable to someone blackmailing them into committing acts of treason (spying) to keep their secret. However, in this day and age, that just doesn't hold water. I mean, look at Clinton! He was heterosexual, but wouldn't the same reasoning apply to him? Couldn't he have been vulnerable to blackmail? Hmmm, wonder what he would have done to prevent the scandal that shook the nation? :rolleyes: In interviews now, he laughs about it. I think the female warriors getting pregnant on the front lines are a bigger problem than homosexuals.

As far as Clinton goes when he got rid of Monica Lewinsky she went to the Pentagon as Confidential Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defence for Public Affairs. Of course if she were blackmailed it would be possible that lives would be put in jeopardy so I donít fully buy that argument.

One of the often cited reasons is that homosexuals are not good for the cohesiveness of a military unit and that the cohesiveness of that unit is paramount to their success and of course their survivability in a combat zone.

Now in a normal workplace we would be told to Ďget over ití and rightly so. When sending people off to fight and where the failure to operate cohesively means some of them may die it becomes an issue that isnít so black and white to many.

Donít ask donít tell was a compromise but it wasnít acceptance and I have to wonder though how many heroic American soldiers throughout history may have been homosexuals that simply weren't 'out'..

July 16th, 2005, 01:29 AM
All I can say is I had a very obviously homosexual doggy when I was little, and my dad always told us, "See? It is natural. It's not a choice." I think people should be free to be whoever they may be, as long as it doesn't hurt somebody else. Like Pierre Trudeau said, the government has no place in the bedrooms of its citizens. Nobody does.

July 16th, 2005, 05:56 AM
This could be a hot one - and let's please keep it cool.

Mods have brought it to my attention and if they see it gets out of hand they will shut it down.

We don't want to shut anything down so long as everyone plays nice.



July 16th, 2005, 07:27 AM
This is a topic,same as religion that can really not be debated in a Forum.
A friend of mine,very catholic,brought the subject up after a"bottle"of wine and her and her,husbands views came to surface.
I am not getting into details,but the ignorance was astounding :evil:
Talk about hitting a brickwall...
A human being should be respected for the person he/she is,not their sexlife.
Canada has made some major strides towards equality for all and I for one am very proud of that fact,heck,even Alberta is trying :D :thumbs up

July 16th, 2005, 08:03 AM
I think what bothers me the most about people who are against homosexuals for religious reasons is that they're taking pieces of the Bible and choosing what they want to believe. In the old testament, where the "don't be gay" quote comes from, there's references to selling your daughters for money, the abomination of eating shellfish, and that it's alright to own slaves, as long as they are from neighboring nations.

All of these things are no longer considered "right", but yet we're clinging to the anti-gay sentiment? It just seems a little off to me.

(Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not trying to 'bash' Christians, things like that irk me, no matter what religion of belief. ;))

July 16th, 2005, 11:59 AM
Chico, I didn't mean for it to be a debate..... I was just wondering if anyone knew of why that law is still around. James said that it is basically there are so many people still against that lifestyle, and that is why it hasn't been able to be changed.

Prin, my friend's dog is that way too..... :rolleyes: Infact, lots of different species are. I was a a zoo once, and it must have been mating season, because a lot of the male critters were getting it on with each other (females in a separate area) :eek: Good thing that I was 16.....

Speaking of zoo's, what is every ones opinions on them. I am not all that knowlegable on this at all. I know the only zoos James and I go to are the ones where you can see the animals for free, but rides, food, and consrvatories have a fee...... The animals there seem to be in better condition, and they aren't making tons of money off from them.

Being it was my thread, I will take the honors of highjacking it, now that I found the answer to the origional reason for the post..... :cool:

July 16th, 2005, 12:35 PM
Since the question has been asked as to why the 'law' is still around... (I think it's more of a policy than a law actually) I can try to explain what I've understood of it without getting into how I personally feel about it....

Whether we like it or not there are still an awful lot of cultural taboos in the world -- many sexual in nature. There are many cultures which still regard homosexuality as evil -- fundamentally... and those cultures, for instance, consider a homosexual relationship to result in the de-masculation of the man.. Read a bit about the history of warfare and you will find that historically (even recent history -- re: bosnia) sexual degredation is considered a prime psychological weapon in warfare... the raping of the women to humiliate -- not the women, mind you! not the women -- to humiliate the men fighting for them... and the demoralization of the captured men through connotations of homosexuality. Psychological warfare is more than half the battle... and frankly in some situations that battle is already lost with an openly all-inclusive military.

