Gurdur

LOL ! Super-provocative !
Inside the USA, of course, in recent years the armed forces have been a great way out of poverty and the ghetto; the armed forces have contributed greatly to social mobility.

But it gets hairy when you then discuss just how much people should be willing to die for having been given that chance

Still, getting back to the point made by Livius Drusus; excuse me, but the USA armed forces really need Arabic speakers right at this time - of all times ! - and yet they're willing to suddenly throw out a whole lot just because they're gay ?
Excuse me, but what is wrong with this picture ?

Just to be super-provocative in return - it reminds me of the Nazi regime in 1936-1940 Germany tossing out all those Jewsih scientists, simply because they weren't "Aryan"; so the Jewish scientists end up working for the Allies on the Manhatten Project.

Viciously shooting oneself in the foot is rarely recommendable.

livius drusus

That passage stood out for me too, GWV. If true, I think it's one of the strongest practical arguments against "don't ask, don't tell" I've seen. It's a massive loophole for anyone who wants to take advantage of valuable (and I imagine hugely expensive) specialist training only to resell it to the highest bidder.

As Gurdur pointed out, the military is the big loser here. It loses acutely needed people and skills as well as the time and money invested in training. It seems to me that if people use dadt to make a chump out of the military, then the military has only itself to thank.

Marvin

I was coerced into military service and I saw a large amount of combat. It never seemed relevant if another soldier did not utilized "Happy happy renta girl" or what he did on leave. What's sex got to do with it?

wade-w

I served in the US Navy from 1980-85; most of that time was spent on a destroyer. We had two gay sailors aboard for much of that time. While there were occasional jokes made, nobody really cared as long as they performed their duties effeciently.

One was eventually discharged, not because of his sexual orientation, but because he was caught getting high while on watch. The other gay sailor was a petty officer 1st class when he rotated off (that's E-6), and was generally well liked except by a few hard core homophobes. He was also damned good at his job.

I didn't notice an increase in morale once there were no "outted" gay sailors aboard. I will grant that this is anecdotal evidence, it still seems to indicate that the morale argument is bogus.

Autonemesis

As I have pointed out before when you raise this non-sequitur, I have first-hand experience and know what it means for gays to be gay in the military, yet I disagree with you on every point, including who is qualified to give a worthwhile opinion. Furthermore, I haven't a clue what you mean by implying that someone with personal experience is more objective than someone who hasn't any personal experience. That makes no sense. Usually, the more personal a topic, the more one must be careful of losing one's objectivity, not the other way around.

In any case, please re-read the replies I have posted in this thread, and respond if you are still interested in this discussion. I hadn't been following it through the holidays since I have been out of town and away from the computer.

gulfwar_veteran

The discussion has taken its course and is now evolving into a new area (see recent few posts about the article and how gays use their status as gays to get the education and then expose themselves to be discharged), which is where I am more inclined to stay as opposed to rehashing the older parts of the discussion. Sorry.

GWV
formerly 'Neo'

gulfwar_veteran

I agree! For this reason (example) the "DA,DT" policy either needs to go or seriously needs revamping. Otherwise, as you said, they military loses and they only have themselves to blame.

GWV

Bree

Oh yes, those bad, bad gays (tricksey gays!!!) I'm sure that's exactly the reason things happened they way they did! Oh, it's all their fault, those false gayses!

Gurdur: :notworthy

Hugo Holbling

Every red-blooded male who isn't a traitor to his gender knows that queers are evil criminals, plotting to take over the world. I'll bet it was a gay that set up the ban on homosexuality so that his unnatural brethren could benefit at the expense of decent, moral folk everywhere.

Autonemesis

I understand completely. You have no answer to the fact that someone (me) who did serve in the military - as you insist is necessary - disagrees with you. All your hand-waving about "if you didn't serve, you can't know what it's like" are just that: hand-waving You see, I did serve, I do know what it's like, and I came a different conclusion based on the experience I had, which you claim is essential to come to the conclusions you did. All I wanted to show was that you were talking out of your ass, and since you have all but admitted that, I'll consider this "mission accomplished" and pass on the new phase of your discussion, which I find highly inflammatory and self-serving.