-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Sf Jrotc
- Thread starter scoober78
- Start date
That attitude is fine, but it is not the DADT policy as it stands. We've lost a LOT of sailors, marines, airmen and soldiers simply because somehow it got out that they were gay. They didn't "come out" to anyone. Someone simply found out by snooping and reported it.
I don't think a person's sexual preference belongs inside the workplace, AT ALL. However, it if ever came out for reasons unrelated to anything about the job being done, then why should they be kicked out? The DADT policy doesn't seem to mind straight folks talking or expressing openly their heterosexuality, but a homosexual must hide it for fear of being removed from duty.
A lot of those who were discharged were very important to the war effort, such as translators and cryptos, but there was no other choice than to let them go due to their "coming out" against their will due to others with malicious intent (in some of the cases).
I've never claimed vast personal experience. I don't really expect anyone, even serving, would know much about many people getting discharged for violating DADT, or am I completely wrong in that respect?
I wont pretend I know off the top of my head. I head read an article or two with statistics on this matter. I'll post again if I find it, so I can vindicate myself and corroborate my claims
This is what you start your posts with when you don't have a clue what you are talking about, so it doesn't sound like you are speaking from personal experience.
This is what you start your posts with when you don't have a clue what you are talking about, so it doesn't sound like you are speaking from personal experience.
fair enough...
as for an article, the one I found isn't the one which has the statistics about translators, and other specialty personnel, but it has some interesting statistics and information:
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060813/NEWS01/60813001/1008
I'll save you the time. Your original claims are completely incorrect. In the 13 years DADT has been active, the Navy has discharged about 3800 members under the policy. Of that, the VAST majority were voluntary admissions...people who claimed to be gay and sought discharge. BTW this trend is true with a close statistical similarity DOD wide. This represents "approximately 95% of discharges" according to a Congressional study on the issue. (http://digital.library.unt.edu/govd...df?PHPSESSID=82e413b7cde5041c1e44f8fbd0c56837 )
So....3800*.05 = 190/13 years = about 15 people per year discharged against their will yearly by DADT...hardly a personnel crisis.
Quit talking out your @##...really. Take this as friendly advice.
snizo
Supply Officer
I didn't see any statistics in there about how many people claimed they were gay - only the number actually given the axe. I'm sure a lot of people claimed to be gay so that they could get kicked out, but their LPO/LCPO/DivO/DH/XO/CO saw through it and sent them back to work.
Right. It's a thorough document, but I only saw the "axed" number as well, not differentiating between willing and unwilling discharges...perhaps a page reference? Well that's exactly my point, what does it take to get discharged by "violating DADT"? Does it take incriminating photos? Do you need to report to your CO holding hands with a hispanic guy named julio wearing women's jeans? I just think that if you can claim to be a homosexual to get out of the military, it doesn't necessarily discriminate agains't homosexuals as much as it frees people from their obligations and ends up screwing the military out of time and money. I don't speak with any knowledge about this at all beyond the anecdotal stuff I've read/heard. I'm really just curious how this works.
You are such an idiot - please stop posting. Scoob has hit the nail on the head. Furthermore, the Navy goes out of its way to thoroughly vet and flush out people who try to use DADT as a means of getting out of their contractual military obligations. It is a huge deal when it does happen and there is also a huge burden of proof required. Your original claim about losing a "LOT" of people due to DADT is flat out wrong - stop trying to defend it. You have yet to make an informed, coherent post. Stop going so out of your way to make a fool of yourself.
Brett