10 responses

  1. Lucrece
    May 25, 2010

    Do they have non-discrimination clauses for gender and race? If so, why are they so resistant to non-discrimination clauses for sexual orientation?

  2. Quo
    May 25, 2010

    It really is taking things the wrong way to think that a dryly written piece of legislation that does not mention you or any other individual specifically is saying something “outrageously offensive” about you.

    To think that your nation is saying anything at all about you as a person by passing the don’t ask, don’t tell law can seem a little egotistical.

    That law, while it unfortunately does not go far enough in its restrictions on homosexuals in the military, does make perfectly reasonable points about military life, and the reasons it gives for thinking that the presence of open homosexuals would be disruptive are sound.

  3. Burr
    May 25, 2010

    Oh yes, the reasons are SO sound!

    …except for that tiny little inconvenient fact that none of the theorized disruptions have occurred in practice.

  4. Quo
    May 25, 2010

    Burr,

    You’re talking, I suppose, about military forces outside the United States. The possibility that non-American militaries might have allowed homosexuals to serve without obvious harmful consequences does not mean that the American military would have the same experience, if it went the same route.

  5. Emily K
    May 25, 2010

    This is a step in the right direction. change happens slowly but Americans who fight alongside other armed forces who *DO* allow gays – including the UK and Israel – have seen that it’s just not a big deal. A decision to lift the ban would, imho, cost the least amount of political capital. And since so many other nations have done so, we’re ready to join the rest of civilization.

  6. Priya Lynn
    May 25, 2010

    Quo said “The possibility that non-American militaries might have allowed homosexuals to serve without obvious harmful consequences does not mean that the American military would have the same experience, if it went the same route.”.

    Beyond your wishful thinking here’s no reason to believe the American experience would be any different than other western countries’ experience has been.

  7. Ryan
    May 25, 2010

    Amazing Quo, that your faith in that the reasons for banning gays from serving are “sound”, yet openly acknowledge there is no real world verification of these arguments. Gee, I wonder where your certainty comes from?

  8. Lucrece
    May 26, 2010

    Jesus Christ, how dumb can you all be to continue taking the bait from a troll?

  9. Maurice Lacunza
    May 26, 2010

    Lucrece is right. Leave the idiot troll and his bait alone.

  10. Emily K
    May 26, 2010

    although i’m sure comments will be infrequent from now on in this post (b/c it’s relatively old,) I concur with the previous two commenters – obvious troll is obvious.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

Back to top
mobile desktop