Last night's Democratic Front runner forum

[Bill the Cat]

Last night, the Democrats had an open forum hosted by a large pro-homosexual lobbyist group. The main issue was the front runners' stances on gay marriage. But a second issue came up that I am interested in. All democratic candidates wish to overturn the "don't ask don't tell" policy (ironically implemented by one of the candidate's Democratic spouse).

I have a few logistics questions on the implication of overturning the policy (which I think is too permissive, but that's for another thread.) I'll start with one and follow up based on the responses.

1. Where do you house open gays in basic training?


Thanks for the replies.

[electronicmaji]

Well why do you think housing in the military would need to be changed in the first place? Your suggesting we should be ashamed of human sexual activity.

[Bill the Cat]

There is no sex allowed in Basic Training. That's why men and women are billeted in separate dorms.

Have you been in the military? If so, which branch?

[Jnthn]

Well why do you think housing in the military would need to be changed in the first place? Your suggesting we should be ashamed of human sexual activity.I'm pretty ashamed that rape and paedophilia exist. They're human sexual activities.

J

[SteveF]

I'm pretty ashamed that rape and paedophilia exist. They're human sexual activities.

J

Are you suggesting that gay sex is equivalent to rape and paedophilia?

[electronicmaji]

There is no sex allowed in Basic Training. That's why men and women are billeted in separate dorms.

Have you been in the military? If so, which branch?

No thank God no.


As for sex not being allowed...when will the american goverment learn. Probition never works and when it comes to the most basic of human instincts it will work less. I much rather the military educate its recruit and let them make their own choices then outlaw sex all together.

[Darth Executor]

Are you suggesting that gay sex is equivalent to rape and paedophilia?

Jimmy Higgins, is that you?

[electronicmaji]

I'm pretty ashamed that rape and paedophilia exist. They're human sexual activities.

J

Why don't we change the wording. Human Sexuality was what I meant specifically.

As for paedophilia it is just rape the actual word paedophilia does not apply to the act but to the condition of feeling sexual attraction to those who have no reached puberty.

Frankly though your simply arguing the strawman and I detest fallacies.

[electronicmaji]

Jimmy Higgins, is that you?

No Jimmy Higgins would have attacked the neocon agenda :ahem:

[Teallaura]

Last night, the Democrats had an open forum hosted by a large pro-homosexual lobbyist group. The main issue was the front runners' stances on gay marriage. But a second issue came up that I am interested in. All democratic candidates wish to overturn the "don't ask don't tell" policy (ironically implemented by one of the candidate's Democratic spouse).

I have a few logistics questions on the implication of overturning the policy (which I think is too permissive, but that's for another thread.) I'll start with one and follow up based on the responses.

1. Where do you house open gays in basic training?


Thanks for the replies.
You build separate housing just as for women. Then you increase staff to insure no rules violations and you do all of that at public expense. The question then becomes how cost effective is this? Are you receiving more in terms of benefit than you're paying out in terms of expense? If not this is a poor public policy*.
















*No, I don't find the civil rights argument compelling for a behavior. An intrinsic attribute, yes; behavior, even with predilection, no.

[electronicmaji]

You really think fags would have sex in the military? They'd face too much time being hazed to even have a chance.
That is not appropriate for Theologyweb.

[electronicmaji]

You build separate housing just as for women. Then you increase staff to insure no rules violations and you do all of that at public expense. The question then becomes how cost effective is this? Are you receiving more in terms of benefit than you're paying out in terms of expense? If not this is a poor public policy*.
















*No, I don't find the civil rights argument compelling for a behavior. An intrinsic attribute, yes; behavior, even with predilection, no.

Awww...how cute you act like its a fact that sexual redisposition is a choice. Ignorance does not excuse fallacies in logic.

[Teallaura]

Awww...how cute you act like its a fact that sexual redisposition is a choice. Ignorance does not excuse fallacies in logic.The immutability theory is dead, dude. So is the genetic theory. Theory now is that sexual orientation is largely influenced by nurture and that it can and does change over time.

There's no logical fallacy - predilection or no, everyone chooses how they will or will not behave - unless you are trying to argue insanity? The ignorance here is yours - both of current theory and of the basics of logic.


Now, care to argue a point without fallacious appeals to logical fallacies?

[Bill the Cat]

No thank God no.

I've been in for 20 years, and it has been one of the best things I ever did. :nsm:



As for sex not being allowed...when will the american goverment learn. Probition never works and when it comes to the most basic of human instincts it will work less. I much rather the military educate its recruit and let them make their own choices then outlaw sex all together.


Sex is outlawed for a reason in Basic Training. Basic is intended to break an enlistee's sense of self and instill a sense of team. Anyone who went through it will tell you "they break you down and build you back up". Sex is a distraction. Also, if sex is outlawed, the consequences of sex are drastically reduced (pregnancy, STDs and the like). Sexual Harassment is another unfortunate consequence of mixed-sex dorms. People make stupid choices and the military does not want to be held liable for those choices.

[Bill the Cat]

You really think fags would have sex in the military? They'd face too much time being hazed to even have a chance.

