(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
xBPx, why should they? You have a good reason Im sure. Im sure the Officer that you met was a nice guy, its been my experience that homosexual men and women are all nice people. That dosent qualify them to be combat ready troops, in any military organization. Where Im from is Colorado, although I call Texas home. Your a bigot for calling me out like that based on my location in an online forum, you dim wit. Im not a racist or a homophobic.
Im just stating a fact that knowing if someone is gay or not would seriously affect any unit I was ever assigned too. The last thing any solider or Marine needs to worry about is if one of their platoon members was wanting to always take a shower to take a look at their sausage... Preparing and training for combat is stressful enough worrying about keeping your self in one piece and not getting injured, accomplishing the mission with out spending any undue energy on wasteful anxiety, such as: worrying about family or friends at home, whats for dinner, or if my "battle buddy" is more concerned about my physical attributes! There are to many other outside variables that you have to mentally block out while fosusing on the mission at hand, not this issue! If you haven't been in the military xBPx, how can you even attempt to argue with me, let alone call me a bigot?
I quoted works, because the policy does work! If there was a homosexual in my squad and he never told us, well... it never affected our squad obviously! so the policy "works!" Get it now? Or am I just being a dumb steer from Texas? btw Cali is a nice place to visit hope its a beautiful Cali day...
EDIT: There are entirely way more important issues facing our country in this time, than spending time and money reversing this policy. For that Im glad it was rejected... now where can we get another couple of million dollars to study the fruit fly??
I stated you as I did because you're automatically assuming that just because someone is gay they will put a squad members ass over life and death. Let me ask you this: If you were fighting in an urban setting, just somewhere with average citizens, and there are combatants shooting at you from buildings and there happens to be a hot woman that you see, maybe hiding, are you gonna stare at her ass before you fight and protect your life and your squad members? Fuck no you won't.
"The last thing any solider or Marine needs to worry about is if one of their platoon members was wanting to always take a shower to take a look at their sausage... "
So it seems to me that the problem isn't the homosexual in question, it's the other platoon members thought's and attitudes towards them. But, again, if you are shooting/being shot at I highly doubt the first thing that would be on your mind is if Jim is staring at your ass. I stated what I did about you because it seems you put homosexuals outside the realm of everyday human beings. If you're not going to stare at a hot woman while engaged in combat, why would he do the same at a guy?
Ok, I see why you quoted works. It just threw me off for a second. But, voting on human equality isn't important? This is no different than allowing blacks in the military during the civil war. No different at all. All the same general points and arguments get made. And yes, California is paradise. At least where I live. 5 minutes from the beach, 1-2 hours from skiing, 1 hour from desert, 45 minutes from a big lake, 6-8 hours to vegas or san fran.
Why does what a man (or woman) like sexually determine if he can follow human nature to survive and protect his peers around him. It doesn't, and it seems the real problem is the other soldiers' attitude/thoughts/views about the homosexual in question.
