Defending the Truth

It gets really boring when you repeat your arguments while being incapable of addressing the response they got the last time you tried it.

Saying a gay can join the military is like saying a guy can drive his car at 85 MPH on a 65 MPH highway.

It's a fact he can do it.
It's also a fact that it is ILLEGAL for him to do so.


As was previously explained to you, that's not my issue at all.
Quite frankly, I don't want any gays in the military who would demand to "form a parade and prance around the military base".
Such stupid non-sequiturs are what people typically use to ignore the fact that the gay men and women who are getting booted from the military ARE NOT "forming parades". They are doing their job, while gay.


The GOVERNMENT'S OWN RESEARCH proves that being gay in the military IS NOT detrimental to discipline or morale. That's just a lame cop-out which is used by people who don't like gays, and it was LAST used by people who didn't like blacks in the military...

In 1993, Secretary Aspin commissioned a study from RAND to provide analysis useful for the implementation of President Clinton’s order to remove the ban on sexual minorities in the military.[42] The RAND study, which ran more than 500 pages, found, "There is no evidence, and no compelling reason to believe, that homosexuals are inherently less capable of performing military tasks than are heterosexuals" (National Defense Research Institute, 1993, p. 284). Its authors acknowledged that hostile opinions concerning homosexuality were prevalent within the American military, but they concluded that evidence suggested, "[H]omosexuals can be successfully integrated into military and public security organizations" (National Defense Research Institute, 1993, p. 32). In reviewing research related to the issues of unit cohesion and operational effectiveness, RAND found:

[H]omosexuals who serve in the military are committed to the military’s core values, which Henderson (1990, p. 10 lists as "fighting skill, professional teamwork, physical stamina, self-discipline, duty (selfless service) and loyalty to unit. (National Defense Research Institute, 1993, p. 312)

The researchers used the sizable literature on unit cohesion more generally to extrapolate the likely effects of open homosexuality on unit cohesion and operational effectiveness. The RAND researchers concluded that potential problems could be overcome with effective leadership, and stated, "[T]here is ample reason to believe that heterosexual and homosexual military personnel can work together effectively" (National Defense Research Institute, 1993, pp. 329-330).

Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military | UCSB

So what are you crying about? Homos can join the military.

It gets really boring when you repeat your arguments while being incapable of addressing the response you got the last time you tried it.

Saying a gay can join the military is like saying a guy can drive his car at 85 MPH on a 65 MPH highway.

It's a fact he can do it.
It's also a fact that it is ILLEGAL for him to do so.

That's quite a dilemma. Is that why homos are confused?

It's not a "dilemma" at all.
I understand it just fine.

It just took a while to get you to start to comprehend...

(And predictably, you avoided my point and made a really pathetic attempt at an insult...)

The fact is homos can join the military. If a homo doesn't like the rules then don't join. Simple. You want everyone to bend over for you. I know you like it, but a lot of us don't like bending over for the homos and you can't make us. This is a free country.

It gets really boring when you repeat your arguments while being incapable of addressing the response you got the last time you tried it.

Saying a gay can join the military is like saying a guy can drive his car at 85 MPH on a 65 MPH highway.

It's a fact he can do it.
It's also a fact that it is ILLEGAL for him to do so.


Yeah. And if Rosa Parks doesn't like the back of the bus, then don't ride.
And if Christians don't like rules that prohibit Christian symbology on governmental property, then go back to Africa.
< end sarcasm >


Do you understand the difference between tolerance, and acceptance?
Do you understand the difference between not discriminating, and approval?

What I want is tolerance and no discrimination against gays.
The U.S. constitution protects against unjust discrimination.


It's amazing how you try to pervert the idea of "free country" to mean that the government can discriminate against gays for no good reason, just because some people are prejudiced...

Yes I understand the difference between tolerance and acceptance. You don't. America will tolerate homos, but most of us don't accept it. You want all of America to see you as the exact same as heteros and we don't. Deal with it and grow up.

I don't care how you "see" gays. That's irrelevant to me.
A positive opinion of gays would be an issue of "acceptance", and I don't care about your prejudice, except for exposing it for the ignorance it is.

Allowing gays EQUALITY and not discriminating against gays is about tolerance.

Tell me Alias.
Since you claim I don't know the difference between tolerance and acceptance, can you explain to me what you think the difference is?

I just did in my last post.