DADT Repeal Passes in Senate

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.

What's the alternative? Vote for a Republican president; someone who's party actively seeks to thwart gay rights?

Doing very little or nothing to advance gay rights is preferable to doing things to repeal gay rights.. and that is exactly what the Republican party has done at many levels of government.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
31,396
47,696
136
Homosexual warriors..Hmmm well there was Alexander the Great and his army of Macedonians who conquered the know world at the time, there was also the Spartans and lets not forget the British Navy who ruled the Seven Seas for a few hundred years.

The Spartans weren't homosexual warriors (as far as I know) but the men from Thebes who fought alongside them at Thermopylae definitely were. Macedonians didn't have a stigma about playing for both teams, but homosexuality was still viewed as the activity of younger men - when you got all grown you were expected to bang chicks and father children.

No comment on the Brits other than to note they weren't all Fellatio Hornblowers. ;)



Way to go Obama and Congress, it's about time. Yet another issue the GOP just threw egg in it's own face over.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,387
32,889
136
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.

The passing of DADT is a big deal to the gay community. I would more likely believe them.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
It wasnt an attack, it was a fact. Im sorry you didnt like it. Calling someone ignorant, isnt necessarily an insult. Let me give you just one definition of it, "Unaware or uninformed." Which I think you are in this case. As you can see, it wasnt a misuse.

Just because I dont think gays belong on the front lines of battle, doesnt make me a bigot. I dont think women generally do either. And I love women! Most of them...

Have you ever been deployed? Have you ever lived in the middle of know where, with nothing, with a squad of grunts? Doing everything together? Have you ever lived, breathed, and died with other men in battle?

I believe with no doubt that putting a gay Marine in such a situation would do far more harm, than good. People who are actually fighting the war, are under extreme stress. Adding one more thing on top of that, is not good for unit cohesion. Adding any additional stress on top of them, is in fact detrimental to them, in my opinion.

Now it is a different story in garrison. Where it is more like a civilian work place for some MOS's. Where the most stressful thing is making coffee in the morning.

Congratulations, everything you just said was also said about desegregation of military units after WW2, or when women began serving on Naval ships. Guess what? It disrupts the unit momentarily, and then unit gets over it. Those fear-mongering that this will get service members killed (*cough* McCain) are doing so for purely political purposes. There are bigger things to worry about when you are being shot at that if the guy fighting next to you happens to be gay. No one worth their salt gives a shit if you are white, black, Hispanic, straight, gay, male, female, so long as you can do your job when it counts. This view is bigoted, or at least ignorant of the level of professionalism and discipline our military service members have.

For what it's worth women serve in combat roles all the time. The concept of a "front line" doesn't exist in warfare anymore, and hasn't since at least Vietnam.

I didn't serve in combat, but I did complete some fairly intense military training before a medical discharge. I'm sure at least one or two of the people I served with were gay and it had absolutely no impact on anything.
 
Last edited:

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.

I don't think this was insignificant to the LGBTQ community, most of them who I have spoken to since this passed were extremely happy. This is one more step towards equality and will open the door for further reforms in the future.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,985
55,394
136
The biggest question I have about this is if it's going to make the Navy more gay, or less gay. Somehow, both seem unlikely.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.
It's too bad that you won't actually do something useful for P&N like reducing the number of your knee-jerk anti-Democrat troll posts.
Should the gay community have voted rather for Senator McCain, whose contribution as President to the DADT repeal would have been his veto?
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,767
46,572
136
It wasnt an attack, it was a fact. Im sorry you didnt like it. Calling someone ignorant, isnt necessarily an insult. Let me give you just one definition of it, "Unaware or uninformed." Which I think you are in this case. As you can see, it wasnt a misuse.

Just because I dont think gays belong on the front lines of battle, doesnt make me a bigot. I dont think women generally do either. And I love women! Most of them...

Have you ever been deployed? Have you ever lived in the middle of know where, with nothing, with a squad of grunts? Doing everything together? Have you ever lived, breathed, and died with other men in battle?

I believe with no doubt that putting a gay Marine in such a situation would do far more harm, than good. People who are actually fighting the war, are under extreme stress. Adding one more thing on top of that, is not good for unit cohesion. Adding any additional stress on top of them, is in fact detrimental to them, in my opinion.

Now it is a different story in garrison. Where it is more like a civilian work place for some MOS's. Where the most stressful thing is making coffee in the morning.

