House repeals "Don't ask, Don't tell"

“Death is good. Hitler is dead! Yeah!” :Christopher Titus

When they stop wearing Stars and Bars underwear. Republican base, deep south, rural farmers. I have a hypothesis. I think non wealthy conservatives are suffering from brain damage caused by dehydration. Think about it? If you live in a city, you have air conditioning. Up north, cooler temps. All the conservatives are in extra warm rural states. Hence more dehydration, more brain damage, lower IQ, more conservatives.

LOL!

when they are bought for an alternate purpose, for now thier warchests are finaced by fear, and hate

Are you serious? You have been eating those cupcakes of ignorance if you are.

I believe that she is using sarcasm, i think. on the internet and with txting it is hard to tell.

being as no one (despite a zillion claims otherwise) is actually sure of what god likes or dislikes, you are showing a degree of stupidity, or insanity in claiming to know how god feels about anything.
being as god made them that way and doesnt strike them dead with bolts of lightning, it seems the big guy is ok with them, how does god recieve the hatefull though?

ive been hearing this if the gays hit on me shit since i was a kid.
firstly if they do you should feel flattered, as you should anytime someone has an interest in you in any way.
secondly seeing as how they havent hit on ya yet, it seems you neednt worry they dont want to fuck you.

Do you really think YOU are God?
If not, how the hell can you claim to know what God would aprove of?

My God, the ignorance of some people- compounded by your own obvious sexual disfunction.

Here is a clue-
If a psychologically well-adjusted straight man gets hit on by a gay man, he says:

"No thanks dude, I'm into chicks."

That's it. no drama.

If a man who has deep issues about his sexuality gets hit on by a gay man, he says:

"WHAT? You are hitting on me? ME? You think I might be GAY! I'm not gay! I've spent my whole life pretending, I mean, being straight! I did not choose to be gay like you, I choose to be straight! I mean, I'm straight! You choose, I didn't, I just am! I am straight, that is! Not that I would choose to be gay! Oh, I'm just going to beat the hell out of you for making me question my sexuality!"

Yep.

And BTW- if there is a God, and if God is in any way just, it's you that God would not aprove of.

glad to see that every side is voicing it's opinion. Know that what you have posted has a great deal more to do about you and your bigotry, ignorance and insecurity then the actual topic.

alf_d_guard:
A) God has nothing to do with this.
B) I doubt you're attractive enough to get hit on by a gay guy.

"if there is a God, and if God is in any way just, it's you that God would not aprove of."

= brilliance

God enjoyed your comment. I've been directed to vote it up!

And you have a direct line to God to make such a bold statement as to presume to know the mind of God? How small and insignificant you must believe you truly are within to presume such grandiose things.

I don't recall the headline saying "we've done it! We're there!" The house is the first step. I'm pretty sure people know and understand that.

lol so your new to current.........

I've actually been here quite a while. I will change that word "sure" to "hope"

it was a knock to the level of depth many current posters posses (or rather dont) not a literal question to you

Right. Got it.

****delete "current posters" & replace with "humans"

Pun intended? hahah

No but close enough!

If marriage is a good thing or not is not the point- it's about equality.

Some people want to get married, and it's their right to do so, and the government must recognize their marriages just like they recognize any other marriages.

Just like the issue of gays serving in the military. I sure as hell would not want to serve in the military, but some other people do, and they should not be discriminated against based on arbitrary bigoted traditions.

I agree that marriage is a joke, and I'm not sure I ever want to get married.... But (and I know you know this), I'm still intent on FORCING them to allow me to do so.

Yeah that really slowed down the Spartans

Seeing someone die in a fight is emotional, period. From what I understand, people who serve consider their comrades as brothers/sisters, so it's emotional no matter what. Plus, I would think that they train servicemen to control their emotions on the battlefield, otherwise we would be vulnerable.

It may end up working to their advantage to be attached to each other because they need to work together as a team to be the most effective and they'll be more motivated to keep each other alive.

that's what the Romans believed. And they were the greatest military force history and the world has ever seen.

