The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

  • Hi Guest - Did you know?
    Hot Topics is a Safe for Work (SFW) forum.

DOJ offers full-throated DEFENSE of DADT in court

I support the DOJ on this one. I agree wholeheartedly that DADT should stay in effect. I used to think otherwise but my opinions have changed as I have grown more mature and actually looked at the issues behind it's existence in the first place. The only reason people are even talking about it is because the "gay community" has such a problem with being asked to keep their private lives private.

The DADT policy allowed homosexuals to serve for the first time legally. It did so by making it against regulations to ASK or TELL about such things in any manner. It also made it against regulations to discharge someone because of suspected homosexuality. Before DADT you could be summarily, and dishonorably, discharged based only on supposed homosexuality.

In the end I am sure the "community" will win and have it repealed, and I hope it doesn't end up truly hurting our military. It would be a sad day indeed if this caused the military to fail in it's mission to protect and serve the American people from enemies both foreign and domestic just because a bunch of homosexuals didn't want to have to keep their private affairs to themselves.
 
That was the implied original intent not to ask and for the gays not to tell but it turns out nobody needed to ask or tell, the suspicion-based discharges and the section of the Uniform Code Of Military Justice about homosexual acts are still in there.
If they want to do it right the Code needs to be revised by eliminating the section on homosexuality and also all references to homosexuality and gay sex acts needs to be eliminated.
Some say that it's because the heterosexists dont want to lose their "specialness" or to spread G.I. bill benefits and glory to those they (wrongfully) think are "inferior" or less than a man(from the obviously outdated stereotype that all gays are limp-wristed long-nailed freaks that want to be women).

The same arguments were used on race-minorities and women but that was changed and now accepted. As a matter of fact I bet female soldiers are still being raped at night when they try to go to the latrine or take a shower.

Others say let the straights go ahead and be used for cannon-fodder.
It's not just the soldiers who won our freedom, It's the taxpayers including us gays who pay more in taxes and receive less in services whose money paid for the military, which made it all possible.
 
carlb85 said:
I support the DOJ on this one. I agree wholeheartedly that DADT should stay in effect. I used to think otherwise but my opinions have changed as I have grown more mature and actually looked at the issues behind it's existence in the first place. The only reason people are even talking about it is because the "gay community" has such a problem with being asked to keep their private lives private.

The DADT policy allowed homosexuals to serve for the first time legally. It did so by making it against regulations to ASK or TELL about such things in any manner. It also made it against regulations to discharge someone because of suspected homosexuality. Before DADT you could be summarily, and dishonorably, discharged based only on supposed homosexuality.

In the end I am sure the "community" will win and have it repealed, and I hope it doesn't end up truly hurting our military. It would be a sad day indeed if this caused the military to fail in it's mission to protect and serve the American people from enemies both foreign and domestic just because a bunch of homosexuals didn't want to have to keep their private affairs to themselves.
Click to expand...
Clearly you are not in the military nor do you have a partner in the military or you definitely would not have this opinion. My partner and I have been together for many years and the things we are asked to do in order to keep things quiet are absolutely insane. Lets get one thing clear as well the only thing that could possibly hurt the military as a result of DADT being repealed is the lack of uneducated and bigoted people enlisting which I think our military would be better off without anyways. BTW there is fewer than 400 people that can do what my partner does what would happen if he was not out there doing his job because he got kicked out?
 
carlb85 said:
It would be a sad day indeed if this caused the military to fail in it's mission to protect and serve the American people
Click to expand...

If a bigoted homophobic soldier does not have the constitution to serve beside an openly gay soldier who he happens to view negatively because of a stupidly trivial thing like his sexuality, then in my opinion he probably doesn't have the constitution to face the far more immense mental challenges of war, and would be better off not serving anyway.
 
Yeah this is political grandstanding by Obama. He has the power to push for an overturning of the law, but instead he handed it to the military to "study" so they could find gays hurt "unit cohesion" and that the military isn't a "social experiment".
 
