No. Military law supercedes civil law.

I did have to laugh at this post on another board

seems that people feel the same way about him everywhere

I think it's funny that the only post you decided to create all day yesterday was about Gary. THAT made me laugh.
It's obvious that Gary has you under his spell too.

Sexual tensions and sex-based favoritism in intimate settings destroy cohesion, whether they involve opposite- or same-sex attraction. If we respect women’s need for privacy from men, then we ought to respect the same need on the part of heterosexuals with regard to homosexuals. Protecting privacy in a military with open homosexuality would necessitate recognizing essentially four sexes and would severely disrupt units.



This is true. A hetro man/woman shouldnt have to put up with being eye balled in the shower, or even have to worry about such a thing. It would litteraly be like forcing the women to shower with men.

bullshit

there are gays in the military right now

if anybody is interested in your dubious assets, they would be doing the eye-balling anyway.

the only difference is that without DADT, gays wouldn't be under constant fear

IMO, living under the stress of constant fear would make a soldier far more "dangerous" than the off-chance he is "eye-balling" somebody in the shower. Not to mention, many people have stated there is no longer communal showering in the military anyway - there are petitions between.

If a gay soldier thought he would be under that much stress living in the military under DADT, maybe he/she shouldn't have joined in the first place. It's not like the policy is a secret. He/she should just get a job as a civilian contractor or something.
I reiterate that I would not want to shower with an openly gay man that I wasn't familiar with any more that a woman would not want to shower with a male that she wasn't familiar with. It's that simple. While some people may be comfortable in that situation, I wouldn't be, and it would effect my decision to join the military knowing that I may have to share quarters that close with a openly gay man.
I'll also compare it to the Catholic Church situation. There were pedophillic priests working for years successfully in the church, no one had a problem with them until it "came out" that they had issues with children. It's the openly gay that causes the issues. And no matter how much gay people want to be tolerated, in my book, toleration and acceptance are two different concepts and are situation dependent.

Opposing views on the Israeli army and homosexual soldiers.
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/world/middle_...srael.military
Homosexuality and the Israel Defense Forces | Michael D. Palm Center

And here's a nice writup.
The silent right:Homosexuality and the military - African Security Review Vol 8 No 5, 1999

In South Africa, the situation exists where homosexuality is permitted by law, rather than accepted. A decrease in hostile attitudes is not the same as an increase in social acceptance. What may at first glance appear to represent an increase in liberal attitudes, is actually a mere growth in indifference. Similarly, homosexuality is neither condoned nor condemned within the SANDF, provided that existing regulations on social conduct is not violated. Negative sentiment still prevails and this is possibly why, even with the ‘constitutional scoop’ guaranteeing homosexual rights, few have come out of the closet and why within the military, it remains ‘a silent right’.

[quote=Grace;146477]Sexual tensions and sex-based favoritism in intimate settings destroy cohesion, whether they involve opposite- or same-sex attraction.[quote]

Then please explain why other civilized western cultures (not to mention ISRAEL) are capable of having openly gay servicemen with no problems whatsoever.

Are you suggesting that Americans need to start idientifying with repressive middle eastern regimes and the backward nations of Africa rather than the civilized western nations?

Allowing openly gay people in the British military hasn't seemed to destroy their armed forces. Israeli armed forces seem capable of putting up a pretty good fight, etc. etc.

I think it's disgraceful that you consider American soldiers so juvenile and uninformed - and ARROGANTLY self-impressed.

including more than 322 language experts, at least 58 of whom specialized in Arabic


This is impossible since everybody knows that there are no Arab homosexuals.

There is no amount of money that could be spent to convince me that straight men who sit about all day contemplating homosexuality, (men such as yourself), aren't a bit off either. Its just weird and a little 'off'.

As for gays in the armed forces. I really could not care less. If people want to protect their country via the armed forces more power to them. Other countries allowing gays in their miltary are doing just fine and have no issues. None of the things presented by anyone opposing gays in the miltary in this thread supports their nonsensical position. Please present me with any evidence gays do anything other then personal conjecture and prejudice. Unfortunately for the backward rednecks who support this discriminatory policy, primarily because gays scare them (which makes me wonder about their own sense of self worth), evidence is on our side and prejudice on yours.

As for the money spent on excluding gays in the military that could of been spent on something like body armor, more training and so forth but instead of using it to help protect the people in the military we waste it on prejudice. Sure it may not be a huge amount considering the military budget but it could of been better spent.