Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off-topic Political' started by gsusnake, Sep 23, 2010.
The one on the left.
How can you tell?
I bet this one gets a whole lot nastier than my religion thread, and gets there a whole lot faster...
It's already been ruled un-Constitutional so yeah, get it off the books already. (oh wait, Republicans can't do that right before an election in many voting districts if they want to keep their seat)
Show me in the COTUS where it refers to sexual orientation for service members.
Apparently Democrats can't do it right before an election, either. Do you watch or read the news? Nice try, though.
I get it, I get it. Hee Hee. Very witty MP. (And I must agree, BTW)
I don't need to, the courts already have http://www.palmcenter.org/files/Opinion.pdf
First Amendment and 5th. I know. Now, show me where be gay is even mentioned in those. Also, under that same pretense, a man with no arms or legs should be able to serve to right?
Robin Carnahan is campaigning on it, as is Elaine Marshall, Paul Hodes, Lee Fisher etc etc. Do you watch or read the news? Nice try, though...
Show me what in power is vested in Congress to discriminate. Show me where wire taps are mentioned in the Constitution. Show me where tattoo identification marks are mentioned? etc etc etc I guess those are okay since they aren't specifically addressed in your opinion?
As for the "same pretense" I'd say that isn't even close to the same pretense. What part of stating your sexual preference prevents them from performing their physical duties?
Wire taps and tats are not the issue here. Ball is still in your court.
Just for the sake of open discourse here, How many people in this discussion, on either side, have ever served in the military? And no JROTC, or getting Admin'd out of Boot Camp doesn't count.
How many in this thread are gay and want to join the military? (not that it matters but at least you would have standing)
I have, and I know Grunt has. I'm not gay, even though I did join the Navy. I've known several people in the Navy that I know were gay without them ever saying anything, and I never cared as long as they did their jobs.
I'm not sure if Grunt is gay, but I think not.
Grunt: Ball isn't in my court, the court has spoken. Violating their rights is not incumbent on the right to free speech needing to mention "free speech about sexual orientation" just as the the 4th Amendment doesn't have to spell out that unlawful wiretaps are prohibited. Congress can't infringe on their first amendment or 5th amendment rights just because some people in this country have a problem with their lifestyle. DADT violated those rights and how it did so is clearly spelled out in the court's decision. Feel free to read it if you still can't see the connection.
Ashe: I served 12 years in the Navy submarine force prior to getting medically discharged (MM1/SS nuke). My direct supervisor served in the Army. I'm not gay, she is and there are more than a few people I served with that I know are gay or highly suspected they were. DADT didn't stop their lifestyle it just infringed on their rights to both serve and talk about/live their lives freely, not to mention make them have to be fearful of persecution or losing their ability to serve their country if someone found out. I was never uncomfortable around any of the people I served with based on their sexual orientation.
My opinion stands at this: If a gay person can take a bullet just like a straight then wtf is you're problem with removing the dont ask don't tell crap? Anyone who serves in the military comes back in the same box wearing the same flag... I wonder if peoples "christian" beliefs drive their fuel for this debate.. Let me get this straight... Its ok if a gay person serves and gives his life for this country, but its no ok if they're openly gay... go figure
I have served.
I am not gay.
Although I have opinions on the matter, I'm not getting in the middle of this one.
It doesn't require much effort at all to realize that since homosexuality has been around since the dawn of time then there have always been gays in the military. There were most likely gays who died to secure our freedom from King George in the 1700's, gays who died in the War for Southern Independence, the world wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
The problem with the debate over DADT is that Congress in involved. This is an issue that should be settled internally, not by civilians who turn it into an election issue in order to pander for votes. There's plenty of other soup sandwiches for Congress to eff up. Like the deficit, Social Security, healthcare, the border, taxes......not suggesting they do eff those up any further, just sayin'
Let the military decide on this issue amongst the different branches and keep the bureaucrats out of it...