Obama and company have lied yet again. Not only has it not been repealed, they are vigorously defending it.

DADT is just flat stupid and indefensible.
 
In response to the person who said I obviously hadn't or don't serve in the military, you are quite correct. However I recently tried to enlist. I was disqualified due to partial blindness in my left eye. I couldn't pass the vision tests. It sucked, but hey it is what it is. Had I been allowed in the entire DADT thing wouldn't have even been an issue with me. I don't routinely make it a habit to go around telling people I am gay in the first place, and I wouldn't have been looking for a romantic partner in the military either. Guess that's why I have the opinion I do.

Oh and my last statement was because of the ignorant, bigoted people who are in the military. Yes they are ignorant, and incredibly wrong, however they are serving our country. I work with a large amount of young adults who are planning on going into the military, several have just left for their basic training, and some have just returned. I am friends with many of them, and I have a great respect for them. Many of them have sat and spoken with me about this issue. They feel that their unit cohesion would be disturbed by open gay people serving. It isn't because they don't like us as people, it's just that they feel it would be a disruptive influence.
 
RazorzEdge88 said:
They make me want to move to Canada.

The members of their military have no problem serving next to gay men. These guys are being pussies, plain and simple. If having a gay guy see your junk in the shower is unbearable, how can they deal with real terror?
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly. I honestly think I would have MUCH more pressing issues to deal with in wartime than if someone I didn't want to see me naked was seeing me naked. I mean seriously? But again, it is what it is. And in the end I do think they will repeal it, I really just hope they don't go all in right at first. If they do it gradually, the way they handled racial integration it might just work, but if they just go for the gold all at once they might have a disaster on their hands.
 
blacksyringe said:
That is where heterosexuals, for the most part, are wrong. One's sexuality has no bearing upon them as an individual. I don't know about your friends...but the last thing I'm going to be thinking about is how nice a fellow soldier's ass is when I have a loon tossing grenades at me and trying to shoot me in the face. Sexuality has its place, in high-risk and life-threatening situations it's non-existent.

No military (to my knowledge) in the world that allows homosexuals to openly serve is having issues with 'unit cohesion'. Find one, please...because I am very confused as to of how homosexuality destroys group functionality. Your friends are either a) talking out of their assholes, b) have latent homophobia, c) sexually insecure, d) incredibly uneducated or e) all of the aforementioned.
Click to expand...

Seeing as they are all young, just out of high school, and male you could be quite right. I work with a couple of veterans as well, might just have to get their opinions as well.
 
jackoroe said:
Obama and company have lied yet again. Not only has it not been repealed
Click to expand...

They have pushed for its repeal and the momentum for it is underway.

The opposition, which you support at every turn, still opposes repeal.
 
hotatlboi said:
They have pushed for its repeal and the momentum for it is underway.

The opposition, which you support at every turn, still opposes repeal.
Click to expand...

Obama is the current boss of the DOJ. The DOJ is defending DADT. Why would Obama even allow for a transparent waste of time like a "year long study" so that obviously by the time a decision is made there would be more Republicans to blame?

Obama has made it very clear that he respects gay people but doesn't hold their rights as a priority (yes yes please don't point out the contradiction I already know). The Matthew Shepard act was great, but so far that's all he's accomplished.
 
jackoroe said:
Obama and company have lied yet again. Not only has it not been repealed, they are vigorously defending it.

DADT is just flat stupid and indefensible.
Click to expand...

Yep, kinda like he defended DOMA as well.Obama's concern for the gay community is about as long as his dick.



carlb85 said:
In response to the person who said I obviously hadn't or don't serve in the military, you are quite correct. However I recently tried to enlist. I was disqualified due to partial blindness in my left eye. I couldn't pass the vision tests. It sucked, but hey it is what it is. Had I been allowed in the entire DADT thing wouldn't have even been an issue with me. I don't routinely make it a habit to go around telling people I am gay in the first place, and I wouldn't have been looking for a romantic partner in the military either. Guess that's why I have the opinion I do.

