End of Don't ask, Don't tell

Every gay person is either in a relationship or constantly having sex?

This is news to me.  And let's not get into straight couples and blowjobs/anal...

So ok....now they can be gay....they just cant admit that they are in a relationship.  Got it.

You have to prove heterosexuals do that.....with homosexuals, its a given.

What Saddam said.  Something tells me Wardogg is Conservative.

Quote from: Supertails on December 24, 2010, 05:36:39 AM

Every gay person is either in a relationship or constantly having sex?

This is news to me.  And let's not get into straight couples and blowjobs/anal...

So ok....now they can be gay....they just cant admit that they are in a relationship.  Got it.

You have to prove heterosexuals do that.....with homosexuals, its a given.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 05:44:37 AM

So ok....now they can be gay....they just cant admit that they are in a relationship.  Got it.

You have to prove heterosexuals do that.....with homosexuals, its a given.

No, what it means is that they can't have sexual relationships with their fellow soldiers.  Whether or not they happen to be in a relationship back home is not the military's concern.

No, it's not a given.  It's not a given that anyone is having sex at all.  Maybe the gays just like to cuddle, lol. 

Wardogg, do you personally have an issue with gays serving in the military? If you do, can you explain it?

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on December 24, 2010, 06:27:08 AM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 05:44:37 AM

So ok....now they can be gay....they just cant admit that they are in a relationship.  Got it.

You have to prove heterosexuals do that.....with homosexuals, its a given.

No, what it means is that they can't have sexual relationships with their fellow soldiers.  Whether or not they happen to be in a relationship back home is not the military's concern.

Show me that in the UCMJ.....and even if that is the case, then now they can be gay, they just cant be gay with each other?  Just civilians?

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on December 24, 2010, 06:27:08 AM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 05:44:37 AM

So ok....now they can be gay....they just cant admit that they are in a relationship.  Got it.

You have to prove heterosexuals do that.....with homosexuals, its a given.

No, what it means is that they can't have sexual relationships with their fellow soldiers.  Whether or not they happen to be in a relationship back home is not the military's concern.

Show me that in the UCMJ.....and even if that is the case, then now they can be gay, they just cant be gay with each other?  Just civilians?

Yeah, dude. Just like the same thing says no blowjobs. The same rules that apply to military personnel don't apply to civilians. When the soldiers go home, they can have all the sex they want.

Quote from: Trekky0623 on December 24, 2010, 09:21:42 AM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on December 24, 2010, 06:27:08 AM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 05:44:37 AM

So ok....now they can be gay....they just cant admit that they are in a relationship.  Got it.

You have to prove heterosexuals do that.....with homosexuals, its a given.

No, what it means is that they can't have sexual relationships with their fellow soldiers.  Whether or not they happen to be in a relationship back home is not the military's concern.

Show me that in the UCMJ.....and even if that is the case, then now they can be gay, they just cant be gay with each other?  Just civilians?

Yeah, dude. Just like the same thing says no blowjobs. The same rules that apply to military personnel don't apply to civilians. When the soldiers go home, they can have all the sex they want.

Does this mean they can plow a mule, but not the army mule?

I have a problem with the benefits they are trying to accomplish with this.  This repeal isn't about DADT.  They are already allowed to serve in the military.  Have been ever since Ive been in.  I signed up in '93, the same year this went into effect.  Don't get any ideas out there.....    I have known, for a fact, that a few people I have served with were gay.  Mostly Navy Corpsman, no Marines, but nevertheless they were in the unit.  The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Its something Ive learned to live with.  Honestly my biggest complaint is what the repeal means towards benefits.  That, and that this was pushed through during the lame duck session. 

Quote from: Supertails on December 24, 2010, 06:49:00 AM

What Saddam said.  Something tells me Wardogg is Conservative.

Quote from: Trekky0623 on December 24, 2010, 06:56:05 AM

Quote from: Supertails on December 24, 2010, 06:49:00 AM

What Saddam said.  Something tells me Wardogg is Conservative.

Sarcasm is so unappreciated these days.  And here of all places. 

Show me that in the UCMJ

and even if that is the case, then now they can be gay, they just cant be gay with each other?  Just civilians?

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on December 24, 2010, 07:13:41 AM

No, it's not a given.  It's not a given that anyone is having sex at all.  Maybe the gays just like to cuddle, lol. 

Wardogg, do you personally have an issue with gays serving in the military? If you do, can you explain it?

I have a problem with the benefits they are trying to accomplish with this.  This repeal isn't about DADT.  They are already allowed to serve in the military.  Have been ever since Ive been in.  I signed up in '93, the same year this went into effect.  Don't get any ideas out there.....    I have known, for a fact, that a few people I have served with were gay.  Mostly Navy Corpsman, no Marines, but nevertheless they were in the unit.  The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Its something Ive learned to live with.  Honestly my biggest complaint is what the repeal means towards benefits.  That, and that this was pushed through during the lame duck session. 

