Seems like we need all the people we can get into the military these days. Plus it seems to go against the constitution "all men are created equal". If all men are equal then shouldn't all men have the right to serve their country? I am not gay and I have never served in the military. I don't see why they should not be allowed but I am open to hearing any educated logical reasons why they should not be allowed. Please no homophobic rants or slander.
2006-09-19 12:45:28 · 22 answers · asked by Diggs 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Ok, first off, in my basic training flight, the guy who slept in the top bunk of my bunk for a while, was a gay, smoking, cursing, Mormon. I have generally no problem with homosexuals, however, when the man is staring at your penis while you are in the shower, it is disturbing. Also, I shall give an example of why gay men shouldn't be allowed at least on the battlefield. A squad is deployed into hostile territory, they move as a unit, think as one, kill as one. It happens that in this very squad there are two homosexual partners, excelling at their jobs, blah blah blah etc. One of the two gets shot by a sniper, and the squad chooses to take out the sniper before grabbing him. The man's partner either A) does as he's told, and possibly allows his boyfriend to die. or B) Endangers the whole squad for the life of his boyfriend. And if you try and tell me that him running out there to save his boyfriend isn't endangering the group. Every squad member is important, while he is an extra rifle, he is also an extra mind. If they both die, then that means they reduce the effectiveness of the entire squad, one less entrance covered, one less window covered. Maybe later, maybe never.
2006-09-19 14:28:31 · answer #1 · answered by Kamikaze 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I already answered a very similar question. Personally, I couldn't care less. My husband, who IS a soldier, also couldn't care less. I don't have any educated logical reasons why they shouldn't be allowed, but I will tell you that I think the reason is just because so many people are "uncomfortable" with the idea of serving with someone who is openly gay. I always hear "Well, it would make me uncomfortable if he hit on me". So what? First of all, the chances of that happening are slim (why do all straight guys think that every homosexual is magnetically attracted to them???). Even if a soldier WAS hit on by another soldier, the magic word is "no". Besides, there are all sorts of rules against fraternization, etc., so the chances of *that* happening are even slimmer. Not to mention the fact that I'm pretty sure that any homosexual in the army is aware that if he were to hit on another soldier (especially the WRONG soldier), there is a ridiculous chance of being beat up.
But, basically, it comes down to the general population having an undefined discomfort with the idea. Remember how long it was before blacks and women were integrated into the armed forces? There are STILL people who are uncomfortable with the idea. But, they've learned to deal with it.
At the same time, you can probably give me the most homo-phobic guy in the world, but when he's shot, he's not going to care who's covering his *** and keeping him from bleeding out.
There is no educated logical reason at this point, in my opinion
2006-09-19 12:57:53 · answer #2 · answered by katheek77 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hello! Back to reality! There are gays in the military right now! There's no reason why they shouldn't be there. If they want to serve, then they should serve. Insecurity is why people don't want them in. What is this whole they'll peek in the shower thing? Concerned you're wee wee is too small? Get a life. Doesn't bother me or my ACTIVE DUTY HUSBAND OF 9 1/2 YEARS!
2006-09-19 14:03:24 · answer #3 · answered by Mrs. Waiting 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anything that would adversely affect the morale and teamwork of a group of soldiers should be discouraged.
The military is not a place for social experimentation. The purpose of the military is to kill people and break things, period. It's not the place to try to figure out if a person who lives this lifestyle or that lifestyle will fit in.
Also, the military does not want just anybody to enlist. If someone is deemed to be a risk as far as jeopardizing other members from performing their duties perfectly, that person should not be allowed in, period.
Of course, there are combat, and non-combat positions, two obviously completely different things... I would leave it up to the members of the military as to whether or not gays should (openly) be allowed to participate in one, or the other, or both...
2006-09-19 13:04:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I served with gays in the military. Everything was peachy and peaceful until Don't Ask, Don't Tell came out. Right after that is when the witch hunts started. All Don't Ask Don't Tell did (at least in the beginning, I can't tell how it is now) was make it easier to speed up a discharge due to homosexuality.
A complete disservice.
2006-09-19 13:48:05 · answer #5 · answered by veraperezp 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i grew to become into interior the provider interior the previous and don't have faith there is going to ever be a unexpected implosion of gay women and men that want to connect the militia. I do think of whether that congress should not be having something to do with working the militia because it pertains to its make up or values. the ladies and men of the armed centers do no longer choose open homosexuals of their ranks, and which could have been respected. Congress could have minded their own enterprise (which it does no longer look able to doing in any understand). This usa easily does no longer choose what is going to result could congress do lots extra sticking its nostril into such...that's a recipe for particular catastrophe (and that catastrophe having a large cost ticket). what's accomplished is accomplished now whether because it concerns this difficulty..... maximum interior the militia will pass alongside with this whether or no longer they help it or no longer (they're going to settle for orders to be tolerant of it on an identical time as they serve). To be truthful whether...this incredibly on no account have been given my blood boiling to any large degree. Defeat of the Dream Act grew to become into much extra important so a techniques as i'm in touch. We already enable homosexuals interior the militia....they're going to easily be authorized to be open approximately it now (with common militia restraint).
2016-10-01 03:59:50 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The military doesn't have time to be politically correct. Having gays in the military could ruin unit cohesion and cost lives. Just like women aren't allowed in a combat MOS. We don't have time to be fair when lives are at stake.
2006-09-19 13:05:18 · answer #7 · answered by Curt 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, the military needs people to protect our country. I do not feel that gays should join the military. How would you like to join the military and have to worry if someone is checking out your body, plus they should not get the benefits of the military. I am sorry to say but people decide if they want to be gay, they are not born that way.
2006-09-19 12:55:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
For the same reason we don't have coed rooms in barracks. As others have mentioned, it affects unit readiness and cohesion.
Would a straight man be self-conscious in a shower room with a known homosexual in the shower room with him? Of course! Just the same as a woman would not appreciate having coed showers. And many barracks still have open showers, especially overseas.
2006-09-19 13:09:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because if wars only killed soldiers they would be a blessing, however but if we start killing gay people in our wars for petrol or world domination then we are perverting the initial point of wars. And a gay person in a war would not be very gay, he/she would be very sad
2006-09-19 12:57:59 · answer #10 · answered by The High Flying Freedom Frie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