A General Speaks Out on Gays In the Military

[Bullaholic]

General Peter Pace, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, has gone on record stating that he believes "gay" relations to be immoral and equates it with adultery.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/13/gays.military/index.html

[pirate4state]

uh oh ..... let the bashing begin .... I hope HE doesn't apologize. I have no problem with people speaking their mind about something, but by golly stick to your guns!! :mad:

he looks a little gay :p LMAO!

okay, now let me read the rest of the article, so far so good - he doesn't PLAN to apologize

[JJ7997]

Good job Sir !

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Phil C]

BUT IT'S NOT BEING POLITICALLY CORRECT!!

:( :confused: :mad:






:) :clap:

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by pirate4state
uh oh ..... let the bashing begin .... I hope HE doesn't apologize. I have no problem with people speaking their mind about something, but by golly stick to your guns!! :mad:

he looks a little gay :p LMAO!

okay, now let me read the rest of the article, so far so good - he doesn't PLAN to apologize

By the look of the General, Rita, I don't think there will be any problem with him wanting to "stick to his guns". The question is, will he continue to hold fast to his position if he is "ordered" to make a retraction.

[pirate44]

Originally posted by Bullaholic
By the look of the General. Rita, I don't think there will be any problem with him wanting to "stick to his guns". The question is, will he continue to hold fast to his position if he is "ordered" to make a retraction.
When i first read your post, i thought you were calling her "General Rita":eek: first a Moderator, now General??!! what has the downlow come to??

then i re-read it and realized i am not in the twighlight zone :D

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Phil C
BUT IT'S NOT BEING POLITICALLY CORRECT!!

:( :confused: :mad:






:) :clap:

SO WHAT!!!!

Good for him!!:thumbsup:

[JJ7997]

I would hope that with the current leadership we have, that he wont be ordered to.

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by pirate44
When i first read your post, i thought you were calling her "General Rita":eek: first a Moderator, now General??!! what has the downlow come to??

then i re-read it and realized i am not in the twighlight zone :D

Lol. Sorry, P44---that should be a "," after the word, "General", not a ".".

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Bullaholic
Lol. Sorry, P44---that should be a "," after the word, "General", not a ".".

NO MORSE CODE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

ROFLMAO

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Bullaholic
By the look of the General, Rita, I don't think there will be any problem with him wanting to "stick to his guns". The question is, will he continue to hold fast to his position if he is "ordered" to make a retraction.

Indeed.

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by pirate4state
NO MORSE CODE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

ROFLMAO

Why not? I may want a "board vacation" to attend PPHSFan's wedding. :D

[BuffyMars]

I personally could care less about gays in the military. I don't give a flying hootenanny about a person's sexual orientation. If they are willing to fight and die for my country, then they get my support. More power to them. :thumbsup:

[BullFrog Dad]

Originally posted by pirate4state
he looks a little gay :p LMAO! Check out his name, he might be!

[Phil C]

It is wise to be politically correct.

[Phil C]

Buffy, it is wise to be wise.

[Phil C]

Buffy it is also foolish to be foolish. :)

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
I personally could care less about gays in the military. I don't give a flying hootenanny about a person's sexual orientation. If they are willing to fight and die for my country, then they get my support. More power to them. :thumbsup:

You may have a point there, but most guys in the military, including me dont see it quite like you do. JMHO

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Phil C
It is wise to be politically correct.

I never claimed to have much wisdom...if there is something I deeply believe in, I am not going to apologize for the way I feel and make all "nice" about it.

That's just not who I am!!

[Phil C]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
I never claimed to have much wisdom...if there is something I deeply believe in, I am not going to apologize for the way I feel and make all "nice" about it.

That's just not who I am!!

One must be tactful.

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
I never claimed to have much wisdom...if there is something I deeply believe in, I am not going to apologize for the way I feel and make all "nice" about it.

That's just not who I am!!

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Blastoderm55]

They're dying for this country just the same as straight men and women are. If the general is so adamently against them, he should send them all home. :rolleyes:

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Phil C
One must be tactful.

Being tactful and being politically correct are two completely different things, IMO!!

[Phil C]

Blas remember it is easier to catch a fly with honey than with vineger.

[Phil C]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
Being tactful and being politically correct are two completely different things, IMO!!

One must strive to develope both wonderful traits. :)

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by Phil C
Blas remember it is easier to catch a fly with honey than with vineger.

True...true.

[pirate4state]

All of a sudden I feel like throwing ROCKS!!!

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Phil C
One must strive to develope both wonderful traits. :)

Oh well...I always have been a bit of rebel anyway!:p

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Bullaholic
Why not? I may want a "board vacation" to attend PPHSFan's wedding. :D I would be so sad :( :weeping:

[JJ7997]

This issue is definitely like a catch-22. Both sides make very valid points.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by pirate4state
All of a sudden I feel like throwing ROCKS!!!

