Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Rep-Military More Afraid Of Gays Than Terrorist  
User currently offlineMax999 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 993 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2306 times:

From the AP:

Quote:
A New York congressman on Wednesday jokingly suggested the Bush administration may fear a "platoon of lesbians" more than terrorists in Baghdad, given the military's resistance to letting homosexuals openly serve.

Gary Ackerman, a New York City Democrat, was criticizing the military for firing Arabic and Farsi translators after learning they were gay. He suggested to Condi Rice at a Foreign Relations House Committee that her department should hire those translators.

Video of the exchange: http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=96468@wcbs.dayport.com

He's right...don't ask, don't tell is discriminatory. Look at Britain, our closest ally, they let gays serve openly and it hasn't been an issue for them.

With our military being short on manpower, they should be recruiting every willing and talented American we can get. Especially ones with critical skills needed in the Middle East.

[Edited 2007-02-09 00:28:44]


All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening.
45 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39478 posts, RR: 75
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2292 times:

As I've already stated in another thread. The Bush administration can't be picky about who volunteers to fight his war in Iraq.
Gays should be able to serve openly in the military.



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

Amazing isn't it. Instead of homosexuals, according to the CNN report linked in another thread, the U.S. armed forces will take convicted felons who haven't even yet served their time.

I'm sure there's some logic in there somewhere, but I'm hard-pressed to find it. I think of the arguments such as "unit cohesion", yet fighting side-by-side with a convicted criminal contributes to the cohesion of a unit? The argument just doesn't work out for me.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineSTLGph From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 9237 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2273 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 2):

and Alexander the Great could probably come back from the dead and kick everyone's tail!

ha!



Eternal darkness we all should dread. It's hard to party when you're dead.
User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2265 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 1):
Gays should be able to serve openly in the military.

The late Barry Goldwater is quoted as saying gays should be able to serve as long as they can shoot a gun..Quite frankly any american resident that meets the entry requirements and wants to serve in the military should be entitled.


User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2259 times:

Sometimes I have to look at a calendar just to remind myself what year we are living in.


You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2246 times:

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 5):
Sometimes I have to look at a calendar just to remind myself what year we are living in.

1782, why do you ask?



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2242 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
1782, why do you ask?

Well at some point I thought we would stop with the one step forward and 2 steps backwards.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2234 times:

Shows that there's still a lot of convoluted idiocy in the military.

Gays should serve, if they can be of benefit to defending the nation. After all, they're part of the citzenry that the military is defending, are they not?

I'm sure AirTran737 will set us straight here, and tell us how it's so bad for gays to serve. After all, we won't even give them insurance.  Yeah sure


User currently offlineMax999 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 993 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2223 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 8):
I'm sure AirTran737 will set us straight here, and tell us how it's so bad for gays to serve. After all, we won't even give them insurance.

If gays were to serve, the military might have to give them insurance.



All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening.
User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2220 times:

It appears that change is on the horizon regarding this issue...Maybe not in the next two years, but it will inevitably happen soon. A bill was introduced in the 109th Congress to let gays serve openly. There were a lot of co-sponsors--both Democrats and Republicans--but it went nowhere in a Republican-controlled Congress. There has already been talk of a similiar bill being re-introduced and it would likely pass this time.

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2176 times:

Quoting Superfly (Reply 1):
As I've already stated in another thread. The Bush administration can't be picky about who volunteers to fight his war in Iraq.

And once again, you're off the mark Superfly. Why you incessantly bring Bush into every thread lately is baffling. Are you practicing to be the new RSmith?

The Don't Ask, Don't Tell came about long before Bush. It's stupid, it's a wasted policy, it's ridiculous, but it AIN'T PotUS's doing.  sarcastic 


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 39478 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2171 times:

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 10):
There has already been talk of a similiar bill being re-introduced and it would likely pass this time.

Would Bush veto it?
Will Congress have to wait until Hillary Clinton becomes President in 2009 to sign this bill in to law?



Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineADXMatt From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 947 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2138 times:

With how much the right wing hates us homos you would think that they would be bending over backwards to let us go to Iraq to be shot and keep the breeders alive and procreating.

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2130 times:

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 13):

Your entire post is inflammatory and stereotypic.

I can introduce you to some die-hard right wingers right here on this site that could give a damn about your sexual preference. And I'm quite certain they don't want you - or anyone else - going off to Iraq or anywhere else simply to become cannon fodder.

The term "breeder" is offensive. It's no different than someone straight calling you a faggot.

I'll wait for the apology.


