RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


jlf1961 -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 12:19:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

You cannot be that delusional!

The Dream Act does not in any way, shape or form fund any part of a college education. People like you are what turned me off the conservative movement in the first place. You manufacture reasons (LIE) to be against something.



JLF, so then they'd walk into college admissions with cash or checks for $50,000 that they "saved"?


So they qualify for the same student loans and grants that any one can qualify for. The Bill does not fund the cost of them going to school.

By the way, Popeye, this is going to happen even if the dream act is not passed. It has been happening.

Perhaps you should be yelling at someone to close the loop holes that allow an illegal immigrant from qualifying for the loans and grants?

Oh, by the way, one of the co-sponsors of the bill was Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

The Dream act would also grant citizenship to non-citizens who have served honorably in the US Military. I guess that would be a problem, why should they be granted citizenship if they were willing to die for this country?




rulemylife -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 5:10:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Btw, if you were really informed, you would have known what the Dream Act is. It's a plan to fund Illegal aliens college education, and allow them in the military, then reward them with citizenship once they serve their enlistment or graduate. I don't know the details but that's it in a nutshell.



Just out of curiosity, how is it that you are complaining someone else is not informed when you say in the next sentence you do not know the details?

I'm also curious how you can be opposed to something that you just admitted you don't know the details of.




thishereboi -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 6:39:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls


Now, is not the time to take a chance on losing battle hardened troops to failure to reenlist because they may not want to trust their lives to someone who would rather suck the enemie's dick than fight them.



I actually started to respond to your post until I read this.







Here is a trick I use to avoid that problem. When you see his name on the left, just scroll down to the next post. Trust me, you won't miss a thing.




thishereboi -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 6:44:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

OK remember this little post the next time you don't agree with a poll... I'll hold you to it....[:D]

Butch



The thing is it is not just one poll.

In every poll you can find the vast majority are for repeal of DADT.



And yet they are having a real hard time getting any laws for gay marriage passed? Seems kinda strange. Now I am not saying the polls are wrong, but if that many people have no problems with gays in the military and are taking a live and let live attitude about that....why are they so against gay marriage?




mnottertail -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 6:50:00 AM)

from the real politic perspective, dumping don't ask don't tell has little to do with whether you are a carpet licker or pole smoker..

the issue is a larger pool of cannon fodder, and since nobody has the guts to draft...

so you can easily (and from the politco perspective, cuz dying from a firefight or explosion is not an in my back yard activity) say go ahead and gay up the military, but don't let them marry here.




rulemylife -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 6:56:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

OK remember this little post the next time you don't agree with a poll... I'll hold you to it....[:D]

Butch



The thing is it is not just one poll.

In every poll you can find the vast majority are for repeal of DADT.



And yet they are having a real hard time getting any laws for gay marriage passed? Seems kinda strange. Now I am not saying the polls are wrong, but if that many people have no problems with gays in the military and are taking a live and let live attitude about that....why are they so against gay marriage?



Good question, and I won't even pretend to have an answer.

I can only guess that while most people are becoming more accepting of homosexuality they only accept it when it doesn't intrude on their belief systems, marriage was designed by God to be between a man and woman, marriage is for procreation, etc..




Moonhead -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:27:30 AM)

Marriage is also until death do you part, yet I don't see the more homophobic elements of the Religious right holding out for a repeal of the divorce legislation.




RacerJim -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:38:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

You and I...like it or not...must understand they, the Republicans, are representing the wishes of their supporters. So putting the blame on their shoulders is wrong. The blame lies with the American people as a whole who are still prejudice towards homosexuals...and this includes all political parties.

Butch

Like it or not, those who favor repealing DADT therefore forcing the military to allow GLBTs to serve openly must accept the fact that the Republicans are representing the overwhelming majority (90+%) of those who have served and/or are serving in the military, specifically Generals and Admirals, who DO NOT want DADT repealed. The blame lies with those who want to impose their civilian lifestyle on the military, the difference being that civilains are free to not associate/mingle/work with, moreover not co-hab with, those whose lifestyle(s) they don't like while military personnel are not.




JstAnotherSub -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:39:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

snip
As far as the issues goes about gays in the military. I think this is a critical time, and we've got a lot of money invested in training and in experience. Now, is not the time to take a chance on losing battle hardened troops to failure to reenlist because they may not want to trust their lives to someone who would rather suck the enemie's dick than fight them.

Oh yeah, I am sure the female troops who are straight sit there thinking I can not shoot that man, I would much rather suck his dick.  As the straight men, when confronted by females trying to shoot or bomb them think, man I wanna eat that pussy, I just can not hurt her.

I think your paragraph above is the most idiotic thing I have ever read.  I can assure you that I would not want anyone who thought like you to be the one covering my ass during a firefight or a water balloon fight for that matter.

