If your a 'bit light on your feet' Do you think you should be allowed to join the armed forces?

Answer 1

I served for 20 years and retired, never heard a single complaint

*looks down* hey tengu, replace the word gay with the word black and you will have a common statement made in the 50's and 60's.

The fact of the matter is that there are gays in the military and they are serving with honor. They are there to do a job, not to eye screw other guys in the shower.

Answer 2

Plenty of other countries have integrated gay and lesbian individuals into their armed forces with no problems.

It's funny to me - in a sad way - that the U.S. armed services have been dropping their standards in order to inflate their numbers. They'll now allow in the intellectually sub-average, felons, and drug users (as long as they can pass a pee test).

But if you're gay - no matter how bright, moral, or skilled in Arabic you may be - forget it.

Personally, I enjoy being exempted from military duty, but I'll quote Bill Hicks:

"Anyone DUMB ENOUGH to want to be in the military should be allowed in."

Answer 3

Yes, we should, by now, be educated enough to accept anyone into the armed forces unless they have committed a crime. An all voluntary military should respect, as we should, that a person's sexual preference has nothing to do with their ability to perform skills as a soldier.

Answer 4

Gays do serve in the military. They are allowed to join. There is no question asked to keep gays out of the military.

Many sexual acts will get you discharged from the service from buying a prostitute, to being openly gay.

Even though the services fight to protect the bill of rights and constitution, members are not covered by these rights. They are covered by the UCMJ.

Answer 5

let's put it another way, maybe you got too much sugar in your blood?

i know many gays who risk their lives fighting, not b/c they wish to kill and mame other humans, but b/c it was one of the few places they could actually get a decent job with benefits, an affordable education, AND do something for the country they live in and love. (and i don't mean love in a sexual context)

i also know many str8s who feel what happens in regard to anything the military does in other countries, is none of our d++n business and refuse to join the military b/c of these beliefs. if the draft comes back, and just b/c you're str8, should you be compelled to fighting for what others feel is right?

Answer 6

The reason I think this whole gays in the military argument is so ridiculous is because there has always been gays in the military. How many men during WW I or WW II do you think would openly admit being gay for any reason, military or not.

Answer 7

Of course.

I would point out that many gays have actually served and their sexual orientation had nothing to do with their success or failure at it, except when somebody decided to out them and then a military machine fueled by machismo stepped in to guarantee failure or discharge or occasionally death of the gay solidier.

There are so many reasons to point to that this should be a non-issue, it is merely a case of unfounded prejudice that they aren't allowed already.

I would point out that historically, the Spartans encouraged male lovers in their army (and their army was a required part of their society-- you didn't avoid service and it was required to move up the social/civilian hierarchy). They thought that if you lover was in the trench with you, you would fight even harder because somebody you loved was at risk--fancy that!

Simply because one likes another man does not make one physically incompetent-it is an unfounded assumption that gay men are effeminate--those who are, are usually so because they are victims of societal expectation, and have found a prescribed, defined role by being so that is somewhat comfortable because it meets that expectation. Funny, but society says gay women--lesbians are macho and I think it finds it easier to accept a lesbian soldier--after all they are butch and are conforming to the macho image of soldiers and men.

Gays are no less competent to be in the army than blacks were--unfortunately nobody had the balls Harry Truman had to simply order it to be so. Bill Clinton showed the lack of fortitude that apparently was his hallmark in that area (just as he did with the Monica scandal)--getting us "don't ask don't tell", a hypocritical and actually more dangeous policy for gays than it was ante-"don't ask, don't tell."

This concept that gay men are willing to "recruit" "hit on" straight men is simply silly. We are no more likely to seek out rejection or even violent rejection than any straight man would. And, I suspect if a staight man were thinking retionally and didn't feel threatened, if approached he would simply say "no thanks, I don't swing that way" and that would be the end of it. How many men actually ask a woman more than once? It becomes harrassment to persist in asking for a date or sex, it would be no different in a same sex situation. Everyone is allow to ask once maybe twice and then should accept the other's rejection. Beyond that it starts to become first a disciplinable offense, a civil wrong or even a crime. So even if a gay guy hit on another soldier, either the other guy will accept or he won't, no harm, no foul.

In fact, most sexual harrassment in the military is perpetrated by straight men against women. Is that an argument against straight men in the military? No and it would result in great criticism if anybody used that situation to argue women should not be in the military. Its the problem of straight men who act inappropriately, isn't it?

So isn't also the problem of straight men that they fear gay men in the military, right? Its only a problem for the gay man if he doesn't take no for an answer, right? That's a very few gay men. I suspect, they're in the military for the same reasons as straight men, not to cruise, but for the glory, the discipline, to serve, for a job and so forth. Only a very few, like sexual predators would be there for the concentration of men and hitting on them...those could still be disciplined and thrown out. Just like the rapist, wife abuser, who is straight would be.

The military frowns on sex between males and females, but it happens. It could similarly frown on male-male, female-female sex (but it already happens) and apply the same range of penalties when it occurs and is found out. There is no rational reason to keep gays out. And this business of morale is a crock too--look at most american's views and you will find that in all other walks of life the majority favor toleration, even if they personally would not associate (and most of them, already have associated unknowingly and without incident).

The whole issue is silly...just like preventing adoption or teaching in schools. Gays successfully do both and have no higher incidence of child abuse in those areas..in fact some studies say they make very good teachers and parents....

Answer 8

No, you should be a dancer. No one is light on their feet enough to dodge bullets and I think your talant could be used much better in another area. ROTFL

Answer 9

Sexual preference makes no difference to fighting efficency.

The Spartans were encouraged to form "loving friendships with other warriors".

Alexander the Great, one of the greatest leaders of all time, was reputed to be bisexual.

Answer 10

You're either gay or you're not. You can't be a "bit".
And yes they should be allowed the same rights.
As soon as you start taking away peoples' you'll start losing your's too.