You do realize that there are already gay Marines (even in combat units) right?
 

Jadow

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2003
5,962
2
0
On an unrelated note, lube sales around naval bases have gone up by 1000%
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,985
55,394
136
For bonus fun, everyone should go over and read Freep. They are melting down in a pretty epic fashion over there, it's hilarious. One guy is even going so far as to start banning any account on Freep that says anything in favor of gay people.

I looooooove the delicious, pathetic tears of these awful, awful people.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.
I see what you did there.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
The anti-gays are being persecuted yet AGAIN!


RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE!
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
For bonus fun, everyone should go over and read Freep. They are melting down in a pretty epic fashion over there, it's hilarious. One guy is even going so far as to start banning any account on Freep that says anything in favor of gay people.

I looooooove the delicious, pathetic tears of these awful, awful people.

That's the only site I've ever been banned from. I had just made a post or two with a liberal view, and that was that. Shows who they are. I'm proud of that ban.:)
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Beautiful moment in American history. What happens if this is signed and there are no problems with "readiness" that GOP has been BSing about? Are Republicans going to apologize to all those gay soldiers whose careers they have destroyed or would have destroyed for nothing?
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
It wasnt an attack, it was a fact. Im sorry you didnt like it. Calling someone ignorant, isnt necessarily an insult. Let me give you just one definition of it, "Unaware or uninformed." Which I think you are in this case. As you can see, it wasnt a misuse.

Just because I dont think gays belong on the front lines of battle, doesnt make me a bigot. I dont think women generally do either. And I love women! Most of them...

Have you ever been deployed? Have you ever lived in the middle of know where, with nothing, with a squad of grunts? Doing everything together? Have you ever lived, breathed, and died with other men in battle?

I believe with no doubt that putting a gay Marine in such a situation would do far more harm, than good. People who are actually fighting the war, are under extreme stress. Adding one more thing on top of that, is not good for unit cohesion. Adding any additional stress on top of them, is in fact detrimental to them, in my opinion.

Now it is a different story in garrison. Where it is more like a civilian work place for some MOS's. Where the most stressful thing is making coffee in the morning.

Why the special exception for gays on the front lines? After all, we ask your overly poetically described warriors to serve with all sorts of different types of people. And given the common prejudices in our society, chances seem very good that some percentage of soldiers have been uncomfortable with at least some of their comrades. What makes homosexuality a special exception to the general rule that we ask soldiers to fight with and for their fellow soldiers, regardless of whether or not they like everything about them?

And for that matter...why don't you trust in the professionalism of our men and women in uniform? Sure, if asked directly, many might admit that they don't personally like homosexuals. But we're not asking them to work on the set of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", we're asking them to fight wars. Are you really suggesting that they can't fight alongside their fellow soldiers unless that person likes the socially acceptable gender? And if that is true, are those soldiers really the ones we want to keep? We're asking them to face down an often vicious enemy. How prepared are they really to do that if they can't even get over the fact that Private Dancer has a boyfriend instead of a girlfriend?
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
It's too bad that Obama won't actually do something useful for the gay community like legalize gay unions. I've been saying it for some time, Obama doesn't appear to be very interested in doing much for gay people. He seems to be doing just enough to keep them from freaking out. But Obama ultimately knows most gay voters are not going to switch parties so he may as well just keep the bone hanging in front of them as long as he can.

Because in our system of government, the President is totally endowed with the ability to write and pass laws...
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
All I know is John McCain must turning in his grave!

But seriously, McCain should resign. I thought he just had some unfounded concern against the repeal. Some old persons thing.
But on the senate floor he made comments to "a sad day", and "preppies tomorrow in coffee shops hi-five-ing over the victory". He was obviously clueless on what it is to be gay, and lacks any compassion at all.
In fact, McCain's comments on the senate floor were blatantly insulting and reprehensible.
If this were a race thing, McCain would be FORCED to resign over his comments.
It turned out he had no justified concerns after all. Just plain blunt bigotry was his only motivation.
Anyone in such high elected office as he is, that detached from understanding any minority of American citizenship, should never be allowed to have a hand in law making process.
There should be an outcry for him to resign. Period!
This guy isn't just some old detached person. Not just some extreme right wing member.
John McCain let it be known he is purely homophobic and a bigot.
 