I never thought I would read something else and shake my head in disbelief, I was sure nothing could surprise me.....gawd I hate being wrong!




RacerJim -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:43:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Btw, if you were really informed, you would have known what the Dream Act is. It's a plan to fund Illegal aliens college education, and allow them in the military, then reward them with citizenship once they serve their enlistment or graduate. I don't know the details but that's it in a nutshell.



Just out of curiosity, how is it that you are complaining someone else is not informed when you say in the next sentence you do not know the details?

I'm also curious how you can be opposed to something that you just admitted you don't know the details of.


cuckoldmepls knows enough details about the Dream Act to oppose it as well as complain that someone else who doesn't know anything at all about it is not informed.




tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:47:50 AM)

quote:

The 2006 Zogby Poll specifically asked about known gays serving in a unit. The results showed that 23% of U.S. veterans of the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars knew for certain there were gays in their own unit, and that the majority of them stated that this fact was widely known by others in their unit. Furthermore, another 45% of these Iraq/Afghanistan War veterans stated that they suspected there were gays in their own unit. And 73% of the troops said they were comfortable working with gays and lesbians. Again, with tens of thousands of straight troops indicating they either know for certain or suspect there are gays in their own unit, where are all the problems? Since evidently the problems are few, if any, how can anyone justify keeping DADT and discharging competent, trained and experienced gay and lesbian troops if they are not negatively impacting operational effectiveness?

The problem with the current Military Times poll, if its results indeed prove to suffer from selection bias and if indeed the results purport to demonstrate a negative view of gays serving in the military (based on questions that support negative views of gay service members), is its potential to influence decision makers in the Pentagon and in Congress. Hopefully these leaders will be aware of the problems with any poll conducted in an unscientific manner and whose results therefore cannot be said to accurately reflect the opinion of the active duty workforce.

Ideally, the Pentagon should conduct its own research on this issue through statistically valid polls which contain only unbiased questions. I would love to see an updated version of the Zogby Poll conducted in which the troops are again queried on their knowledge of serving with gay, lesbian or bisexual peers. If, as I suspect, there is an even higher percentage than in the previous poll of troops serving with known gay, lesbian or bisexual peers, and if indeed the Pentagon can verify that there are no demonstrable problems with unit morale, unit cohesion and combat readiness, despite the known presence of gay troops, then that should herald the end of DADT. If the Pentagon won’t or can’t conduct such a poll, perhaps a group of interested independent agencies could jointly sponsor and fund a scientifically valid poll of the active duty troops. At the very least, it might provide a more realistic view of gays serving in the military than is likely to result from the current Military Times poll.


http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=1824

quote:

Growing Military Support for Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
•73 percent of military personnel are comfortable with lesbians and gays (Zogby International, 2006).
•The younger generations, those who fight America's 21st century wars, largely don't care about whether someone is gay or not-and they do not link job performance with sexual orientation.
•A recent article in Joint Force Quarterly concludes, “after a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly.”

Growing Public Support to End "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
•Seventy-five percent of Americans support gays serving openly (ABC News/Washington Post, 2010). This includes majorities of Independents (77%) and Republicans (64%) who favor repeal.
•Majorities of weekly churchgoers (60%) and conservatives (58%) also want DADT repealed (Gallup, 2009).

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Hurts Military Readiness.
•The U.S. must recruit and retain the greatest number of the best and brightest - especially while we are fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
•The Pentagon reports that 75% of young Americans are ineligible to serve in our military because of inadequate education, criminal records or weight problems. Conduct waivers have been given for recruits with records of bomb threats, sex crimes and negligent or vehicular homicide. And yet, qualified, smart, law-abiding and fit youths who want to serve are being excluded merely because of their sexual orientation.
•According to the GAO, as of 2003, the military had discharged more than 750 mission-critical service members and more than 320 with skills in important languages such as Arabic, Korean and Farsi (GAO, Military Personnel: Financial Costs and Loss of Critical Skills Due to DOD’s Homosexual Conduct Policy Cannot Be Completely Estimated).

America's Allies Support Open Military Service.
•More than two dozen countries allow gays to serve openly. The US and Turkey are the only two original NATO countries that still have bans in place.
•Studies of the militaries in Australia, Israel, Great Britain and Canada have shown open service to have no adverse effect on enrollment or retention.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is Expensive.
•The same GAO study identified almost $200 million in costs for the first ten years of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” while concluding that the total costs could not be estimated.
•A follow-up study by an expert commission put these costs at more than $363 million.

Pentagon, Government Studies Support Open Service.
•In 1993, RAND Corp. concluded that openly gay people in the U.S. military do not negatively impact unit cohesion, morale, good order or military readiness. An update of this study should be completed in the next 90 days.
•Several other military-commissioned and GAO studies have concluded that open service does not undermine military readiness, troop morale or national security.

