Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-22-2010, 12:45 PM
 
3,378 posts, read 3,714,540 times
Reputation: 710

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDragonslayer View Post
No, but my spouse served almost three years in Viet Nam. Have you served? Any why does that matter?
Yes, I have served. I made the comment in response to your previous post. The majority of people on here do not understand that the military is different. You can't call in sick. You can't give 2 weeks notice. You train, live, & work with dozens of other guys for weeks, months, and sometimes years at a time.
There are places that are off limits to soldiers. The Uniformed code of military justice (UCMJ) is the law for military members.
Gays act like their civil rights have been taken away. But, ALL military members have to sacrifice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-22-2010, 12:57 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,484,760 times
Reputation: 4243
Default Barney Frank: Not Allowing Gays and Straights to Shower Together is ‘Discrimination’

Quote:
[LEFT]Not allowing gay military personnel to shower with straight military peronnel would be “discrimination.” That’s the position of Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), an openly gay member of Congress who is a proponent of banishing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.
What is worng with this picture? So if this is discrimination, is not allowing men to shower with women discrimination too?

Barney Frank: Not Allowing Gays and Straights to Shower Together is ‘Discrimination’ | The Blaze[/LEFT]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,668,587 times
Reputation: 27720
I never did like military showers. When I was in I'd wait til like 1-2am when no one else was in there and then I'd hurry like a bat out of hell.

I'm not gung-ho on communal showers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 01:05 PM
 
45,304 posts, read 26,570,887 times
Reputation: 25056
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
What is worng with this picture? So if this is discrimination, is not allowing men to shower with women discrimination too?

Barney Frank: Not Allowing Gays and Straights to Shower Together is ‘Discrimination’ | The Blaze[/LEFT]
Gays are"special"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 03:19 PM
 
14,916 posts, read 13,131,116 times
Reputation: 4828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunucu Beach View Post
I didn't read all 288 posts that have preceded this one so don't know if this point was brought up but can someone enlighten me on a legal technicality?

When a law is repealed, and no new law is put into place, aren't we supposed to go back to what existed before the repealed law was enacted? That would take us back to no gays allowed in the military, wouldn't it?
The law that congress and the president just repealed was US Code, Title 10, Chapter 37, Section 654. That law previously banned homosexuals from serving in the military and required than anyone found out as gay must be dismissed from military service. Since they are no longer banned, they can now serve. The DADT executive order was Clinton's way to best circumvent a law he very much disagreed with. Technically, DADT wasn't really repealed - it simply goes away because the repeal of the law banning homosexuals from serving in the military renders it moot.

Had only DADT been repealed (which Obama could have done on his own), then you would have been correct - the underlying law banning homosexuals would still have remained and the military would once again have been able to ask about homosexuality.

Here is the law that was just repealed if you care to read it (the actual policy is halfway down after the 15 findings):

US Code 10 G 654
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
28,143 posts, read 30,089,846 times
Reputation: 13130
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDragonslayer View Post
The mormon church till the 70's treated blacks as if they were 7/8's human and got away with it.
Uh... one of the main reasons the Mormons were driven out of their homes in Illinois in the middle of the winter and forced to head west across the Great Plains is that they tended to vote as a block and were overwhelmingly abolishonist.

Quote:
It is about hate when one uses their morals to deny people their rights.
Did you know that it was legal to kill a Mormon anywhere in Missouri until 1976? Now what were you saying about denying people their rights? I suspect you know a whole lot less about this issue than you think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
2,239 posts, read 3,236,069 times
Reputation: 1180
Finally, the US Congress and the majority of Americans recognize the need to repeal DADT. Why should anyone be forced to hide or lie about who they are. That's a disgrace, and I'm glad we got rid of that policy. Equal rights is slowing take full form in the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
2,239 posts, read 3,236,069 times
Reputation: 1180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Gays are"special"
Sure are...special for having to deal with such ignorance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 05:27 PM
 
8,289 posts, read 13,592,372 times
Reputation: 5019
What amazes me about DADT and it's repeal is the fact that we are telling our professional troops who we entrust with our lives that we really can't trust them sexually! We know the military has a code of jusice so what makes people think that Gays who serve honorably are somehow going to go on some hedonistic sex splurge?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 06:23 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 43,019,830 times
Reputation: 12829
Now that this pressing issue has been decided the Obama administration has no excuse not to hurry up and win this war, now, and bring our soldiers home with victory and honor, asap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top