Yes. Without a doubt. I will not link to it because it is revolting and against decorum, but there is a book called "Basic Training (True Homosexual Military Stories, Vol. 5) (Basic Training) (Paperback)"

[electronicmaji]

I've been in for 20 years, and it has been one of the best things I ever did. :nsm:





Sex is outlawed for a reason in Basic Training. Basic is intended to break an enlistee's sense of self and instill a sense of team. Anyone who went through it will tell you "they break you down and build you back up". Sex is a distraction. Also, if sex is outlawed, the consequences of sex are drastically reduced (pregnancy, STDs and the like). Sexual Harassment is another unfortunate consequence of mixed-sex dorms. People make stupid choices and the military does not want to be held liable for those choices.

Its not like fags are gonna turn the dorm in a turkish sauna. If anything the pressure from the straight fag hating soldiers will cause them to try to hide their homosexuality.

Inappropriate content. NO user-submitted content shall contain any obscene, vulgar, illegal, sexually-explicit, gratuitously blasphemous, profane, harassing or generally distasteful language... Read the decorum rules. Campus Decorum (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/faq.php?faq=campus_decorum#faq_campus_decorum_profanity)

[electronicmaji]

Yes. Without a doubt. I will not link to it because it is revolting and against decorum, but there is a book called "Basic Training (True Homosexual Military Stories, Vol. 5) (Basic Training) (Paperback)"

A rare case that is usually hidden and in fact I'm sure theres plenty of books that talk about straight sex in basic training. But its not a common occurance. Its simply a theme thats exploted to produce nice stimulating erotica.

[Bill the Cat]

Its not a common occurrrence because sex is forbidden in Basic Training.

[electronicmaji]

Its not a common occurrrence because sex is forbidden in Basic Training.

its not a common occurance because people are too tired for sex in basic training....if not they should be...

in other countries people die during basic training...its that demanding.

[Teallaura]

Wouldn't it also be uncommon because guys and girls don't have access to one another? My understanding is that Basic Training is pretty regimented with very little personal time alloted.

[Bill the Cat]

Yep. and that is the reason they are not bunked together. Avoiding the added complication of sex is the primary reason for separate housing. That's the crux of the question I have. Where do you house openly homosexual men while avoiding the very reason for separated dormitories?

[nickcopernicus]

Last night, the Democrats had an open forum hosted by a large pro-homosexual lobbyist group. The main issue was the front runners' stances on gay marriage. But a second issue came up that I am interested in. All democratic candidates wish to overturn the "don't ask don't tell" policy (ironically implemented by one of the candidate's Democratic spouse).

I have a few logistics questions on the implication of overturning the policy (which I think is too permissive, but that's for another thread.) I'll start with one and follow up based on the responses.

1. Where do you house open gays in basic training?


Thanks for the replies.
Nick:

"It's a great day to be a soldier! Hooah!"
- Some idiot


1. The answer is that you house them with everyone else:

a. You smash down gender barriers.
b. No more "male" or "female" latrines.
c. Guys sleep right next to girls. (honestly that IS what my units did during our field training exercises. It was too much of a pain in the but to bother putting up an all chick tent. Besides....field sex is disgusting....I know. )
d. Rapists are castrated or "sealed shut".
e. If two married soldiers have sex with one another (and they aren't married to each other) then they are chaptered out (chapter 13).
f. If two people who are unmarried have sex, are ergo married.
"You can't keep your hands off one another eh? Well, it looks like you two are 'in love'---- I pronounce you wife, and husband, or man, and husband, or wife, and woman."
g. as far as individual housing, if someone has a roomate, then it could be a girl as well. as a guy.
h. As far as basic training, if you're good enough, all the recruits will want to do after traning is go to sleep. have strict bed checks (fireguard).


It seems that smashing down gender barriers would be the only way to FAIRLY allow homosexuals to even EXIST in the military. If some guy who is a little sweet on men gets to look at guys in the shower, then it's only fair that straight guys like me get to look at chicks (well some of them) in the shower as well. Fair's fair. :lol:

I'm joking everyone. Seriously though. I think that gender barriers being smashed would raise our level of consiousness. It would be a lot like Nudtity---Once the shock wears off, it's not really all that big of a deal. It's a way to look at the person.

As soldiers, you should see your comrades as people that you can (because you have no choice) trust your life with. Becuase you will one day. As a Solider, Marine, Airmen, or Seamen (no pun intended), the important thing is the accomplishment of the mission, not whether some guy has sugar in his tank or not.

While I understand the conservative Christian outlook the matter (moral outrage or at least largley immoral), I'd rather be around to complain about morals then die because I would not allow the military to do its job.

Why should homosexuals be DENIED the right to fight and die, for their country?

Would some of you rather we have the draft, and have people who don't want to fight have to do so while those who are willing to fight have to be left a home all because of something that has nothing to do with the accomplishment of the mission?

That's ridiculous!

Bill, my rant is not directed at you, you just happened to start this thread. As a former service member and a currrent physical supporter of the war effort, I understand how the military works and how WE should be focusing on the winning the war, not if a guy crossdresses. Don't you think?