It's bullshit that there was any compromise to let gays serve in the military. What's next, are we going to let brown people serve?

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 23, 2010, 03:04:56 AM

Not just bigger, but it's more well equipped.

Yes, that is another consequence of the States spending 32x more per year on warfare than Canada does. And yet, somehow, the multiple trillions of dollars worth of funding spent waging pointless and unwinnable wars in the Middle East seem to evaporate into nothing as soon as the public discourse turns to actually providing a basic level of first-world healthcare to its own people. Fact: the USA cares more about killing Islamic insurgents than it does about saving and preserving the livelihoods of its own citizens.

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Quote from: Mykael on December 23, 2010, 12:43:03 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 23, 2010, 03:04:56 AM

Not just bigger, but it's more well equipped.

Yes, that is another consequence of the States spending 32x more per year on warfare than Canada does. And yet, somehow, the multiple trillions of dollars worth of funding spent waging pointless and unwinnable wars in the Middle East seem to evaporate into nothing as soon as the public discourse turns to actually providing a basic level of first-world healthcare to its own people. Fact: the USA cares more about killing Islamic insurgents than it does about saving and preserving the livelihoods of its own citizens.

Fact: the agenda of a presidential administration =/= the opinions of the entire nation.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Excellent point.

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:13:35 PM

Quote from: Mykael on December 23, 2010, 12:43:03 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 23, 2010, 03:04:56 AM

Not just bigger, but it's more well equipped.

Yes, that is another consequence of the States spending 32x more per year on warfare than Canada does. And yet, somehow, the multiple trillions of dollars worth of funding spent waging pointless and unwinnable wars in the Middle East seem to evaporate into nothing as soon as the public discourse turns to actually providing a basic level of first-world healthcare to its own people. Fact: the USA cares more about killing Islamic insurgents than it does about saving and preserving the livelihoods of its own citizens.

Fact: the agenda of a presidential administration =/= the opinions of the entire nation.

Except during a campaign.

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:13:35 PM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Excellent point.

No its not...straight men have been showering with gay men for as long as there were communal showers and wherever there are communal showers. This is nothing new, and has nothing to do with equitable treatment. I suppose you could claim that it's ultimately not fair, but there's nothing that can be done about that. It's always happened and always will happen.

Quote from: Benocrates on December 24, 2010, 04:21:36 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:13:35 PM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Excellent point.

No its not...straight men have been showering with gay men for as long as there were communal showers and wherever there are communal showers. This is nothing new, and has nothing to do with equitable treatment. I suppose you could claim that it's ultimately not fair, but there's nothing that can be done about that. It's always happened and always will happen.

So just because black people have been discriminated against for x amount of years it means we should just let things lie? No, it was a good point. You are wrong.

Quote from: Benocrates on December 24, 2010, 04:21:36 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:13:35 PM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Excellent point.

No its not...straight men have been showering with gay men for as long as there were communal showers and wherever there are communal showers. This is nothing new, and has nothing to do with equitable treatment. I suppose you could claim that it's ultimately not fair, but there's nothing that can be done about that. It's always happened and always will happen.

So just because black people have been discriminated against for x amount of years it means we should just let things lie? No, it was a good point. You are wrong.

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:26:14 PM

Quote from: Benocrates on December 24, 2010, 04:21:36 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:13:35 PM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Excellent point.

No its not...straight men have been showering with gay men for as long as there were communal showers and wherever there are communal showers. This is nothing new, and has nothing to do with equitable treatment. I suppose you could claim that it's ultimately not fair, but there's nothing that can be done about that. It's always happened and always will happen.

So just because black people have been discriminated against for x amount of years it means we should just let things lie? No, it was a good point. You are wrong.

Not only do I not understand your point, I find it remarkable how you're pointing to an example of how discrimination is bad in an attempt to justify a different form of discrimination.

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on December 24, 2010, 04:30:11 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:26:14 PM

Quote from: Benocrates on December 24, 2010, 04:21:36 PM

Quote from: Keldarion Typrax on December 24, 2010, 04:13:35 PM

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on December 24, 2010, 09:15:08 AM

The problem I've always seen was one of fairness.  If gay men are allowed to check out other men in the showers of say the gym, that they are sexually attracted to(or women for that matter), then I should be allowed to shower with women that I am sexually attracted to.   Alls fair and equal right?

Excellent point.

No its not...straight men have been showering with gay men for as long as there were communal showers and wherever there are communal showers. This is nothing new, and has nothing to do with equitable treatment. I suppose you could claim that it's ultimately not fair, but there's nothing that can be done about that. It's always happened and always will happen.

So just because black people have been discriminated against for x amount of years it means we should just let things lie? No, it was a good point. You are wrong.

Not only do I not understand your point, I find it remarkable how you're pointing to an example of how discrimination is bad in an attempt to justify a different form of discrimination.

It's a fairly simple concept. Maybe you should try to understand it a little better?

straight men have been showering with gay men for as long as there were communal showers and wherever there are communal showers.