<paper covers rock> :)

[BullFrog Dad]

Originally posted by Phil C
Blas remember it is easier to catch a fly with honey than with vineger. Why would you want to catch a fly? Do they make good pets?

[Phil C]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
<paper covers rock> :)

Good one! :D :clap:

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by BullFrog Dad
Why would you want to catch a fly? Do they make good pets?

To feed to the frogs, duh. :p

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by JJ7997
This issue is definitely like a catch-22. Both sides make very valid points.

I really don't have an opinion on this issue one way or the other.

I'm just arguing against the always being "politically correct" stand!!:p

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by BullFrog Dad
Why would you want to catch a fly? Do they make good pets?

Catch them, then tear the one wing off and watch them fly in circles.

[Phil C]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
I really don't have an opinion on this issue one way or the other.

I'm just arguing against the always being "politically correct" stand!!:p

It is always wise to be politically correct.

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
I really don't have an opinion on this issue one way or the other.

I'm just arguing against the always being "politically correct" stand!!:p

Another very valid point, one in which I agree. Theres way too much PC going on !

[BuffyMars]

How did this thread turn into confuscious says? :thinking:

[BullFrog Dad]

Originally posted by JJ7997
Catch them, then tear the one wing off and watch them fly in circles. What do you call a fly with both wings torn off?

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Phil C
It is always wise to be politically correct.

We have now gone in a complete circle!!

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
<paper covers rock> :)

:doh: :doh:

http://www.buzzlife.com/forums/images/smilies/hitwithrock.gif

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by BullFrog Dad
What do you call a fly with both wings torn off?

Enlighten me.

[BullFrog Dad]

Originally posted by JJ7997
Enlighten me. A walk.

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
I never claimed to have much wisdom...if there is something I deeply believe in, I am not going to apologize for the way I feel and make all "nice" about it.

That's just not who I am!!

Never apologize!!!

SAY WHAT YOU MEAN & MEAN WHAT YOU SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by BullFrog Dad
A walk.

ROFLMPWAO

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by BullFrog Dad
A walk.

ROFL!!!

When you let a fly out of your car window going doing the interstate at 70 MPH....does it die??

I have always wondered that!!:nerd:

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
ROFL!!!

When you let a fly out of your car window going doing the interstate at 70 MPH....does it die??

I have always wondered that!!:nerd:

I doubt it, but its hard to get them out going down the road, swiping and swerving.

[Txbroadcaster]

While I disagree with the General, I have no problem with what he said.

HE was being honest, which in today's PC world is refreshing.

Sorry Phil but the PC charade people live in only hides things until they boil over.

I personally would rather know how people truly feel then to hide it with "correct" statements.

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by JJ7997
I doubt it, but its hard to get them out going down the road, swiping and swerving.

Sometimes, if they get close enough to where the window is cracked...they just get sucked right out!!

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
While I disagree with the General, I have no problem with what he said.

HE was being honest, which in today's PC world is refreshing.

Sorry Phil but the PC charade people live in only hides things until they boil over.

I personally would rather know how people truly feel then to hide it with "correct" statements.

I 100% agree with you!!

[LH Panther Mom]

Originally posted by pirate4state
All of a sudden I feel like throwing ROCKS!!! Wonder why? :evillol: :evillol: :evillol:


Originally posted by BuffyMars
How did this thread turn into confuscious says? :thinking: I might have an idea... ;)

[JJ7997]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
Sometimes, if they get close enough to where the window is cracked...they just get sucked right out!!

Yeah, but its hard when theres an entire colony of them in there. Never leave your windows down on your pickup when you work on a dairy farm, a cattle auction or a feedlot. You would think after working at all three in my lifetime I would remember to roll up the windows. :doh:

[Phil C]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
How did this thread turn into confuscious says? :thinking:

A wise man indeed!

[Phil C]

Originally posted by pirate4state
Never apologize!!!

SAY WHAT YOU MEAN & MEAN WHAT YOU SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JUST BE POLITICALLY CORRECT AND TACTFUL AS YOU DO IT!

[carter08]

So he said something hurtful

So a lot of people disagree

If he takes it back he's a fool
Stick to your guns

As wrong as they may be

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Phil C
JUST BE POLITICALLY CORRECT AND TACTFUL AS YOU DO IT!

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by Phil C
JUST BE POLITICALLY CORRECT AND TACTFUL AS YOU DO IT!