User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8492 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2121 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 14):
The term "breeder" is offensive. It's no different than someone straight calling you a faggot.

as a gay man I have to agree - attaching general labels ( particularly derogatory ones ) to any group of people is offensive . furthermore , it is inaccurate , there are lots of straight people who dont have kids and lots of gay people who do

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 14):
can introduce you to some die-hard right wingers right here on this site that could give a damn about your sexual preference

as a slightly left of centre person myself I can also agree with this - I know many 'right wing' people who argue for freedom for everybody and are opposed to any sort of silly arbritary rules such as "dont ask , dont tell"

Quoting AirCop (Reply 4):
Quite frankly any american resident that meets the entry requirements and wants to serve in the military should be entitled.

on a lighter note , I really do need new glasses ... on first glance I misread this as :

"Quite frankly any american President that meets the entry requirements and wants to serve in the military should be entitled"

an excellent idea , particularly with the current one Big grin



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2110 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 14):
I can introduce you to some die-hard right wingers right here on this site that could give a damn about your sexual preference.



Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 15):
I know many 'right wing' people who argue for freedom for everybody and are opposed to any sort of silly arbritary rules such as "dont ask , dont tell"

Add me to your list of die-hard right wingers. I am very vocal on here when it comes to my religion (Christian) and being a Republican and I must say, I do have a lot of respect for Kiwiandrew. Although I may not agree or would choose to have their lifestyle, it makes them no different then me. I have many gay friends and we actually hang out, go on vacations, dinner groups and everything. In fact, one of my gay friends is one of my closest friends. If someone who is gay wants to be part of the military, I cant see why it would be a problem. Although I have never been in the military and ANCFlyer has, so maybe he would have a different perspective then me and would enlighten me I dont know.

A right-wing nut job here is cool with those of different sexual orientation!



Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineEWRCabincrew From United States of America, joined May 2006, 5523 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2107 times:

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 13):
keep the breeders alive and procreating.

Must we keep calling each other names?

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 14):
The term "breeder" is offensive. It's no different than someone straight calling you a faggot.

 checkmark 

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 15):
as a gay man I have to agree - attaching general labels ( particularly derogatory ones ) to any group of people is offensive . furthermore , it is inaccurate , there are lots of straight people who dont have kids and lots of gay people who do

 checkmark 

The military could also be of the mindset that that gays are unable to serve in the capacity that others serve. By this I mean in an agressive manner, able to be in confined spaces without "wanting" a fellow soldier under dire circumstances, therefore endangering them and the troup.

That list goes on.

When will the madness end? Who knows. Doubtful in my lifetime with this country. It is just yet another sad day when more than qualified individuals are being told no, asked to leave or harassed based on sexuality. The people that bring this (gays not being allowed to serve in the military) up all the time should maybe serve to take the place of those being asked to leave.

That'll never happen either.

The rhetoric continues.

For the record, it has nothing to do with with Bush, this administration or Republicans. It falls squarely on members of society and their unwillingness to accept those different to themselves or what may be percieved as a threat (what threat and how, I have yet to figure that out)to them.



You can't cure stupid
User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8492 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2101 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 18):
It falls squarely on members of society and their unwillingness to accept those different to themselves or what may be percieved as a threat (what threat and how, I have yet to figure that out) to them.

totally agree - I think your signature sums it up - regrettably no one seems to have found a cure for stupidity . In the meantime the US will have to fallback on less qualified people to fill the posts left empty because of idiotic sackings - it has been said before that "Military Intelligence" is an oxymoron - and this is proof of it



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2073 times:

Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 17):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 15):as a gay man I have to agree - attaching general labels ( particularly derogatory ones ) to any group of people is offensive . furthermore , it is inaccurate , there are lots of straight people who dont have kids and lots of gay people who do
 
 checkmark 
 

Now wait, in another thread, you thought that gay bashing was hysterically funny.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinePanAmOldDC8 From Barbados, joined Dec 2006, 960 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2069 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 19):
Now wait, in another thread, you thought that gay bashing was hysterically funny.

You either have a policy or you don't. But you can't have it both ways. Either you let gays in the military or you don't it is that simple. You can't beat around the "bush" and have it both ways



Barbados, CWC soon, can't wait
User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8492 posts, RR: 14
Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2066 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 19):
Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 17):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 15):as a gay man I have to agree - attaching general labels ( particularly derogatory ones ) to any group of people is offensive . furthermore , it is inaccurate , there are lots of straight people who dont have kids and lots of gay people who do




Now wait, in another thread, you thought that gay bashing was hysterically funny.

you are mixing me up with someone else - I have certainly never said or posted or thought any such thing



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2066 times:

Quoting PanAmOldDC8 (Reply 20):
Either you let gays in the military or you don't it is that simple.

Oh I agree! I was referring to EWR's comments in the Gay Snickers thread.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2059 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 21):
you are mixing me up with someone else - I have certainly never said or posted or thought any such thing

If you look at my post clearly, I was quoting you only because EWR had not responded to your post with anything other than the checkmark symbol. With his name at the top of the quote, I presumed it would be clear.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinePanAmOldDC8 From Barbados, joined Dec 2006, 960 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2040 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 22):
Oh I agree! I was referring to EWR's comments in the Gay Snickers thread.