Oh and my last statement was because of the ignorant, bigoted people who are in the military. Yes they are ignorant, and incredibly wrong, however they are serving our country. I work with a large amount of young adults who are planning on going into the military, several have just left for their basic training, and some have just returned. I am friends with many of them, and I have a great respect for them. Many of them have sat and spoken with me about this issue. They feel that their unit cohesion would be disturbed by open gay people serving. It isn't because they don't like us as people, it's just that they feel it would be a disruptive influence.
Click to expand...

I'm calling bullshit there. I am a veteran,and I don't belive a word you said.For starters,you're clearly a ''self loathing homosexual.'' Bar someone in the religious right,what gay person calls themselves a''homosexual'' these days? What kind of impression do you make on people, that after talking with you,so ''many'' young people think you'd be better off not serving with them? Did they know you were gay when you ''sat down'' and spoke with ''many'' of them?"I'm not sure how you can be freinds with people who clearly have no respect for you.Did you ask them why they have no respect you, or did you just sit there nodding your head at their unfounded slurs?

Don't give me your ratshit about ''unit cohesion'' either, because that's just more right wing nonsense.Most of the young recruits coming into the military these days are cool with the idea of serving with openly gay servicemembers.They know gay people.If we're going to use FOXSPEAK words like ''many'' to support our arguments,then I'll say 'MOST'' recruits are cool with gay people.Even if they weren't, tough shit.Their bigotry shouldn't trump the rights of others to do their part in the mission of protecting America from dusty poor people thousands of miles away from our nearest shores.Back in the 50's ''MANY'' white recruits didn't like the idea of serving with black soldiers.Today ''MOST'' recruits have no problem with it.The ones that do,keep it under wraps.You know,''unit cohesion'' and all.

Ask Lt.Choi's (discharged under DADT) commander what he think about unit cohesion.His soldiers didn't particularly like having their platoon leader who led them into combat ,ripped from their unit and replaced when he came out. http://www.60minutes.com/blogs/2010/02/09/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6191549.shtml

Just because you feel like you're not desrving of equality ,don't force your bullshit on the rest of us.I don't know of ANY gay people who joined the military to look for a romantic partner.The fact that you use that to support your weak assed argument just further reveals your self loathing.Why is that you have such ''respect'' for bigoted members of the military,but you feel that gay people only join up to get laid? An issue I'm sure you'd never have to deal with BTW..

Xzilla7 said:
Obama is the current boss of the DOJ. The DOJ is defending DADT. Why would Obama even allow for a transparent waste of time like a "year long study" so that obviously by the time a decision is made there would be more Republicans to blame?Obama has made it very clear that he respects gay people but doesn't hold their rights as a priority (yes yes please don't point out the contradiction I already know). The Matthew Shepard act was great, but so far that's all he's accomplished.
Click to expand...

I think after a year of that wishy washy fuck Obama,the answer should be clear.He doesn't want to offend the republicans who will use this as a war cry in 2012.There won't be ''more'' republicans to blame.EVERYONE of them can be counted on to block whatever progressive piece of legislation is introduced.Forget about the republicans, they will not support a repeal.He could work on Democrats instead of wasting time with more ''studies'' but he's not..

Maybe he'll seek some more ''bi partisan" support on the issue..:rolleyes:
 
RedRubberBall said:
what does this tell ya ?

http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?t=301654
Click to expand...

It tells me that bigotry,among soldiers old enough to achieve the rank of any kind of general,bigotry is still alive and well.

I'm talking about the young recruits.I belive that among young people, the prospect of serving with openly gay members in their units, doesn't frighten them as much as it does senior field grade officers.

This guy has got to be nearing retirement soon, he's pretty near the end of his miltary career.In any case,no matter what his positon on it was, if we had a President and a Democratic Congress who were succesfull in repealing DADT,and gay soldiers could openly serve,this General would have to obey the law.

But, he is allowed to have his opinion on the matter. I just don't agree with him.Do you?

What does this tell you?http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/07/1253311.aspx
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top