The fact is there are already homosexuals in the military fighting side by side. DADT just punishes them from freely expressing their sexuality. This was a discriminatory measure brought upon by a lack of understanding and a fear of differences. Trust there is nothing tactical or strategic about denying qualified men and women the right to serve their country.

I feel sorry for the women in your life, if you consider their emotions as a sign of weakness. You have somehow turned a heterosexist issue into a sexist one. Real men display their emotions. They don't care if their feelings make other people uncomfortable, or makes others question their masculinity. Showing others raw emotion is a sign of strength, not of weakness. Your hyper-masculine perspective is obviously a result of the images that you have been bombarded with during your development. But hopefully, if you mature, you'll realize that men (even hetero ones) are capable of displaying the entire spectrum of human emotions. You don't seem like an expert on homosexuals so I'll say this nicely: Don't speak for a group of people you know very little about. Gay men can be just as masculine as the next guy, and hetero men can be just as effeminate.

I was just saying your viewpoints on the way gay people, men, and women behave seem limited. If you met more people who fall outside the archetypal masculine and feminine gender modals you probably would have a different perspective. A lot of times that just comes from experience (maturity). You say that a woman's expression of emotion is "natural" whereas for men it is not. This isn't "natural", it's societal, a product of how men and women are raised in certain cultures, especially ours, where we are inundated from birth with images of what a man and woman "should" be. It bothers me that you would use blanket statements about gay men based off of whatever your experience with gay men is. It seems you know more about the way they are portrayed then who they really are. The gay community is just as diverse as any other division of peoples, and it's not a constructive nor fair assessment of the gay male population to compare their perceived emotional displays to those of women, and then in the next sentence, say it's a weakness. It's a little bit more than offensive. And yes, you do have a right to voice your opinion, obviously, but I found your comments really disrespectful, so I was encouraged to find out why or how you have come up with such opinions.

http://enforcement.sh

men and woman serving together worked pretty good for israel, maybe its not the genders that are the problem but how we value them.
guys in foxholes love eachother like brothers, for christ sakes my grandfather still plays cards with his ww2 buddies every week. seeing one shot doesnt cause a break with reality that prevents them from doing thier job, as every service man know death is possible, and no one is immune.

your comments arent homophobic but overly simplistic,you might aswell apply them to law enforcement.should female cops not serve in the same streets as male cops?how many instances of over emotional cops unable to function cuz thier lover was shot in the line? firemen and so on.

not to mention sexual attraction doesnt mean love.

just ask the blacks

its not a metter of being pc. just as the world is full of stallones and shwarzanegers it is also equaly full of cobains and lennons, sexual orientation has nothing to do with it.for every limp wristed flaming homo thier is a burly rugged one.your statement speaks more to your ignorance of the gay community than it does political correctness.

out of curiosity can you support your theory with any real world events, i mean every go back to to the druids if you have to. show the time some (percieved) masculine vocation failed via girly homos.cops, fireman, whatever

"just ask the blacks"

I don't know what that is pertaining to, but thanks for adding to the conversation. I was wondering if I was alone on this one.

all the anti gays in the military rhetoric mirrors that of intergrating the army in the 60s and 70s

I wasn't denying the nature of feminism or masculinity, but rather disagreeing with your point that femininity, in the 'natural sense', is a weakness. On the point of a man taking on a woman's persona (or vice versa) who is to say that it's not natural? Since it occurs in the natural world (which humans I believe are still a part of) I'd have to disagree with your statement. You should always be knowledgeable on any subject you are willing to debate on, otherwise why would your analysis of the gay community have any merit? It's not irrelevant to be aware of the diversity of a culture in which you are passing flash judgements. You say you have "them" figured out, but how could you? Have you gone through the experiences of a gay person? Immersed yourself into different aspects of gay culture? I just don't think anyone can know what anyone is like just by "outward behavior". All people are much deeper than they're outward behavior and appearances, and as unique individuals they deserve the basic decency to be treated and considered as such. I've worked in educating both high schoolers and adults about issues of diversity for years now, I know the difference between an educated opinion and a callous judgement. Please, for the sake of people who pick up your book, don't rely on what you know at any given point to be a definite, especially without doing the necessary research.

