Defending the Truth
Articles | Interviews | Politicians | Groups | Arcade | Experience | Donate
  Defending the Truth > Political Issues > Gay Marriage
Now, This is Certainly Fair!

Gay Marriage Debate and defend your political beliefs as to whether or not marriage should be only defined as a union between a man and a woman.

Reply
Page 4 of 5 < 123 4 5 >
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-11-2007, 10:49 PM   #31 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,692
Country:
Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
It's funny how garysher keeps claiming his position is one thing, but when it comes to actual stories about discrimination, he'll support them over and over and over again...

>>>>>>>>>>>>

This wasn't a story about discrimination.

It's a story about a homosexual who lied, flouted military discipline and was reprimanded severely






While we're at it, do we need to discharge all the people who knew he was gay?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes - they should have informed the authorities immediately so the offending person could be removed forthwith




And how about the people who called him back into service in the first place? Should they be discharged as well?
Probably an administrative oversight, I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt.

But then I always tend to do that, it's part of my tolerant laissez-faire outlook
[IMG][/IMG]

Doggone it darn right you betcha bless your heart maverick
Sponsored Links
Old 05-11-2007, 10:59 PM   #32 (permalink)
Senator
 
foundit66's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,836
Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86 Points: 18,394, Level: 86
Level up: 9%, 456 Points needed
Level up: 9% Level up: 9% Level up: 9%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
foundit66 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post
This wasn't a story about discrimination.
It's a story about a homosexual who lied, flouted military discipline and was reprimanded severely
He was "disciplined" SOLELY because he was gay.
And you claim this isn't about discrimination.

Your dishonesty truly knows no bounds.

So now, if I fire a guy because he is a Christian or gay or straight or Jewish, and call it "discipline", then it can't be discrimination?


Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher
Yes - they should have informed the authorities immediately so the offending person could be removed forthwith
You reveal over and over again that ANYTHING you would have ANY authority over would be ruined in a short period of time.
Absurd policies and idiotic ideas that are just plain not followed in real life.
These guys aren't going to get fired.

And the very idea of firing a person just because he knew of another gay sailor?
Wow!

You are off the deep end...


Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher
Probably an administrative oversight, I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt.
No. They shouldn't.
History is replete with examples of the military ignoring policy against gay military service during times of war, only to put them in effect again when the people are no longer needed.
"(Gay marriage) is a debate about whether you think gay people are part of the human condition or just a random fetish."
-- Jon Stewart
"Please don't judge others by your own standards."
-- Garysher
Old 05-13-2007, 07:36 AM   #33 (permalink)
Citizen
 
Marilyn Monroe's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Tennessee
Gender: Female
Posts: 73
Points: 1,712, Level: 24
Points: 1,712, Level: 24 Points: 1,712, Level: 24 Points: 1,712, Level: 24
Level up: 12%, 88 Points needed
Level up: 12% Level up: 12% Level up: 12%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Marilyn Monroe is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
[quote=garysher;109471]

Quote:
In any case by broadcasting his homosexual condition in the Stars and Stripes he sealed his own fate
The military is about rules and regulations and discipline, so it's their call.

Quote:
Out he goes, along with any other homosexuals who flout military authority[/color]
This is true, but was there another reason that probably isn't being told. Most government organizations are not allowed to respond to queries. Could this guy have been a nuisance? Was he a poor candidate for the service in some other way that was overlooked when he was called back. Mistakes do happen.
Old 05-13-2007, 10:06 AM   #34 (permalink)
Congressional Representative
 
CrazyFlamingos's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Alabama
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,468
Points: 12,752, Level: 73
Points: 12,752, Level: 73 Points: 12,752, Level: 73 Points: 12,752, Level: 73
Level up: 76%, 98 Points needed
Level up: 76% Level up: 76% Level up: 76%
Activity: 18%
Activity: 18% Activity: 18% Activity: 18%
CrazyFlamingos is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marilyn Monroe View Post
The military is about rules and regulations and discipline, so it's their call.
True.

But it doesn't change the fact that DADT is a stupid rule that interfers with the military's ability to choose personnel based on thier ability to do the job.