Last edited:

Ackmed

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2003
8,499
560
126
Congratulations, everything you just said was also said about desegregation of military units after WW2, or when women began serving on Naval ships. Guess what? It disrupts the unit momentarily, and then unit gets over it. Those fear-mongering that this will get service members killed (*cough* McCain) are doing so for purely political purposes. There are bigger things to worry about when you are being shot at that if the guy fighting next to you happens to be gay. No one worth their salt gives a shit if you are white, black, Hispanic, straight, gay, male, female, so long as you can do your job when it counts. This view is bigoted, or at least ignorant of the level of professionalism and discipline our military service members have.

For what it's worth women serve in combat roles all the time. The concept of a "front line" doesn't exist in warfare anymore, and hasn't since at least Vietnam.

I didn't serve in combat, but I did complete some fairly intense military training before a medical discharge. I'm sure at least one or two of the people I served with were gay and it had absolutely no impact on anything.

Its not about when you are engaging the enemy, its about what you are at the PB doing daily activities. And I guarantee you people do care if you are "straight, gay, male, female". Mainly because most women cannot do my job, or other jobs out there. Its not about being a woman, its about not being strong enough. Can they drive a MATV? Sure, those are on the front lines all the time doing supply routes. I have no problems with them doing that. There are other jobs that are close to the action, which I believe can be done by either gender. I do not think they can do my job, or live where I did. For one, I never saw a woman carry anything other than an M4. Grunt squads carry 203's, SAW's, 240B's, and Mk19's. I had an A4/203. With 7 mags of 28 rounds, and 15 203 rounds. HE, smoke, star clusters. I also carried 100 rounds of 7.62 because we took out 1,000 rounds and spread loaded it. I am a Combat Engineer so I also had to carry a metal detector, and demo. On several patrols I also carried an AT4 on my back. Not to mention everything else you had to carry. Im not superman, but Im pretty good to go. Ive got a 300 CFT, and a 286 PFT. There is no way (most) women can carry that much weight over a 9 hour/10 click patrol. They fell out carrying their day pack from PB to PB.

You didnt serve in combat, and I have. Yet you think you know what you're talking about more than I do. I find that silly. We did have two female FET's come to our PB, once. A Cpl got into a screaming match with the Sgt in charge, who if it was a male would have killed him. She accused him of going thru canals on purpose, and making it hard on them. They threw their rifles across canals, you never do that. They left the next day, and we never had females again. We lived with nothing. No tent, no AC, no anything for a long time. We walked around next to naked, just our underwear on. Bathes together, slept close together, talked about everything. Things I dont talk about with people Ive known for 20 years. Of course a favorite topic was sex. What position you like, how you like to beat off, dry or lubed, sexual conquests, comparing dick sizes, etc. That wouldnt happen with a female, and not with a gay person being present either. Being in the middle of nowhere is different than being some pog on a base. Odds are there are gay grunts... Ive yet to meet one. I have never heard of an openly gay grunt either. Which is what this is all about.

Like gay people, I think women can do most jobs in the military just fine. I do not think they belong with 12 guys in the middle of nowhere living very crudely. I dont know how anyone can think this would be a good idea, except people who have never done such a thing. Its not being a bigot, its being a realist. Dont like my opinion? Oh well, at least it is based on facts and personal experience, not what people think they know. I could post tons of pics to support what Ive said, it really doesnt matter.

Im done talking about it. I dont get into back and forth banter all day, its not worth it. Have fun.
 
Last edited:

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Like gay people, I think women can do most jobs in the military just fine. I do not think they belong with 12 guys in the middle of nowhere living very crudely. I dont know how anyone can think this would be a good idea, except people who have never done such a thing. Its not being a bigot, its being a realist. Dont like my opinion? Oh well, at least it is based on facts and personal experience, not what people think they know. I could post tons of pics to support what Ive said, it really doesnt matter.

Im done talking about it. I dont get into back and forth banter all day, its not worth it. Have fun.

Your personal experience with gay people is probably next to nothing.. and that's what the issue is.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Of course a favorite topic was sex. What position you like, how you like to beat off, dry or lubed, sexual conquests, comparing dick sizes, etc. That wouldnt happen with a female, and not with a gay person being present either.
Uhhhh...
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Because in our system of government, the President is totally endowed with the ability to write and pass laws...

Actually, the President does have the power to end this discrimination in the military - IF it hadn't been passed into law in DADT which may have prevented Bush from returning to complete discrimination (Do Ask). Because it was passed into law, that law had to be repealed for DADT to be repealed - but Truman was able to end racial discrimination as Commander in Chief.