Being pc only covers up the truth

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
I personally would rather know how people truly feel then to hide it with "correct" statements. AMEN! :clap:

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by pirate4state
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ditto!!:devil: :devil:

[Phil C]

It is wise to be PC and tactful. Ben Franklin was a tactful man.

[carter08]

Originally posted by Phil C
It is wise to be PC and tactful. Ben Franklin was a tactful man.

Frankin was also a deist. He believed that God created the earth and then left it alone. Deism heavily influenced the Declaration and Constitution

[Blastoderm55]

The General is free to express himself however he can do so in a legal fashion. However, he has to be prepared for the backlash of those who have rights to opinions that are not the same as his. This pansy-footing, for lack of a better term, is the reason we're PC. Got an opinion? Feel free to express it. But don't think it won't come without an equal and opposite reaction.

Not to mention, by his estimation, if infidelity equates to immorality, then there goes half of Washington, including most of his bosses, I'm sure.

[pirate4state]

It is wise to know when to QUIT!

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by Phil C
It is wise to be PC and tactful. Ben Franklin was a tactful man.

No problem beinc tactful..BUT being PC means your afraid to be yourself

[Phil C]

Originally posted by pirate4state
It is wise to know when to QUIT!

Now now P4S the general has the freedom and right to say how he feels even if it isn't tactful and PC.

It is good to stay calm cool collected and focused.

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Phil C
Now now P4S the general has the freedom and right to say how he feels even if it isn't tactful and PC.

It is good to stay calm cool collected and focused.

Who said I was talking about the General? :thinking:

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by pirate4state
Who said I was talking about the General? :thinking:

HAHAHA I gues you was being PC in your statement

[Phil C]

Are you all getting upset with me? :eek:

[Blastoderm55]

Never Phil!

Group hug, everyone!!! :D

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
HAHAHA I gues you was being PC in your statement

Maybe :devil:

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
No problem beinc tactful..BUT being PC means your afraid to be yourself

I am afraid of waterbugs and cockroaches. Especially ones that fly! :helpme:

Gays in the military....RUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
I am afraid of waterbugs and cockroaches. Especially ones that fly! :helpme:

Gays in the military....RUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

I dont think we should deny anyone willing to fight and possibly die for our country if they are physically able to do so

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
I dont think we should deny anyone willing to fight and possibly die for our country if they are physically able to do so

I didn't get to finish my sentence.

RUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!! AND GRAB A GUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
I dont think we should deny anyone willing to fight and possibly die for our country if they are physically able to do so

From what is being said on the news, it sounds like the service can use every man or woman it can its hands on.

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
From what is being said on the news, it sounds like the service can use every man or woman it can its hands on.

Can I get an Amen?

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
Can I get an Amen?


It would not be PC to use a religious comment like Amen

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
It would not be PC to use a religious comment like Amen

How about....Yo momma?

[Sinton94]

Originally posted by Phil C
It is always wise to be politically correct.


AND WHY IS THAT:confused:

[pirate4state]

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

regret (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070313/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/military_gays)

[Keith7]

if people are gay, leave them alone.. why does it bother people if someone is homosexual?? Maybe the people who are so against gays just have a guilty concience

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by Keith7
if people are gay, leave them alone.. why does it bother people if someone is homosexual?? Maybe the people who are so against gays just have a guilty concience

Just repressed homosexuality within the selves of the very critics who blast them. Not in every case, of course, but the father from American Beauty comes to mind often during these discussions on homosexuality and those who are intolerant of it.

[vet93]

One of the biggest lies that is brought out in this debate is the whole "repressed homosexuality" gig.
There are basically two seperate issues that have been talked about...1) The morality of homosexuality 2) Whether gays should be allowed to serve in the military. These two things don't have to be mutually exclusive. I for one believe that homosexuality is immoral...Why?, because it is plainly stated as such in the Bible. Do I hate gays, NO!...Why? Because it also plainly states in the Bible that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Should being gay keep you from serving in the armed services...I don't see why not as long as your homosexuality does not keep you from serving in a competent capacity. By the way....I also believe that adultery is immoral...Why? Because it is plainly stated in the Bible....see argument above. For those who don't believe in the Bible...I know that you will not agree, but at least you know why I believe what I do and it has nothing to do with repressed homosexuality.


Originally posted by Blastoderm55
Just repressed homosexuality within the selves of the very critics who blast them. Not in every case, of course, but the father from American Beauty comes to mind often during these discussions on homosexuality and those who are intolerant of it.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by vet93
One of the biggest lies that is brought out in this debate is the whole "repressed homosexuality" gig.
There are basically two seperate issues that have been talked about...1) The morality of homosexuality 2) Whether gays should be allowed to serve in the military. These two things don't have to be mutually exclusive. I for one believe that homosexuality is immoral...Why?, because it is plainly stated as such in the Bible. Do I hate gays, NO!...Why? Because it also plainly states in the Bible that we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. Should being gay keep you from serving in the armed services...I don't see why not as long as your homosexuality does not keep you from serving in a competent capacity. By the way....I also believe that adultery is immoral...Why? Because it is plainly stated in the Bible....see argument above. For those who don't believe in the Bible...I know that you will not agree, but at least you know why I believe what I do and it has nothing to do with repressed homosexuality.