Quote:
This is true, but was there another reason that probably isn't being told. Most government organizations are not allowed to respond to queries. Could this guy have been a nuisance? Was he a poor candidate for the service in some other way that was overlooked when he was called back. Mistakes do happen.
Not according to his direct superior.

Quote:
“He’s better than the average sailor at his job,” said Bill Driver, the leading petty officer of Knight’s 15-person customs crew in Kuwait. “It’s not at all a strange situation. As open as he is now, it was under wraps for quite a while. It wasn’t an issue at work.”

Stars and Stripes: Discharged gay sailor is called back to active duty
Right now America spends $700 billion every year on foreign oil. That's our money going overseas when it could be staying here. We have to stop this.
That's why I support the Pickens Plan. Check out the website at www.pickensplan.com. If you like what you see, please join me as a Pickens Plan supporter.

Old 05-14-2007, 10:20 AM   #35 (permalink)
Council Member
 
mytmouse57's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wyoming
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,784
Country:
Points: 5,060, Level: 45
Points: 5,060, Level: 45 Points: 5,060, Level: 45 Points: 5,060, Level: 45
Level up: 55%, 90 Points needed
Level up: 55% Level up: 55% Level up: 55%
Activity: 7%
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
mytmouse57 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Okay, everybody sing along to... "In the Navy" by the Village People!!!


If at first you don’t succeed – try, try again and then quit. There’s no sense in making a damned fool of yourself. – W.C. Fields

Old 05-14-2007, 10:28 AM   #36 (permalink)
Council Member
 
mytmouse57's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wyoming
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,784
Country:
Points: 5,060, Level: 45
Points: 5,060, Level: 45 Points: 5,060, Level: 45 Points: 5,060, Level: 45
Level up: 55%, 90 Points needed
Level up: 55% Level up: 55% Level up: 55%
Activity: 7%
Activity: 7% Activity: 7% Activity: 7%
mytmouse57 is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
I think both sides of this rather heated debate have good points.


As Gary is trying to point out, IMO, the military lives and functions, or dies, on strict rules and discipline. From that POV, it doesn’t matter if this guy was the best sailor since Horatio Hornblower and Admiral Nimitz had a baby together – if he broke the rules, he’s out… end of story.


On the other hand, we have the question of whether the rules are FUBAR to begin with.


I think so.
I don’t see how allowing open gays will make the military fall apart. Hell, some of the best militaries in history actually encouraged homosexual activity among the troops, as a form of bonding to solidify unit cohesion.


But again, as long as the rules are in place, they have to be followed. Military rules need to be strict and unbending – it’s just the nature of the business. You can’t sit down and have a focus group and explore everybody’s feelings on the matter in the middle of a firefight.


So, if it sucks that guys like this are being kicked out, the thing to do isn’t to cry about whether it was fair, the thing to do is to try getting the rules changed.
If at first you don’t succeed – try, try again and then quit. There’s no sense in making a damned fool of yourself. – W.C. Fields

Old 05-14-2007, 01:04 PM   #37 (permalink)
Council Member
 
Jaxian's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Michigan, Near Detroit
Posts: 1,028
Points: 5,660, Level: 48
Points: 5,660, Level: 48 Points: 5,660, Level: 48 Points: 5,660, Level: 48
Level up: 55%, 90 Points needed
Level up: 55% Level up: 55% Level up: 55%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Send a message via AIM to Jaxian Send a message via MSN to Jaxian
Jaxian is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garysher View Post
Probably an administrative oversight, I think they should be given the benefit of the doubt.

But then I always tend to do that, it's part of my tolerant laissez-faire outlook
Sometimes I'm not sure Garysher really exists.

Looking at the original story, it seems probable to me that Jason Knight was allowed back into the Navy, even though he is gay, under the provision or implied assumption that he would keep his sexuality discreet. So I think that Jason should have expected to be fired from the military when he told his story publically, and if I were his friend, I'd have told him just that.

Let's imagine that the military had a "no convicted felons allowed" policy, and let's imagine that it was found out Jason Knight was a convicted felon. So they discharged him. But maybe they realized he was a good guy, and they bent the rules a little to bring him back onboard. I think it's kind of implied that he should keep this bending of the rules quiet. If he were to go tell that story publically, he should expect that he'd be discharged again.

