Don't Ask Don't Tell Debate - Lafayette, TN

Discuss the national Don't Ask Don't Tell debate in Lafayette, TN.

Should the US repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell?

Lafayette votes to uphold
No
 
12
Yes
 
4

Vote now in Lafayette:

Comments
1 - 20 of 58 Comments Last updated -
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
I KNOW

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 21, 2010
 
I know Corey Newberry
mary

Lafayette, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 21, 2010
 
You shouldn't be having sex in the armed services anyway.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 22, 2010
 
It should be all men on a ship or all women but,it was mixed along time ago.Now,married men and married women can have sex on the ship.But,if the woman gets preg. then she is put in jail.Now,if we have same sex relations like girl and girl or guy and guy,how would anybody know.A woman and woman only bump uglyies and men can sord fight.No one can get preg..lol.
Jesse

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Dec 23, 2010
 
If you don't know what this law means, why comment on it. Repealing this law is puting a huge gay pride flag up that represents our Military. The forum was, "Should the US repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell?" It wasnt't, "Do you know Corey Newberry?" or "Do you think it's right for the armed services to have sexual interactions?" This is what our president Obama gets us into. So now, all gays can be proud! Might I remind you all, God made Adam and Eve; God didn't make Adam and Steve.
Ricockulous

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 23, 2010
 
Jesse wrote:
Might I remind you all, God made Adam and Eve; God didn't make Adam and Steve.
What does this have to do with the military? Is the US military a Christian organization?

Since: Aug 10

Asheville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Dec 23, 2010
 
Ricockulous wrote:
<quoted text>
What does this have to do with the military? Is the US military a Christian organization?
General George Washington found Sodomites unfit for service charging them with "buggery" and discharged them. Historically, there has not been a place for "buggers". No the military is not Christian but it must have standards. Sodomites and buggery is outside the standards set by wise military leadership for 200 years.
Ricockulous

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 24, 2010
 
It should be noted that I'm not arguing one way or the other. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of using a "clever", tired, cliche 700 Club-sounding bumper sticker as a reason for homosexuals to not be in the military when it has ZERO to do with anything.

Since: Aug 10

Carnesville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 24, 2010
 
Ricockulous wrote:
It should be noted that I'm not arguing one way or the other. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of using a "clever", tired, cliche 700 Club-sounding bumper sticker as a reason for homosexuals to not be in the military when it has ZERO to do with anything.
Your comment about the cliche is correct, yet true. Also you did not comment on the historical barrier against the "bugger", even though you use the word "zero". Is your opinion greater than 200 years of military opinion? Is your position on "anything" taking consideration on the logistics of the changeover that must now be made?

What about the issue of "Gay Pride"? Demented parades in every major city with debauchery openly flaunted. Signs, flaggs and rank speech also present. Will the "bugger" soldier require diversity rainbows on their uniform? Will their pride be so brazen to put a mult-colored rainbow on the front middle of their helmet and over the left front pocket? Let's see how prideful they are in front of an Islamic enemy.
Ricockulous

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Dec 24, 2010
 
Isaac Baccus wrote:
<quoted text>
Also you did not comment on the historical barrier against the "bugger", even though you use the word "zero".
Does the historical barrier find it's origins in religion? If so, you didn't mention it. If not, why should I comment on? Please understand that I have no interest in discussing the general topic; only the religious aspect of the topic. The word zero was used exclusively in context of saying that what God made or didn't make it completely irrelevant since God has zero to do with the military.
Isaac Baccus wrote:
<quoted text>
What about the issue of "Gay Pride"? Demented parades in every major city with debauchery openly flaunted. Signs, flaggs and rank speech also present. Will the "bugger" soldier require diversity rainbows on their uniform? Will their pride be so brazen to put a mult-colored rainbow on the front middle of their helmet and over the left front pocket? Let's see how prideful they are in front of an Islamic enemy.
Does it matter? If you're homophobic, I guess a rainbow on a uniform really matters since it's a simple expression of something you loathe. Personally, I don't care. If you do your job as a solider, all this superficial stuff means so little.
Ricockulous

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Dec 24, 2010
 
Please note that I am NOT calling anyone in particular homophobic. If you can present a logical argument for why a rainbow on a uniform would be a problem worth thinking about for more than a moment of time, please do. What I am saying however is that if you're homophobic I totally understand it mattering. I should clarify that this is not to say anyone who has an issue with it is instantly labeled as homophobic.