Hence the "not every case, of course" fragment. I'm glad you don't fit the criteria as per my example listed. Very good movie though.

[vet93]

I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who feel that homosexuality is immoral believe as I do and are not repressed homosexuals.


Originally posted by Blastoderm55
Hence the "not every case, of course" fragment. I'm glad you don't fit the criteria as per my example listed. Very good movie though.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by vet93
I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who feel that homosexuality is immoral believe as I do and are not repressed homosexuals.

Feel free to do so. If there's anything to be learned from this all is that we all have the right to our opinions.

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by vet93
I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who feel that homosexuality is immoral believe as I do and are not repressed homosexuals.

I agree with you!

[pirate44]

Originally posted by vet93
I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who feel that homosexuality is immoral believe as I do and are not repressed homosexuals.
I hope youre right, otherwise im a closet soccer lover :eek: as well as a closet Lakers fan :(:eek: :eek:

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by vet93
I would suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who feel that homosexuality is immoral believe as I do and are not repressed homosexuals.

Not me. It is funnier thinking that there are a bunch of repressed homosexuals running loose in the streets!! :evillol: :evillol:

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by pirate4state
Not me. It is funnier thinking that there are a bunch of repressed homosexuals running loose in the streets!! :evillol: :evillol:

It works both ways, so be wary of any very friendly women. ;)

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
It works both ways, so be wary of any very friendly women. ;)

I hadn't thought about that. :( It is just funny thinking of the men. ;)

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by pirate4state
I hadn't thought about that. :( It is just funny thinking of the men. ;)

It is pretty silly isn't it. :p

[Ingleside Fan]

First the General shouldn't have voice his personal views on the subject.

Second: Under the Uniform code of Military Justice (UCMJ) it is illegal for service men and women to engage in a homosexual act. Just like Adultery, which is illegal.

Military members are held to a higher standard than the rest of citizens of the United States. They are held to two sets of laws, the state laws which they live and the UCMJ. The Military can let the state have jurisdiction over an issue and/or charge the member under the UCMJ.

The don't ask, don't tell policy lets homosexuals serve and the military does not have the break the articles of the UCMJ.

[mustang04]

it IS immoral!!!!!:mad: :mad: :mad:

[Emerson1]

Send them to the frontlines with paintball guns.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
The General is free to express himself however he can do so in a legal fashion. However, he has to be prepared for the backlash of those who have rights to opinions that are not the same as his. This pansy-footing, for lack of a better term, is the reason we're PC. Got an opinion? Feel free to express it. But don't think it won't come without an equal and opposite reaction.

Not to mention, by his estimation, if infidelity equates to immorality, then there goes half of Washington, including most of his bosses, I'm sure.

I've read all these and agree 1000% with you, Blast.

I think it's kinda silly that everyone gets so worked up over homosexuality. I too think it's a repressed type of issue. Many times those that have the most violent reactions to homosexuality are the one's that have a real internal struggle going on inside themselves.

Also, as Blast says, if we are going to treat homosexuality on the same plane as adultery, we better be ready to follow through. You can't come down with both feet on the gays and turn a blind eye to those darn adulterers.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

I haven't read any of the other posts, so this argument might have already been brought up, but you know, there was a time in America where blacks could not own land, marry white women, or fight for our country. Then people realized that what they were doing was considered discrimination. I think that it is a lifestyle choice that people have, and it is their right as citizens in this great nation to do so. Never should anyone discriminate or impede the same rights to someone else as they believe they should have for themselves. This is just another form of discrimination, forty-three years after the civil rights movement.

[Ingleside Fan]

It is not discrimination it is a law that the Military must follow until Congress changes the UCMJ.

Discrimination is the unlawful and intentional act of unfair treatment of a person based on race, ethnicity, sex (gender), religion, national origin, physical or mental disability, and age.

It is not homosexually it is Sodomy.

UCMJ Article 125 states:

"Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense."

It is not that they are homosexual, but they are saying there having unnatural sex acts. This is considered by the UCMJ as "unnatural carnal copulation"

It is considered (no matter how out dated it is) unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that person’s mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal.

Or places that person’s sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal.

Or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person or to have carnal copulation with an animal.