Jason's story is horrible. But that's not because he was brought back, then discharged again. Jason's story is horrible because the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy is horrible. His story is as horrible as every story where a soldier is dicharged for being gay.
-Jaxian
Old 05-14-2007, 01:11 PM   #38 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,692
Country:
Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaxian View Post
Sometimes I'm not sure Garysher really exists.

>>>>>>>>>>

Yes I exist


Looking at the original story, it seems probable to me that Jason Knight was allowed back into the Navy, even though he is gay, under the provision or implied assumption that he would keep his sexuality discreet.
>>>>>>>>>

On what do you base this wild assumption??


So I think that Jason should have expected to be fired from the military when he told his story publically, and if I were his friend, I'd have told him just that.

Let's imagine that the military had a "no convicted felons allowed" policy, and let's imagine that it was found out Jason Knight was a convicted felon. So they discharged him. But maybe they realized he was a good guy, and they bent the rules a little to bring him back onboard. I think it's kind of implied that he should keep this bending of the rules quiet. If he were to go tell that story publically, he should expect that he'd be discharged again.

Jason's story is horrible. But that's not because he was brought back, then discharged again. Jason's story is horrible because the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy is horrible. His story is as horrible as every story where a soldier is dicharged for being gay.
You made an unsubstantiated assumption that negates the rest of your argument

His story is only "horrible" because he flouted the rules and got away with it for a while. Going public was a slap in the face to Naval authorities, and an insult to all those who have served the US Navy and helped to win two World Wars.

After that he had to go
[IMG][/IMG]

Doggone it darn right you betcha bless your heart maverick
Old 05-14-2007, 01:16 PM   #39 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,692
Country:
Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
He was "disciplined" SOLELY because he was gay.
And you claim this isn't about discrimination.

Your dishonesty truly knows no bounds.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

Wrong. He was kicked out for deliberately flouting the rules.

Infact your persistence in spinning the truth knows no bounds
So now, if I fire a guy because he is a Christian or gay or straight or Jewish, and call it "discipline", then it can't be discrimination?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The US military has no religious restriction.

Your analogy is completely invalied. Again





You reveal over and over again that ANYTHING you would have ANY authority over would be ruined in a short period of time.
Absurd policies and idiotic ideas that are just plain not followed in real life.
These guys aren't going to get fired.

And the very idea of firing a person just because he knew of another gay sailor?
Wow!

You are off the deep end...

>>>>>>>>>>>

Ho-ho, Deep end.

Very drole



No. They shouldn't.
History is replete with examples of the military ignoring policy against gay military service during times of war, only to put them in effect again when the people are no longer needed.
Stop blubberring into your handkerchief and have the guts to admit the truth.

This homosexual deliberately flouted the law and was disciplined accordingly
[IMG][/IMG]

Doggone it darn right you betcha bless your heart maverick
Old 05-14-2007, 01:26 PM   #40 (permalink)
Partisan
Premium Member
 
garysher's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,692
Country:
Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100 Points: 34,611, Level: 100
Level up: 0%, 0 Points needed
Level up: 0% Level up: 0% Level up: 0%
Activity: 100%
Activity: 100% Activity: 100% Activity: 100%
garysher is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyFlamingos View Post
True.

But it doesn't change the fact that DADT is a stupid rule that interfers with the military's ability to choose personnel based on thier ability to do the job.

>>>>>>>

You are free to think that. The US Military and Congress think differently, and so do most of the American people
Not according to his direct superior.

Quote:
“He’s better than the average sailor at his job,” said Bill Driver, the leading petty officer of Knight’s 15-person customs crew in Kuwait. “It’s not at all a strange situation. As open as he is now, it was under wraps for quite a while. It wasn’t an issue at work.”

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

His ability to "do the job" is irrelevant to the fact that he flouted Navy rules, and, as a homosexual, could have had a discomforting and disruptive effect on other naval personnel
[IMG][/IMG]

Doggone it darn right you betcha bless your heart maverick
Reply
Page 4 of 5 < 123 4 5 >

Bookmarks

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM.

Defending the Truth - FAQ - Rules - Contact Us - Donate - Archive - Top

 Top Political Sites
Poltical Topsites 

Recommended Sites