DADT

[jaymz462]

So the Senate is once again voting to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_ask,_don%27t_tell

What are you opinions?  Senator Ron Wyden sums up my thoughts nicely:

I don't care who you love, if you love this country enough to risk your life for it. You shouldn't have to hide who you are. You ought to be able to serve.

[sdecaro558]

Considering the state of the US military right now - diminishing numbers, fewer and fewer people enlisting every year - I don't think anyone who wants to serve should be turned away, nor should they be forced to hide who they are in order to serve.

[amyrouse]

I definitely agree that sexuality should not be a reason to turn someone away from serving.  That being said, I believe, from listening to stories from my brother in law who served in Iraq in the Army and is now National Guard, that there are many recruits who are way too whiny and eager to cry discrimination.  I don't want to see the repeal of DADT as yet another reason for recruits, both hetero and homosexual, to cry discrimination.

[Falconer02]

I agree with Amy.

[amyrouse]

I agree with Amy.

Don't go shocking me like that, Falconer, agreeing with me.  I never would have expected you to agree with me on anything!

[mattymatt79]

I definitely agree that sexuality should not be a reason to turn someone away from serving.  That being said, I believe, from listening to stories from my brother in law who served in Iraq in the Army and is now National Guard, that there are many recruits who are way too whiny and eager to cry discrimination.  I don't want to see the repeal of DADT as yet another reason for recruits, both hetero and homosexual, to cry discrimination.

Amy makes a great point.
As someone who is a former Marine, I think this could become the problem. I think the way the worded it will not allow for this to happen though, in that they'll allow for equal considerations not special considerations. I know we had far too many people that wanted to find an easier way of doing things and I hope that this doesn't allow for more people to find an out.

If you want to serve, awesome, we need more people willing to volunteer to server, I just hope people don't sign up and then realize it's not what they wanted and then use this as some way to get out of it or to find some way to sue based on discrimination.

[ULuvCeCe]

Considering the state of the US military right now - diminishing numbers, fewer and fewer people enlisting every year - I don't think anyone who wants to serve should be turned away, nor should they be forced to hide who they are in order to serve.

Agreed. Otherwise sooner than later the draft will be back and all the homophobes will just have to deal with it!

[bigedshult]

but how wan't to live next to one that is gay if u have to sleep in the same room with them or shower with one that is openly gay.what will they want next to have there one room on the bases so they can have there sex to.

[mattymatt79]

Sodomy is still illegal within the UCMJ (Uniform code of military justice) and is punishable. Being allowed to be openly gay is one thing, practicing it is another.

While at Camp Lejeune, the policy was there was to be zero fraternization while inside of the barracks for enlisted persons. Meaning zero sex. That would apply to homosexual as well as heterosexual. The policies would be the exact same regardless of sexual orientation.

Also, this will not allow for any special considerations, and while civilians like to think that hazing has been eliminated from the miliary, I can speak from my own personal experiences that hazing is still alive and well and honestly, I think will increase.

[Cuppycake]

Sodomy is still illegal within the UCMJ (Uniform code of military justice) and is punishable. Being allowed to be openly gay is one thing, practicing it is another.

While at Camp Lejeune, the policy was there was to be zero fraternization while inside of the barracks for enlisted persons. Meaning zero sex. That would apply to homosexual as well as heterosexual. The policies would be the exact same regardless of sexual orientation.

Also, this will not allow for any special considerations, and while civilians like to think that hazing has been eliminated from the miliary, I can speak from my own personal experiences that hazing is still alive and well and honestly, I think will increase.

Coming from a mostly military family I am of the opinion that this will cause allot of "friendly fire accidents". What are your thoughts on that ?

[FuzzyCottonsocks]

I think it should be repealed. A lot of people say "it's for their own protection," but that excuse was also used for segregation back in the day.

[mattymatt79]

Sodomy is still illegal within the UCMJ (Uniform code of military justice) and is punishable. Being allowed to be openly gay is one thing, practicing it is another.

While at Camp Lejeune, the policy was there was to be zero fraternization while inside of the barracks for enlisted persons. Meaning zero sex. That would apply to homosexual as well as heterosexual. The policies would be the exact same regardless of sexual orientation.

Also, this will not allow for any special considerations, and while civilians like to think that hazing has been eliminated from the miliary, I can speak from my own personal experiences that hazing is still alive and well and honestly, I think will increase.

Coming from a mostly military family I am of the opinion that this will cause allot of "friendly fire accidents". What are your thoughts on that ?

I completely agree honestly. I think there are going to be a lot of bad things to come of this initially. Will it work itself out eventually? Probably, but there will be initial consequences of this.

[thetop31]

I do not know that, I don't think I care it, Anyway, I agree with the 2nd floor's opinion.

[tzs]

I think the government and the military are going about DADT completely the wrong way. I think you need to deal with all of those who are uncomfortable with it to find out exactly what it would take to work that out, so there would be no need to vote on it at all. After all, even just recently, a high-ranked senior officer in the navy can't handle it, so he lashed out by making an inapropriate video with some members of his crew. Did'nt help anything at all, did it?

[mattymatt79]

Those videos are almost 6 years old by the way. When he was an executive officer. Not in his current billet.