If a heterosexual in the military is caught is an act of Adultery, Sodomy or any article under the UCMJ they are prosecuted and separated from military service. But you don't hear about this in the media.

It is considered (no matter how out dated it is) unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that person’s mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal; or to place that person’s sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal; or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person; or to have carnal copulation with an animal.

If the American people believe that this is wrong they must tell the representatives to change the law.
The Congress and the President has to change the law.

Many states still have these laws still on the books.

In 2005 the Supreme Court finally made a ruling against a states "anti-sodomy law"

I am not against having homosexuals serving their country in the Military. But the majority of the American people must change thier minds before the laws can change.

Don't blame the Military or the people in the Military.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
It is not discrimination it is a law that the Military must follow until Congress changes the UCMJ.

Discrimination is the unlawful and intentional act of unfair treatment of a person based on race, ethnicity, sex (gender), religion, national origin, physical or mental disability, and age.

It is not homosexually it is Sodomy.

UCMJ Article 125 states:

"Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense."

It is not that they are homosexual, but they are saying there having unnatural sex acts. This is considered by the UCMJ as "unnatural carnal copulation"

It is considered (no matter how out dated it is) unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that person’s mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal.

Or places that person’s sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal.

Or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person or to have carnal copulation with an animal.

If a heterosexual in the military is caught is an act of Adultery, Sodomy or any article under the UCMJ they are prosecuted and separated from military service. But you don't hear about this in the media.

It is considered (no matter how out dated it is) unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that person’s mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal; or to place that person’s sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal; or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person; or to have carnal copulation with an animal.

If the American people believe that this is wrong they must tell the representatives to change the law.
The Congress and the President has to change the law.

Many states still have these laws still on the books.

In 2005 the Supreme Court finally made a ruling against a states "anti-sodomy law"

I am not against having homosexuals serving their country in the Military. But the majority of the American people must change thier minds before the laws can change.

Don't blame the Military or the people in the Military.


But his point is that discrimination was a part of the law in the case of Blacks, also. It means the law is wrong and antiquated.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

It's discrimination any way you butter it up. I don't care what being a homosexual entails, the bottom line is that it is purposeful discrimination against a group of people. It is discrimination, no matter how you try to spin it, and it's wrong to judge someone based on what they do in their own bedroom and the lifestyle that they choose. It's comparable to saying, "I don't like you because you're a vegetarian, so you can't serve our country." I'm not going to be a posterboy for gay rights, just for giving every American the same rights and privileges as I am. I think many people are trying to let their morals and religious beliefs dictate the rights of other American people, and these ideals spread out further than just gays serving in the military, and I'm disgusted by this notion.

[SintonFan]

I believe it is immoral and back up the General in his opinion.:cool:
.
Why is it when someone has a dissenting opinion against certain groups, it is considered wrong for us to have that opinion. :thinking: Are we still frikkin America here or what?:)

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
It's discrimination any way you butter it up. I don't care what being a homosexual entails, the bottom line is that it is purposeful discrimination against a group of people. It is discrimination, no matter how you try to spin it, and it's wrong to judge someone based on what they do in their own bedroom and the lifestyle that they choose. It's comparable to saying, "I don't like you because you're a vegetarian, so you can't serve our country." I'm not going to be a posterboy for gay rights, just for giving every American the same rights and privileges as I am. I think many people are trying to let their morals and religious beliefs dictate the rights of other American people, and these ideals spread out further than just gays serving in the military, and I'm disgusted by this notion.

So I should get treated different because I am a Heterosexual?

They are trying to pass laws so that if a heterosexual couple that does not have kids within three years of their marriage date they should have their marriage automatically annulled.

This is not right and discriminatory to heterosexual, but no one is yelling about this.


Your right that the government should stay out of our bedrooms.

But sexual preference is a choice.

Your Race or Gender is not a choice.

[LH Panther Mom]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
But sexual preference is a choice.

Your Race or Gender is not a choice. :clap: :clap: :clap:

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Macarthur
But his point is that discrimination was a part of the law in the case of Blacks, also. It means the law is wrong and antiquated.

I did say that the Congress and President needs to change the law.:kiss:

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan

They are trying to pass laws so that if a heterosexual couple that does not have kids within three years of their marriage date they should have their marriage automatically annulled.



HUH??? Who is "they"??

What about an instance, such as my husband and myself....we got married, each already had kids from a previous marriage, and have NO intention of having other kids........what then??

[LH Panther Mom]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
HUH??? Who is "they"??

What about an instance, such as my husband and myself....we got married, each already had kids from a previous marriage, and have NO intention of having other kids........what then?? Sounds like you better stop "practicing". ;)

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by LH Panther Mom
Sounds like you better stop "practicing". ;)

Practice makes perfect!:)

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan

They are trying to pass laws so that if a heterosexual couple that does not have kids within three years of their marriage date they should have their marriage automatically annulled.

