OF COURSE THEY SHOULD! I just wanted to further weed out the ignorance of this board with this question. Being sexual orientation has no bearing on ability to serve in the military. In fact the Spartans (of ancient Greece) were one of the most feared militaries of all time and the majority of the soldiers were homosexual/bisexual. The Spartans found that the soldiers fought harder for one another because they shared a bond and would lay down their lives for a fellow soldier to live. If a loved one died on the battlefield, the soldiers would fight even harder to avenge their death. So my conclusion is that homosexual people are actually better fit to serve than heterosexual people and that we should have a whole elite homsexual part of the army that would be modern day Spartans and would be feared as the best fighters in the world. I would join it even if I had to lie and say I was homosexual even though I am Bi!
2006-10-02 17:32:17 · 26 answers · asked by Serious 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
To those of you that have said that homosexual men and women already serve in the military, you are right. However, they cannot be openly homosexual and some are fired and banned from the military for being open about their sexuality. IF you watch the Daily Show you probably saw the segment they had on the translator who was kicked out of the military for being openly homosexual.
2006-10-03 03:53:51 · update #1
Well I agree with you, that yes, openly bisexual/homosexual people should be allowed into the US military. Colonel Margarethe Cammermeyer is the highest ranking official to ever admit to openly being a lesbian. Her story was chronicaled in a TV movie called "Serving in Silence" and starred Glenn Close, if you ever wanted to look it up. I think that the military's "Dont Ask Dont Tell" rule is rather outdated, to the time when only men coulld be in service, and thus any bi or homosexual would obviously only be another man. I believe the first big step to the military accepting all people who were willing to fight for their country was when they allowed women. Logical order would mean that there would be both lesbian/bi/gay men and women signing up as well.
In 1994, a judge actually ruled that (in Cammermeyer's case) it was unconstitutional to ban gays and lesbians from serving in the military. To continue to ban any one openly gay or bi is rather ridiculous.
Thanks for posting this. I'm from Canada, but it was interesting to read up on the US's military rules, and how backard they really are!!
2006-10-02 17:45:11 · answer #1 · answered by Jen M 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Since they always have been and always will be serving in the military, you'd think the question would be moot by now. The only reason I can think of why it isn't is the disproportionate influence of the religious reich on Washington. As long as we keep electing people who take their orders from the Southern Baptist church to high office gays are going to continue to be second class citizens. There are no practical reasons for the ban, most of the arguments are the same that were used for denying Blacks and Asians normal service. Even the popular "target for blackmail" argument is eliminated if they're already out, and most of the guys I heard ranting about the possibility of being harassed weren't the ones who might have been. I even knew a few women who got a kick out of the idea that men might have to put up the same stuff from guys that they did.
I like you're all gay unit idea, but it's been done. The City-State of Ancient Thebes had a unit made up entirely of pairs of lovers all sworn to leave the battlefield together or not at all. It was known as the "Theban Sacred Regiment" and was never beaten until they faced Alexander's Companion Cavalry, and even he couldn't make them break or surrender, they fought to the last man.
2006-10-02 22:25:52 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed. It's not as if their suddenly going to have a rainbow flag patch below the US flag patch or anything else that is somehow going to mark them. If people of different races, ethnicities, and even religions can serve openly in the military then I see why one's sexual orientation should be the one diverse division of humanity should not be included. I don't expect the military to make little pins or patches or anything at all for these folks and I know a few folks that are in the military and wish that they could serve openly (so that they could be more honest with the people they serve and respect si the #1 reason they want to because they talk about honesty, respect, dignity, and so on with their fellow soldiers and actually many of them are open about themselves with their fellow soldiers, but just can't be with their leaders).
The British military allows them to serve openly and after several studies as shown that morale didn't change at all and that there were no incidents of harassment, etc (in fact reports of harassment went down after they allowed soldiers to serve openly). Ashame the US either doesn't care to read the studies or doesn't want to read the studies.
2006-10-02 21:17:13 · answer #3 · answered by gabriel_zachary 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You know that's a good one.. Let's say this country (USA) got into some serious war fair, and implemented a 50% draft.. I guarantee if being a homo kept ya out of the service, there would be a 90% jump in being gay in this country. It depends on whats going on at the time,, hope this generation is up to this. There is going to be some serious chit to deal with in the not so far future.
2006-10-02 17:42:44 · answer #4 · answered by mr.longshot 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many of the ancient Celtic soldiers and fighters were gay or bisexual and they are considered to be some of the fiercest fighters the world has seen. They were hired by other groups to fight for them. They were often soldiers for hire. They were hardly homophobic.
Alexander the Great wasn't straight & he is considered to be one of the biggest conquerors in history.
2006-10-02 17:38:34 · answer #5 · answered by Bronweyn 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a free country, gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly. I do however understand a limitation on transgendereds serving in the military.
2006-10-03 01:15:58 · answer #6 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely they should, and they do! Just because they dont tell, doesnt mean there arnt plenty of lez and gay men in the military. Especially women! Common, how many women do u think are in the military are actually striaght? As far as men, Im sure there is some gay sex going on. I dont see why it matters.
2006-10-02 18:16:35 · answer #7 · answered by arielsalom33 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course, they should... Your sexual preference, has nothing to do with your ability to do/not do a job. It's a job like any other. Gays are everywhere, people need to deal with it and move on. They should have THE RIGHT to fight, just like anyone else. I'm not gay.. but i do have the intelligence to know they ARE PEOPLE with RIGHTS, just like everyone else. It's crap, that they dont have the right, to defend and fight for/in something they believe in.
2006-10-02 17:42:14 · answer #8 · answered by debs 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree with you. It's sad what we have to put up with. Our countries claim that discrimination is wrong... talk about pissing in their own pool... If i had the money I'd sue them for
i) false advertisement... it's supposed to be the land of the free (worth a shot)
ii) discrimination
iii) sexual harasment
Of course, if they don't want me, I'd say "stuff ya". life's totally unfair and the governments of the world contradict themselves... it's pretty pathetic.
2006-10-02 17:43:27 · answer #9 · answered by i_am_nathan_2002 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i couldn't agree with you more! i think military baffoons just don't learn a damn thing. all they think is that if homosexuals are in military, they'll start messing up the entire military operations and missions. bull. they too want to protect the country and the ones they love.
2006-10-02 17:38:12 · answer #10 · answered by mystic_lonewolf22 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