So that's what I've been told anyway. Uh.. I can't defend this position or anything so I'm not taking any questions. :D

Rick C
July 16th, 2005, 01:31 PM
Towards the end of WWII, black American servicemen were finally permitted into some limited combat roles and distinguished themselves in the last "Good" War, the war of freedom against fascism.

Then they returned to the same USA where they were persecuted as they were before. . . . as though nothing had changed. And it hadn't changed. Not for them anyway.

I'm in favour of gay civil marriages, believing it to be an issue of civil rights and I can't think of any good reasons gays can't get killed in a war just as there wasn't any good reason blacks couldn't get killed for a long time in WWII.

Rick C

July 16th, 2005, 04:25 PM
My MIL is a homosexual. It was a little weird going to her house at first, but you know, I wouldn't ever say that I was against it. It was just a different setting than I was used to. I got used to it very quickly, and I love going to over there to visit. I have actually had long talks with her significant other. We have quite a bit in common, and she is almost old enought to be my grandmother.....

Anyways, some of the the things that you guys have said do make sense. I am just hoping that one day this will all change, and people will be able to respect people for who they are, and not their lifestyle. Hopefully in my life time.........

July 17th, 2005, 05:07 PM
lol, whats a female warrior?? is it some tribe you have and i never heard of?? oh dear i had to laugh at my vision of a female wariror, (it was a kitchen lady with a swinging mop lol) :D

secound whats a MIL?? where do i get one :D

in australia they still carry on about woman on the front line, apparently we are jsut the biggest distractions on the planet, i should know, i can hardly think straight :p so homophobia in the military is of no surprise really, boy your more advance d than us though :eek:

clinton- well at least he had personality, there is nothing worse than a bad primeminister and to top it all off having no personality whatsoever, i like clinton, hes got charisma, he should tutor ole johhny howard in having a personality.....

and glassy, i understand that theory about secrets and blackmail, boy i have too many secrets, man i would be hung for treason :D

its an odd world isnt it, now i think about it maybe because its spinning its stuffing us up, i know my thoughts are muddled....... :p

July 17th, 2005, 05:45 PM
Melanie- you don't want an MIL. Trust me. It's a mother-in-law. :eek:

July 17th, 2005, 05:50 PM
oh dear no, in that case i have a MIL too, yep a painful topic, lol lol lol.....

July 17th, 2005, 08:35 PM
Hey I LOVE my MIL. She has a great personality, and is fun to be around. At first things weren't too great between us, but after we got to know each other, things got alot better. I talk to my MIL as much as I talk to my own mom. She is pretty nice. Guess I just lucked out........

July 17th, 2005, 09:40 PM
Yes, you did. I thought I got a good one, but nope. (sigh)

July 18th, 2005, 07:16 AM
Melanie,I must comment on your posts,no matter what they contain they ALWAYS give me a chuckle...keep it up girl :thumbs up

July 18th, 2005, 06:43 PM
chico, your wonderful, at least someone laughs at my sillyness, i sure do too though (perhaps signs of madness)..

but please can someone tell me what on earth is a female warrior, is that an army title in america, casue if it is i would not want to be in trouble with them with a name like that, holy cow scary...

nah my MIL is not too bad, jsut from different worlds and clases which sadly makes it harder for her to understand me, well thats what i tell myself anyways..... :highfive:

July 18th, 2005, 08:32 PM
I enjooy your posts too Mel!! And agree with you Lilith. It is a different topic here - same sex marriage debate and I won't get into it save to say I wish ppl could just respect each other's choices.

July 21st, 2005, 10:37 PM
Hee Hee! Female warrior is just a descriptive term to indicate a woman in active combat duty. There's so much discrimination in the military against women. They were prevented from serving in the front lines. However, to be eligible to advance to the highest ranks in the military, an officer has to have combat experience. But women have been denied advancement because they were not permitted to serve in combat. That has been changing at long last.