People have thought of it, and those people were wrong.

Sexual relationships are not the only emotional bonds humans have.
Ask anyone who has ever served in the military- they form lifelong bonds of friendship.

Say your BEST friend sees you take several shots, get's emotional then all of a sudden he's shot up because he was thinking with his heart and not his head.

All human beings are emotional human beings. EVERYONE, short of a sociopath would feel emotional after seeing another human being get killed in front of them, especially if it's another human being they have spent a lot of time with and grown to care for- even if they DON'T have sex with one another.

You do realize that happens, don't you?

Or are you suggesting that gays and women cannot control their emotions as well as straight men can?

Wow, you post one statement of pure ignorance after another and claim that it's obvious truth, and to disagree is simply being "PC".

Well ges what- you are wrong. Flat out wrong. You have fallen for stereotypes just as much as if you claimed all black people commit crimes and all Asians are good at math.

And your ignorance and stupidity is exactly the problem here, because it's your ignorance and stupidity that caused laws like this to be put in place in the first place.

in reference to......................?

your post:
I believe gay men are OBVIOUSLY more emotional than straight men - let's not lie about that for the sake of being pc - and thus could affect the troop as a whole{underline} in combat - that's critical when lives are at stake. I don't care that this passed, but I saw this bill as way to at least stop them from expressing themselves emotionally, like women. Now that this bill has passed, which I feel neutral for, they're allowed to express themselves as pansy female-like males. Not to sound like a gym coach, but our military needs our men to act like real, hardcore, aesthetically masculine men, real men

i wasnt being presumptive i was responding to your assesment of gay men in the military as emotionaly like woman.you presumed by a man liking dick they lacked the ability to preform as soldiers.out of curiosity if sexual preference dictates military effectiveness does that mean the more craven for pussy a hetero is the better soldier he makes?

Like creationists who disagree with evolution, your "disagreement" is based on ignorance.

In other words, you don't know anything about biology, sociology, psychology or anthropology and you love to spread your ignorance around.

agreed. I'd say it much more about politicians getting the votes they need to stay in office. Pleasing their masses.

No, it's not ignorance if someone sees things differently from me.

It's ignorance when someone bases their opinions on their total lack of knowledge of the topic under discussion.

And it's arrogance when that ignorant person stubbornly clings to their ignorance, and claims it's just "seeing things differently".

Again- you don't know anything at all, not even slightly, about human sexuality. You have the knowledge base of a middle school child.

What you SHOULD be doing is asking questions instead of making assertions.

It's hard (pun intended) to argue and or debate with you when your reasons and examples are filled with fallacies.

Wish I had gotten in on this one sooner. Next time.

so your criteria is based on a profile of sgt slaughter as opposed to who is actualy combat effective.
the 165 pound average soldier is who you would prefer defend us based on his desire to chase skirts than 200 pound mercinary who likes cock?

I don't want to read all that crap, but I think it's clear that many people here have issues.

Ha! That would have been good.

I know what you wrote.
When someone writes "the moon is made of green cheese" that shows they don't know anything about the moon.

Your posts show you don't know a damn thing about homosexuals.

And, your ignorance of homosexuals is so deeply ingrained that it's almost religious- you keep asserting your ignorant beliefs are true, even though science has proven you wrong.

But ignorant people like you don't care about science.

Again: It's ignorance when someone bases their opinions on their total lack of knowledge of the topic under discussion.

And it's arrogance when that ignorant person stubbornly clings to their ignorance, and claims it's just "seeing things differently".

OMG are you certifiable?

You are obviously a bigot and use your ignorance to justify your beliefs.

Your done with this now because you lost the debate....coward.

great comback

Thanks.

tom of finland?

Yes, it is about time!

It won't happen from the congressional level (sadly), I don't think, for at least a decade.... Must do voters or courts!!!!!

I hope I'm wrong

his power is unlimited.

I love that quote, that's hilarious!

I laughed my ass off the first time I heard him say that. I offended more people than that quote did.

Sad, but true.

I so agree with you! This war is not accomplishing anything unless it's goal is to keep increasing the U.S. National debt and to have people killed for no reason!