But sexual preference is a choice.


To the 1st statement: That is crazy! It will never pass, people should not be forced to have kids. In fact more people should NOT have kids! It would suck to be me having no kids and all!

To the 2nd statement: That is a matter of opinion.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan


But sexual preference is a choice.

Your Race or Gender is not a choice.

Some believe that..and others dont

[piratebg]

This whole thing is just............gay. :D

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
So I should get treated different because I am a Heterosexual?

They are trying to pass laws so that if a heterosexual couple that does not have kids within three years of their marriage date they should have their marriage automatically annulled.

This is not right and discriminatory to heterosexual, but no one is yelling about this.


Your right that the government should stay out of our bedrooms.

But sexual preference is a choice.

Your Race or Gender is not a choice.

I'm as straight as an arrow, and I haven't heard of such a law. Trust me, the non-Evangelical nutbar populace of this nation that views sex as an intimate experience between two committed partners will be up at arms as well. However, there are some who believe marriage is just a vehicle for procreation.

I pity those people.

[Ingleside Fan]

Nice!;)

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
HUH??? Who is "they"??

What about an instance, such as my husband and myself....we got married, each already had kids from a previous marriage, and have NO intention of having other kids........what then??


Here is the link!

http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/02/no_kids_your_ma.html

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Here is the link!

http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/02/no_kids_your_ma.html

Another source!

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/302553_initiative06.html:think

Crazy! I know!ing:

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Here is the link!

http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/02/no_kids_your_ma.html

I think that is funny..They are attacking one of the main arguments that people agianst Gay marriage use

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Another source!

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/302553_initiative06.html:think

Crazy! I know!ing:


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/302553_initiative06.html


maybe this link will work?

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
I think that is funny..They are attacking one of the main arguments that people agianst Gay marriage use

Your right! Maybe we should just have no marriages?

Maybe we should ban the word Heterosexual and Homosexual?:D

[piratebg]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Your right! Maybe we should just have no marriages?

Maybe we should ban the word Heterosexual and Homosexual?:D


Hmmm.....a polygamous society. :thinking: Show of hands please of those in favor of this ammendment?

[Ingleside Fan]

Dang! I made 200 post and missed it! Maybe I will notice 300 post?

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Here is the link!

http://www.blueoregon.com/2007/02/no_kids_your_ma.html

:eek: :eek:

oh my stars in heaven!!

[Blastoderm55]

Progressive!?!?!

Hah!

These guys are as mixed up on the term "progressive" as the clan is on the term "racist."

Those Blue Oregonians are about as progressive as a treadmill. :rolleyes:

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
So I should get treated different because I am a Heterosexual?

Uh, No. The same; not different.


They are trying to pass laws so that if a heterosexual couple that does not have kids within three years of their marriage date they should have their marriage automatically annulled.

That is a fringe group and legislation like that will never pass. Just because a certain group comes up with an "initiative" doesn't mean it's even going to see the light of day.


This is not right and discriminatory to heterosexual, but no one is yelling about this.

Sure, no one is yelling about this because it's insane and will never see the light of day. Again, saying a group wants to present something to lawmakers and it getting sponsored and presented by a legislator is two very different things. So for you to base your argument on heteros being discriminated against based on this, is really kinda silly.




Your right that the government should stay out of our bedrooms.

But sexual preference is a choice.

Your Race or Gender is not a choice.

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. There is a certain part of the gay community that chooses the lifestyle, but the overwhelming majority of homosexuals do not "choose" their orientation. There is more and more mounting evidence to support that it is not a choice. Do you remember when you "decided" to like girls?

[Ingleside Fan]

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. There is a certain part of the gay community that chooses the lifestyle, but the overwhelming majority of homosexuals do not "choose" their orientation. There is more and more mounting evidence to support that it is not a choice. Do you remember when you "decided" to like girls? [/B][/QUOTE]

Your opinion! Thanks for your thoughts!:)

[carter08]

There is a better chance that a flying ice cream truck will fall on top of George Bush than there is that the no kids annulment thing will pass.

[pirate4state]

Originally posted by carter08
There is a better chance that a flying ice cream truck will fall on top of George Bush than there is that the no kids annulment thing will pass.

That mental image is funny

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by pirate4state
That mental image is funny

lol. I'm with you, P4S---I've heard "When blue monkeys fly out....." and "When pigs fly", but never this one.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. There is a certain part of the gay community that chooses the lifestyle, but the overwhelming majority of homosexuals do not "choose" their orientation. There is more and more mounting evidence to support that it is not a choice. Do you remember when you "decided" to like girls?