Cheers,

Nick

[Bill the Cat]

Nick:

"It's a great day to be a soldier! Hooah!"
- Some idiot


:rofl: I hear that often here, as I still work with the military.


1. The answer is that you house them with everyone else:

I don't think that's going to happen. In fact, a fairly recent independent study suggested going back to separated single gender training.

Newman, Richard J. A Drill for Him and a Drill for Her. U.S. News & World Report 123:33 Dec 29 '97 - Jan 5 '98.
A Pentagon-appointed civilian panel has concluded that the Army, Navy and Air Force should segregate men and women during basic training. Currently, the recruits are trained together but are not allowed any other contact.






a. You smash down gender barriers.
b. No more "male" or "female" latrines.

I don't think that's feasible.


c. Guys sleep right next to girls. (honestly that IS what my units did during our field training exercises. It was too much of a pain in the but to bother putting up an all chick tent. Besides....field sex is disgusting....I know. )

Didn't bother my ex-wife... sore subject there...


d. Rapists are castrated or "sealed shut".
e. If two married soldiers have sex with one another (and they aren't married to each other) then they are chaptered out (chapter 13).
f. If two people who are unmarried have sex, are ergo married.
"You can't keep your hands off one another eh? Well, it looks like you two are 'in love'---- I pronounce you wife, and husband, or man, and husband, or wife, and woman."
g. as far as individual housing, if someone has a roomate, then it could be a girl as well. as a guy.
h. As far as basic training, if you're good enough, all the recruits will want to do after traning is go to sleep. have strict bed checks (fireguard).


THe rest of these solutions don't address the problems that sexual contact could bring, like STDs, pregnancy, adultery, etc...


It seems that smashing down gender barriers would be the only way to FAIRLY allow homosexuals to even EXIST in the military. If some guy who is a little sweet on men gets to look at guys in the shower, then it's only fair that straight guys like me get to look at chicks (well some of them) in the shower as well. Fair's fair. :lol:

When I was single, I'd have agreed with yoyu whole heartedly... I loved me some wimminz (now I just love me one wimminz)


I'm joking everyone. Seriously though. I think that gender barriers being smashed would raise our level of consiousness. It would be a lot like Nudtity---Once the shock wears off, it's not really all that big of a deal. It's a way to look at the person.

For an 18 year old kid? I think you give teenagers more credit than is due. I remember my basic training and the level of discomfort really never subsided for most of us (freaks and former nudist colony residents notwithstanding)


As soldiers, you should see your comrades as people that you can (because you have no choice) trust your life with. Becuase you will one day. As a Solider, Marine, Airmen, or Seamen (no pun intended), the important thing is the accomplishment of the mission, not whether some guy has sugar in his tank or not.

Yes, I understand that. But in those cases, sexuality must be kept in the back pocket. Soldier first! My friend at work was in Iraq and was doing night watch with 2 other soldiers. They were supposed to be watching each others backs, but the other two soldiers, one guy and one girl, snuck off to do the bone dance leaving him alone on watch. Fortunately, nothing happened that night, but it goes to show how difficult sex makes serving together.


While I understand the conservative Christian outlook the matter (moral outrage or at least largley immoral), I'd rather be around to complain about morals then die because I would not allow the military to do its job.

Why should homosexuals be DENIED the right to fight and die, for their country?

They shouldn't as long as they keep their preference in their back pocket instead of out in the open. I am all for "don't ask, don't tell", hence this thread on the debate.


Would some of you rather we have the draft, and have people who don't want to fight have to do so while those who are willing to fight have to be left a home all because of something that has nothing to do with the accomplishment of the mission?

But it CAN affect the mission. I'm not very big on women in combat either for similar reasons.


Bill, my rant is not directed at you, you just happened to start this thread.

No offense taken. Thanks for your perspective. I respect the opinion of someone who has been there a bit more than someone who hasn't.


As a former service member and a currrent physical supporter of the war effort, I understand how the military works and how WE should be focusing on the winning the war, not if a guy crossdresses. Don't you think?

IMHO, they go hand in hand. But articulating that point is a bit difficult.

Thanks

[Jackie Fox]

Bill, to answer your question: same place as everybody else. At least that's where they did when I was active duty.

[Conductor42]

I can see both sides of this issue, but I think the bigger problem is that it's "don't ask, don't tell" for a person's entire career. I don't know if it'd be that much of an issue, if - for example - they limited it to basic training.

But heck, until the effects of reversing the policy (on whatever scale) can be tested, everything we do here is speculation. But, maybe it's just me, I don't see the military having a huge explosion of gay sex by reversing the policy.

[Jackie Fox]

I can see both sides of this issue, but I think the bigger problem is that it's "don't ask, don't tell" for a person's entire career. I don't know if it'd be that much of an issue, if - for example - they limited it to basic training.

But heck, until the effects of reversing the policy (on whatever scale) can be tested, everything we do here is speculation. But, maybe it's just me, I don't see the military having a huge explosion of gay sex by reversing the policy.

It is a rather ridiculous policy especially since there are gay civilians working side by side with military people all the time.