Since: Aug 10

Charlotte, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Dec 24, 2010
 
Ricockulous wrote:
Please note that I am NOT calling anyone in particular homophobic. If you can present a logical argument for why a rainbow on a uniform would be a problem worth thinking about for more than a moment of time, please do. What I am saying hokwever is that if you're homophobic I totally understand it mattering. I should clarify that this is not to say anyone who has an issue with it is instantly labeled as homophobic.
Are you Bibliophobic/Scripturophobic? Of course I am not insinuating that you are. Are you or do you have a phobia about religion? Of course I am not saying anyone is, it is just that you used the word "anything" in your post which by the structure of your sentence, opened the subject up to more than religion.
Factual history is very important to consider.
Ricockulous

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Dec 24, 2010
 
Isaac Baccus wrote:
<quoted text>
it is just that you used the word "anything" in your post which by the structure of your sentence, opened the subject up to more than religion.
Sir, to explain one last time, read the sentence again closely.

"I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of using a "clever", tired, cliche 700 Club-sounding bumper sticker as a reason for homosexuals to not be in the military when it has ZERO to do with anything."

There is nothing there to suggest even a crack of opening the subject up to more than religion. If anything it closes the subject even more. Religion has nothing to do with the military. That's the basic statement. If I said "religion (the "it") has nothing (the "zero") to do with the question of homosexuals in the military (the "anything")", it would be saying the exact same thing. You're hung up on the word "anything" possibly to invoke (or bait) a larger debate which I have zero interest in. Bye.
Ricockulous

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Dec 24, 2010
 
Isaac Baccus wrote:
<quoted text>
Factual history is very important to consider.
In the overall context of the debate, absolutely. I was not speaking to the totality of the debate, just a particular argument that I find not only flawed but silly.

Since: Aug 10

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Dec 24, 2010
 
Ricockulous wrote:
<quoted text>
Sir, to explain one last time, read the sentence again closely.
"I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of using a "clever", tired, cliche 700 Club-sounding bumper sticker as a reason for homosexuals to not be in the military when it has ZERO to do with anything."
There is nothing there to suggest even a crack of opening the subject up to more than religion. If anything it closes the subject even more. Religion has nothing to do with the military. That's the basic statement. If I said "religion (the "it") has nothing (the "zero") to do with the question of homosexuals in the military (the "anything")", it would be saying the exact same thing. You're hung up on the word "anything" possibly to invoke (or bait) a larger debate which I have zero interest in. Bye.
OK...for the sake of factual debate I will concede on the way you worded your statement, but...you make the best argument in the case that it has nothing to do with the military. In that you also like the word "zero", you did emphatically state that religion has nothing to do with the military. Now, as I said, 200 or more years of basically sound military leadership that has unilaterally rejected the "buggers". I believe they (military leaders)surely know as much as you and believe the same, religion has nothing to do with the military. So...religion is out and another reason must be evident. You have logically argued my position. tanks.

Since: Aug 10

Lafayette, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Dec 25, 2010
 
@ Rico - Just because it's been promoted to mainstream in recent decades doesn't mean that homosexuality has removed itself from its indecency and characterization as deviant behavior. It was rightly listed as a fetish and deviant in the psychology/psychiatric definitions. It was there because it is abnormal and, as such, is harmful. There is a LOT more going on in homosexuality than just the physical act...especially consider males. When you have all that testosterone in one place, whether in prison, in a ship, submarine, or other close quarters, you have domination issues. Man is wired to provide and protect a woman as she relinquishes her power to him. He opens a car door for her...not because she CAN'T, but because she is deferring to his power, protection, provision.

In homosexuality, you see all manner of perversions in re power and dominance struggles. You have the bull queers (e.g. prisons) who get off more on gang dominating a target more than sex itself. Take a look at some of the photographs from some of the gay pride parades. It's more about humiliation of other males than actual sex.

That's where heteros who support gay marriage are all messed up. It's not about "love" like a heterosexual union. It is perversion.

It just so happens, Rico, that the Creator had a plan and "religion" does have a say-so in these conversations. Your goal to sanitize a so-called "secular" topic cannot work - because the Creator has everything in the world to do with wars as well as whatever else happens in this world.

The moment Congress approved this, they brought judgment upon our land. Wait 10 or 20 more years and then come back to this thread and comment.
Jesse

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Dec 25, 2010
 
Ricockulous wrote:
<quoted text>
What does this have to do with the military? Is the US military a Christian organization?
How do you say the pledge of allegiance?

"I Pledge Allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic
for which it stands,
one Nation under God,
indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all."

"under god" remember that.
LMAO

Noblesville, IN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Dec 25, 2010
 
Being a Military member, I can tell you that DADT was a blessing to a gay Service member. Just wait till they see the regulations that being a Open Gay member will entail, they'll wish it was back to the way it was before. It will be so easy for them to be accused of harassment and charged under UCMJ. All they have to do is look at a straight member and they'll be prosecuted. In the past a member was presumed to not be gay, because being gay was not allowed, now they can be persumed to be gay, because it's allowed.

