lol!!!
-
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
Sounds like change is coming...
- Thread starter Kodiak
- Start date
- Status
lol!!!
I knew a pilot who's sexual preference was different than mine....he perferred 7th grade girls. You're saying he should have spent 5 years in the military instead of prison?
I'm sorry fellas, but there's a lot of stuff I know I want to say, but I keep my mouth shut about them. Stuff about things I do to my wife or the role of women in the military. These things are volatile in nature and because of this, I keep my mouth shut. I'm subject to consequences that may come my way after saying these things. It's because of this that I keep my mouth shut. It's because of this, I have no problem with the current policy of homosexuals keeping their mouth shut.
I disagree.
Homosexuality was once considered deviant behavior just as pedophilia is now. Many of us still consider it a deviant behavior. Who draws the line to what is acceptable and where is it drawn? In 20 years is it going to be okay to have sex with dogs? That's a sexual preference that is considered deviant and illegal now just as homosexuality once was.
If you're going to allow gays to serve, then you better start getting the dollars together now to go from 2 types of berthing to at least 4 - straight male, gay male, straight female and gay female. Oh wait! A gay guy can control himself when berthing with a strait male. Guess what? A straight guy can control himself when berthing with a female too. If one is acceptable so is the other.
If I was still on active duty, I would refuse to share a berthing compartment or stateroom with a gay. I believe I would win this battle too. There is going to be a lot of court battles over this if DADT is overturned.
Call me a bigot but if nature had intended gay sex, then oral and anal sex would result in pregnancies and males would be able to get pregnant too.
I also think it is a federal law so it will take more than an executive order to change DADT.
The difference being that homosexuals can both be legally consenting if they are of age. Minors, dogs and livestock cannot, legally.
It is and it will. An intermediate step might be to suspend enforcement or prosecutions of Article 125, I believe that the President alone could do that.
Start getting used to the idea because that is likely what will happen, whether you like or not.
To combat "righteous indignation" to HP's post...the slippery slope is already being ridden
Teachers Fucking Students:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480089,00.html
People Fucking Animals:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002838346_bestiality02m.html
Just a start...
While that is true now, it didn't use to be. Again, who draws the line? Those dog fuckers might start a movement and get the laws changed. It's a slippery slope.
Having one of my fields of study as education in Sociology, I can give you this: This sort of topic can get dirty. Just know that norms follow a baseline and flow from left to right. You would think that being in an information age, these times would come and go faster. Being gay was stratified in Athens and Rome...but of course we know what ultimately happened to them.
The problem is the forced cohabitation of heterosexuals and homosexuals.
If LCpl Jones is gay today and hits the showers he can have all the eye candy he wants (or doesn't want as the case may be) and no one really cares unless he starts obviously ogling or something.
Picture next year when LCpl Jones is gay and everyone knows it - do you think anyone will feel comfortable in the showers with him, whether he is checking them out or not? Doubtful.
Would a group of women feel comfortable if a man rolled up in the womens locker room and started taking a shower, whether he was checking them out or not? Doubtful.
So, as was already brought up, do we need to have 4 berthing areas IOT combat this problem?
The purpose of the military is to fight and win wars. Not to enact social change or perform social experiments. If states around the nation were voting in favor of gay issues consistently then that would be one thing, but as it stands they are not.
If LCpl Jones is gay today and hits the showers he can have all the eye candy he wants (or doesn't want as the case may be) and no one really cares unless he starts obviously ogling or something.
Picture next year when LCpl Jones is gay and everyone knows it - do you think anyone will feel comfortable in the showers with him, whether he is checking them out or not? Doubtful.
Would a group of women feel comfortable if a man rolled up in the womens locker room and started taking a shower, whether he was checking them out or not? Doubtful.
So, as was already brought up, do we need to have 4 berthing areas IOT combat this problem?
The purpose of the military is to fight and win wars. Not to enact social change or perform social experiments. If states around the nation were voting in favor of gay issues consistently then that would be one thing, but as it stands they are not.
Anyone over 18 has long been an adult in this country, it was the acts that were illegal. Changing the laws of consent is much less likely, probably impossible, no matter what you may think.
So that makes it acceptable for a 33 year old teacher to fuck their 18 yr old student? Really?
And what about polygamy? Why is homosexuality accepted by so many, while polygamy is generally frowned upon, and illegal? If all the members are of legal age (I know, rare...), consenting, and human, what's the big deal?
CWJones411
IRR
That's up to the state I think. What's illegal is using all of the wives for tax purposes.
(Disclaimer: I think. One of the old school Mormons can chime in and set this straight)
- Status