Your opinion! Thanks for your thoughts!:)

Well, really it's not "my opinion"...

The American Psychological Association is a good place to start. There is no less than 3 dozen studies in the last 10 years that have suggested that the vast majority of homosexuals studied never "choose" the lifestyle.

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Macarthur
Well, really it's not "my opinion"...

The American Psychological Association is a good place to start. There is no less than 3 dozen studies in the last 10 years that have suggested that the vast majority of homosexuals studied never "choose" the lifestyle.

Sensitive? There are many studies that are the opinion of the people that do the study. Nothing is proven either way on this subject. It is your belief (and many others) that homosexually is not a choice in life. On the other hand there are others (many others) that believe that homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual is a choice.

So you believe in scientific proof? Then look at nature. There are no homosexual animals. They could be bisexual but they breed male to female not male to male or female to female.

[Ingleside Fan]

Dang I miss Football!:mad: Isn't August here yet?:confused:

[Bullaholic]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Dang I miss Football!:mad: Isn't August here yet?:confused:

Now this is one post on which you will get absolutely no arguments, IFan.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Sensitive?

Why would I be sensitive? I'm not homophobic...



There are many studies that are the opinion of the people that do the study. Nothing is proven either way on this subject. It is your belief (and many others) that homosexually is not a choice in life. On the other hand there are others (many others) that believe that homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual is a choice.

These studies go a ways further than "opinion". While the studies have not "proved" something with 100% certainty, they are pretty solid.


So you believe in scientific proof? Then look at nature. There are no homosexual animals. They could be bisexual but they breed male to female not male to male or female to female. [/B]

You sure you want to stick with that one?

You're actually proving my point for me. Homosexuality happens all the time in nature. That is not opinion.

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Macarthur
Why would I be sensitive? I'm not homophobic...




These studies go a ways further than "opinion". While the studies have not "proved" something with 100% certainty, they are pretty solid.



You sure you want to stick with that one?

You're actually proving my point for me. Homosexuality happens all the time in nature. That is not opinion.

Proven your point? You never see two males or two females pair up to establish a family in nature. Homosexuality never happens in nature animals only have sex with the opposite sex to have off spring.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Proven your point? You never see two males or two females pair up to establish a family in nature. Homosexuality never happens in nature animals only have sex with the opposite sex to have off spring.

What's your point? It's a persons choice to make and not for you or anyone else to judge or act like they deserve less rights than you or anyone else because of it, that's the bottom line.

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
What's your point? It's a persons choice to make and not for you or anyone else to judge or act like they deserve less rights than you or anyone else because of it, that's the bottom line.

Its not me judging anyone. It is our society that judges that homosexually is wrong for Military service. The majority does not want homosexuals to serve in the Military becuase the law has still not change.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Its not me judging anyone. It is our society that judges that homosexually is wrong for Military service. The majority does not want homosexuals to serve in the Military becuase the law has still not change.

Change the law and treat everyone the same, regardless of the lifestyle they chose. I'm not friends with homosexuals and I think what they do is wrong, but at least I'm not so blinded by my disgust that I think I'm better than they are and they don't deserve to be treated the same. Not saying you do, just that a lot of people are, and it's shameful.

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
Change the law and treat everyone the same, regardless of the lifestyle they chose. I'm not friends with homosexuals and I think what they do is wrong, but at least I'm not so blinded by my disgust that I think I'm better than they are and they don't deserve to be treated the same. Not saying you do, just that a lot of people are, and it's shameful.

That is what has to happen. We have to get our representative in Congress to change the UCMJ for the Military. And our state representative to change the state laws. But until the majority votes for change it will not happen. Right or Wrong it will not happen!

[theyoefnshow]

Queerin don't make the world work.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Proven your point? You never see two males or two females pair up to establish a family in nature. Homosexuality never happens in nature animals only have sex with the opposite sex to have off spring.

That is simply not true. It is well documented that animals exhibit homosexual behavior all the time.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

[Emerson1]

.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Its not me judging anyone. It is our society that judges that homosexually is wrong for Military service. The majority does not want homosexuals to serve in the Military becuase the law has still not change.

It was also law that women or blacks could not vote. It was legal to own slaves. I could go on and on about antiquated laws.

Oh, and the old majority argument doesn't hold water either. That same majority was okay with slavery, too.

[Ingleside Fan]

Originally posted by Macarthur
It was also law that women or blacks could not vote. It was legal to own slaves. I could go on and on about antiquated laws.

Oh, and the old majority argument doesn't hold water either. That same majority was okay with slavery, too.