I saw that commercial and as a straight person I really didn't see anything wrong with it, just stupid that's all. Don't see any reason that anyone would get upset over it, maybe we all need to cool down and look at life a little differently. We need to laugh at one another and get a life, it is too short as it is. If we can't laugh at one another then we are really in very sad shape



Barbados, CWC soon, can't wait
25 AeroWesty : The one that played on TV, I didn't have any problem with either. The alternate ending version, which sparked the controversy, with one guy going aft
26 Post contains images Itsjustme : Agreed but it could be his undoing, could it not? He's been the CiC for well over 6 years now. Of course then he might be seen as a flip flopper bein
27 ANCFlyer : I doubt it . . . really. There's plenty of other things that may well be his undoing - Don't Ask, Don't Tell ain't one of 'em. . . . J Just another e
28 Itsjustme : That's my point. If we had a CiC who had a different view about gays than our current CiC, don't you think he/she would have taken steps by now to re
29 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Well, sure I suppose. If I were CinC, I'd have done away with it. Current PotUS and past PotUS didn't do anything about it. Next PotUS? Who knows. I'
30 Post contains images Superfly : ANCFlyer: I am not blaming Bush for the 'Dont ask, dont tell' policy. That's Clinton's fault. However, Bush should lift the ban because our military i
31 Max999 : We can start blaming Bush if he vetoes a bill that would allow gays to serve openly. In all likelihood, the current Congress won't create such a bill
32 PanAmOldDC8 : My feelings are that if they meet the physical and medical requirements of the military then why not. But the US Armed Forces have to make up their m
33 Braybuddy : Would you call your parents "breeders" to their faces? Come on, we've moved on from these outdated and offensive terms. Couldn't have said it better,
34 Ilikeyyc : Thats funny because I think it is true. I fully agree! This country belongs to the gays of this nation as much as it does the straight ones. Anyone w
35 Jaysit : No it is not. Don't engage in hyperbole that fails the laugh test. It's crude and stupid, but I doubt if anyone anywhere on God's green earth has bee
36 Post contains images Superfly : Jaysit: Once again, Jaysit is 100% spot on! ANCFlyer, I know you are smarter that this. You know or at least should know that the term 'breeder' is no
37 Deskflier : It may be just me, but I would be more concerned by the risk of a knife in my back than a d-ck up my behind. Apart from the obvious consequences of e
38 Post contains images Superfly : Those are called 'friends with benefits' or 'f--k buddies'. Those are mutually agreed sexual relationships that are good friends to hang out with in
39 Post contains links EWRCabincrew : Hey Westy, gay bashing is never hysterically funny. Ever. I did, however, find the Snickers ad hysterically funny. I do see your point, a very valid
40 AeroWesty : I found the one shown on TV funny as well, just not one of the ones that had an alternate ending. I thought the Australian ad I linked in the other t
41 EWRCabincrew : I know you don't, merely a look inward of me.
42 Jaysit : The ban on gays in the military exists today only to keep Dubya's hard right evangelical cronies pacified. Let's hope that either Rudy Giuiliani or Hi
43 Itsjustme : Precisely my point. Whomever instituted the initial ban is a moot point but the current CiC's failure to take the necessary steps to lift it make him
44 Post contains images ANCFlyer : Ummm, yes it is. Period. End of that topic. Actually, that was Gen John Shalikashvili . . . but at least you were right on one point - it was a Gener
45 ADXMatt : The post was meant to be sarcastic. I don't find the word breeder offensive and I'm sorry that ANC did as it was not intended to be.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
More Likely To Be Killed By Police Than Terrorist posted Fri Sep 15 2006 15:30:04 by Cairo
US Protests Japan Official's Criticism Of Bush posted Mon Jan 29 2007 00:46:56 by Aaron747
Anyone Afraid Of Heights? posted Sat Jan 6 2007 23:49:19 by 9V
More Oil In Alberta Than Saudi Arabia! posted Wed Jul 5 2006 22:12:55 by Emirates773ER
Pets Afraid Of The Fireworks Noises? posted Tue Jul 4 2006 22:58:20 by Dragon-wings
New US Gov Report: Clear Evidence Of Human Impacts posted Thu May 4 2006 16:02:07 by SATX
Why Are People Afraid Of Clowns? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 22:02:58 by SmithAir747
Rep. Pete Sessions Accused Of Favors For Donations posted Thu Apr 20 2006 16:01:21 by Texan
Are You Afraid Of Mice? posted Mon Mar 20 2006 16:42:57 by UTA_flyinghigh
What Are Your Pets Afraid Of? posted Tue Mar 7 2006 04:03:10 by YYZflyer