LGBT Patriots Are Serving with Honor and Distinction Now.
•Today, there are at least 66,000 gay Americans serving on active duty and one million gay veterans in the United States, according to the Urban Institute.
•Admiral Mullen told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he had served with gays since 1968.
Federal Government Agencies Do Not Discriminate.
•The CIA, FBI, State Department, the Defense Department on the civilian side, and defense contractors do not discriminate based on sexual orientation.


http://www.sldn.org/pages/about-dadt

Sort of puts a hole in your theory, racer.




rulemylife -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:51:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

Like it or not, those who favor repealing DADT therefore forcing the military to allow GLBTs to serve openly must accept the fact that the Republicans are representing the overwhelming majority (90+%) of those who have served and/or are serving in the military, specifically Generals and Admirals, who DO NOT want DADT repealed.


Wow, 90+%. 

Along with Generals and Admirals.

And I'm sure we only have a short time to wait until you document those statements.




Moonhead -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:53:36 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim
The blame lies with those who want to impose their civilian lifestyle on the military, the difference being that civilains are free to not associate/mingle/work with, moreover not co-hab with, those whose lifestyle(s) they don't like while military personnel are not.

In which case, why is this being treated as an issue in the first place? If the military is opened up to homosexuals, the enlistees will have to learn to put up with it.




mnottertail -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:55:11 AM)

Forcing the military?

Fucked up as it is, they work for us, folks. War is an extension of politics by other means.  The military will do what it is told to do, with or without the insight of those who admirals and generals who cornholed their buddies at the academy.




rulemylife -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:55:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Btw, if you were really informed, you would have known what the Dream Act is. It's a plan to fund Illegal aliens college education, and allow them in the military, then reward them with citizenship once they serve their enlistment or graduate. I don't know the details but that's it in a nutshell.



Just out of curiosity, how is it that you are complaining someone else is not informed when you say in the next sentence you do not know the details?

I'm also curious how you can be opposed to something that you just admitted you don't know the details of.


cuckoldmepls knows enough details about the Dream Act to oppose it as well as complain that someone else who doesn't know anything at all about it is not informed.


That was very informative Jimbo.

I guess if you vouch for him that's good enough for me.




tazzygirl -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 7:56:22 AM)

quote:

The blame lies with those who want to impose their civilian lifestyle on the military, the difference being that civilains are free to not associate/mingle/work with, moreover not co-hab with, those whose lifestyle(s) they don't like while military personnel are not.


Same argument they used for not wanting to desegregate the military... because white soldiers shouldnt have to share barracks with blacks. This is no different.




mnottertail -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 8:01:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim
The blame lies with those who want to impose their civilian lifestyle on the military, the difference being that civilains are free to not associate/mingle/work with, moreover not co-hab with, those whose lifestyle(s) they don't like while military personnel are not.

In which case, why is this being treated as an issue in the first place? If the military is opened up to homosexuals, the enlistees will have to learn to put up with it.


The fuckin dealio here kids is that the military IS ALREADY OPEN to gays.  So the innanity everyones peddling against it is pure unadulterated horseshit. 

What we are discussing here, is an effort to allow freedom of speech and if you want to say you lick a carpet or smoke a pole, you may do so because nobody fucking cares. 

Except the drooling imbiciles.




mnottertail -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 8:05:40 AM)

Yanno, all we are talking about here, is saying out loud what everyone knows all along.

Hi, I'm Sgt. Rock, and when my combat weary joe's come slogging in from the field, I like to wrap my lips around Sgt. Fury's big bertha..............and puff on that stogie.

What?  You jizz droolin' pack of howlin' commandos wanna live forever?




Archer -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 8:11:58 AM)

On the dream act the principle that I can't get around in order to siupport it is simple.

It provides an amnesty that puts those people ahead of the people who have been in line waiting for a visa through the legal channels. It REWARDS the person who is in the country illegally, letting them cut in line ahead of those people who have followed the rules.

I cannot in any way support a policy that promotes line jumping, putting anyone who has been in the country illegally ahead of those who followed the rules.


The policy exists already that allows for those who join the military to have a path to citizenship, so the Dream Act provisions about such are a cynical ploy to make it look like the act does something.
THE FACT is that military service ALREADY provides for that accelerated pathway.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/a/citizenship.htm





mnottertail -> RE: Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban (9/22/2010 8:16:36 AM)

But as I recall you were a vehemenent defender of the Arizona Law that 'mirrored' the fed law.   Or do I got that wrong?  If so, I apologize to no end.  If not, wherein lies the difference?

I would certainly like to give priority to those getting their ass shot off, rather than the vatos in the airshock chebies.  




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125