The Military is not a place for Social Experiments. It has a job to do and that does not include making people happy about their sexuality.There are 1,000's of jobs in the military and some places a gay might fit, but not in Combat Arms. 1 out of 10 never fire a weapon except on a range.

You take 9 straight soldier's in a rifle squad and put in one openly gay man, you have a problem and they won't last long. Life in the military is about cohesion, this will not take place with a gay person, it's about being willing to give your life for another. Sometimes this has to occur in a very short period of time. Example : you lose 3 men in a firefight, the next day you receive 3 replacements. Those replacements have to bond and be accepted instantaneously, because that same day you might be in battle again. Been there done that and I'll tell you, when your life is on the line, you do what you have to do and you'll not let someone else get you killed, you take action. Misfits do not last, be it someone from the ghetto in Detroit, a gay from Atlanta or a pot smoker from Podunk.

Since: Aug 10

Lafayette, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Dec 25, 2010
 
LMAO wrote:
Being a Military member, I can tell you that DADT was a blessing to a gay Service member. Just wait till they see the regulations that being a Open Gay member will entail, they'll wish it was back to the way it was before. It will be so easy for them to be accused of harassment and charged under UCMJ. All they have to do is look at a straight member and they'll be prosecuted. In the past a member was presumed to not be gay, because being gay was not allowed, now they can be persumed to be gay, because it's allowed.
The Military is not a place for Social Experiments. It has a job to do and that does not include making people happy about their sexuality.There are 1,000's of jobs in the military and some places a gay might fit, but not in Combat Arms. 1 out of 10 never fire a weapon except on a range.
You take 9 straight soldier's in a rifle squad and put in one openly gay man, you have a problem and they won't last long. Life in the military is about cohesion, this will not take place with a gay person, it's about being willing to give your life for another. Sometimes this has to occur in a very short period of time. Example : you lose 3 men in a firefight, the next day you receive 3 replacements. Those replacements have to bond and be accepted instantaneously, because that same day you might be in battle again. Been there done that and I'll tell you, when your life is on the line, you do what you have to do and you'll not let someone else get you killed, you take action. Misfits do not last, be it someone from the ghetto in Detroit, a gay from Atlanta or a pot smoker from Podunk.
Yeahhh, and can you say, "friendly fire." Gives a whole new meaning...
Git Bent

Westmoreland, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Dec 26, 2010
 
Well now they wont have to go out behind the tent..Just Git R Done right there in front of everyone.DADT just Show!
Granny Mo

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Dec 26, 2010
 
I am a straight, married female, 65 years old and I find what I am reading on here horrible!
Ricockulous, you are the only one on this topix thread so far who has a lick of sense and I thank you for that. Baccus, I feel sorry for you. You are so full of fear and hatered and can't see past your nose. I don't care who serves in the US Military. I am a God fearing woman and right with my maker and as I see it if someone straight or gay wants to serve our nation then they deserve our support and prayers. I don't give a good gosh darn what General George Washington said, that is not here and now! What did General George say about allowing known Muselim men to serve in our Military so that they can turn around and murder the very Americans he they are serving with? Do you remember Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who killed 13 at Fort Hood? I am sorry Baccus I would rather see my 2 grandsons who are serving our country in Afghanistan working side by side with a gay American soldier then with a Muslim soldier. My cousin Effy's boy is gay and served his country well and with American Pride (not Gay Pride). He joined up right after 911 for the love of his country and you say he should not be allowed to serve in our military, that is a crying shame. What if one of your loved ones was in a horrible accident and the only person that could save their life was a gay doctor would you refuse treatment for them? You need to realize that straight or gay these men & women are serving to protect your right to sound like the hatered filled person that you appear to be. Take a kindness pill and let people be proud to serve our nation without their sexual orientation being an issue to you or anyone else. Everyone knows that there is an underlying reason why a person is as homophobic as you are and all I can say to you is get in touch with your softer side it might do you some good.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Lafayette Discussions

Search the Lafayette Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
TN Who do you support for Governor in Tennessee in... (Oct '10) 2 hr BOiaF 141,617
Troopers In Trouble - William H. "Butch" Avera,... 3 hr 2 is enough 45
Fire Mark Gammons!!! 3 hr Time for a change 90
TN Should state mandate immunizations? New require... (May '11) 3 hr Zeke 8,982
Don't Vote For Avera, Vote Against Gammons 8 hr LOL 6
Blake Jenkins (Jun '12) 8 hr shutup 20
Marriage and stupid people (Apr '13) 15 hr wow 39

Lafayette Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]