Only your way will seem to please you! Freedom to have different thoughts is not part of your vocabulary. If so many people wanted homosexuals to serve in the Military, then they would stand up to change it. Just like Women did for the vote and just like the blacks did for equal rights. When a ground swell of support for this issue is brought forth then the Congress and the President will work on solutions.

By the way the Military has always been ahead of the civilian population in the rights of the people.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/odyssey/educate/truman.html

"On July 31, 1948, the Chicago Defender, one of the most powerful black owned and edited newspapers in the country, published the headline "President Truman Wipes Out Segregation In Armed Forces." Executive Order No. 9981 issued by President Truman provided for "equality of treatment and opportunity in the armed forces without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." This was the first time that a president used an executive order to implement civil rights principles and was a major victory for civil rights advocates in the quest for full citizenship. Despite these orders, full integration of African Americans in the armed services was carried out slowly. It was not until the end of the Korean conflict that full integration of the armed forces had been achieved."

And executive order by the President can change the racial or gender barriers. But again, the UCMJ must be changed so the Military does not have to prosecute there members that admitted to Sodomy Art. 125.

It took years to educate and change the minds of Americans on Women's and Civil rights. This will not happen until Americans except that people are different and still can be a productive member of a team.

Your job if you believe this to be a travesty of law or rights is to get out there and make a difference.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
Only your way will seem to please you!

No, not really just the truth.



Freedom to have different thoughts is not part of your vocabulary.

Having different thoughts and being factually wrong are two different things. You can think that homosexuals should not serve in the military. You just can't base your opinion on incorrect information and never expect anyone to present the facts to the contrary. One of your defenses of homosexuals not being the in the military was because it was "unnatural" and never happened in nature. I presented one article (there are many more) that proves that it does happen in nature. I never said you can't have your opinion; just base it on something logical. You know, people made the same type of arguments against blacks.



If so many people wanted homosexuals to serve in the Military, then they would stand up to change it. Just like Women did for the vote and just like the blacks did for equal rights. When a ground swell of support for this issue is brought forth then the Congress and the President will work on solutions.

But it was wrong even before the groundswell. Just because the majority of people wake up and demand change doesn't mean it became wrong at that particular point.

Are you saying it was okay for blacks and women to not vote before the law was changed?


By the way the Military has always been ahead of the civilian population in the rights of the people.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/odyssey/educate/truman.html

"On July 31, 1948, the Chicago Defender, one of the most powerful black owned and edited newspapers in the country, published the headline "President Truman Wipes Out Segregation In Armed Forces." Executive Order No. 9981 issued by President Truman provided for "equality of treatment and opportunity in the armed forces without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." This was the first time that a president used an executive order to implement civil rights principles and was a major victory for civil rights advocates in the quest for full citizenship. Despite these orders, full integration of African Americans in the armed services was carried out slowly. It was not until the end of the Korean conflict that full integration of the armed forces had been achieved."

And executive order by the President can change the racial or gender barriers. But again, the UCMJ must be changed so the Military does not have to prosecute there members that admitted to Sodomy Art. 125.

It took years to educate and change the minds of Americans on Women's and Civil rights. This will not happen until Americans except that people are different and still can be a productive member of a team.

Your job if you believe this to be a travesty of law or rights is to get out there and make a difference.

I'm confused. By posting this article are you saying gay should be able to serve in the military?

[Ingleside Fan]

Your truth or my truth is not truth to others.

Just because it is wrong does make the law change. Under our system you have to make it happen. If you would have read earlier I do not have a problem with homosexuals serving in the Military. But if they admit to an active homosexual lifestyle in the Military then they will be charge with Art 125. It is not the problem of the people that do not want homosexuals in the Military. It is the people that want them in the Military to change the law.

Right or wrong? A Moral issue or a law?

To get homosexuals to serve openly in the Military the UCMJ has to be change.

[Macarthur]

Originally posted by Ingleside Fan
[B]Your truth or my truth is not truth to others.

Well, with regards to homosexual behavior happening in nature, it's not a matter of my truth versus your truth. Some things can be observable and provable.


Just because it is wrong does make the law change. Under our system you have to make it happen. If you would have read earlier I do not have a problem with homosexuals serving in the Military.

You're still not answering the question.



But if they admit to an active homosexual lifestyle in the Military then they will be charge with Art 125. It is not the problem of the people that do not want homosexuals in the Military. It is the people that want them in the Military to change the law.

As long as they are treated the same way a heterosexual is treated in cases of adultery then it's fair and "right".




To get homosexuals to serve openly in the Military the UCMJ has to be change.

Well, that's an obvious statement, isn't it? Either I'm missing something or that was not really the point of the discussion. The discussion was centering around the rightness or wrongness of the differentiation; not the mechanism for change.