Welcome to PatsFans.com

Undoing the Damage

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Patters, May 27, 2010.

  1. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    308
    Ratings:
    +569 / 22 / -19

    This is a good modern example of the federal government taking the lead in human rights, like it did on issues ranging from giving blacks civil rights, giving women the right to vote, ending slavery, ending segregation, ending child labor, and so on.

    'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Nearing End? House Votes to Repeal Policy on Gays in the Military - ABC News

    The House of Representatives has voted by a 234-194 margin to repeal the controversial "don't ask, don't tell" policy toward gays in the military.

    ...

    Earlier this evening, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 16-12 on a similar measure, opening the way for a forthcoming Senate vote on whether to repeal the policy.
     
  2. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,738
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    If the committee vote(57% in favor) is a fair representation of how the full Senate will vote on cloture we're still at an impasse.
     
  3. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    Is one of these the one McCain is voting against... after saying he would leave it to the Pentagon?
     
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,183
    Likes Received:
    325
    Ratings:
    +816 / 27 / -33

    Remember there was a conundrum and subsequent brouhaha when women were first allowed to serve on ships and the like.. and even though there have been some minor problems, it seems to be working out pretty well..
     
  5. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,718
    Likes Received:
    53
    Ratings:
    +151 / 20 / -17

    It was only a matter of time before this rule got changed.

    Unless two flamboyant obnoxious clowns get physical out in the open
    this should only be a minor change.

    Then again... a little friendly fire would cure that problem.
     
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    308
    Ratings:
    +569 / 22 / -19

    I don't think the Republicans will filibuster this because there are a lot of gay Republicans (25% of gays supported McCain!) and the Republicans have been trying to build on that for awhile. Also, there are still a number of Republicans from less-than-conservative states who are not going to go out on the limb opposing their gay constituency. Also, the Dems have attached this to the final defense bill, which the Democrats would like nothing more than to have the Republicans vote against. But, we'll see.
     
  7. khayos

    khayos In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    Messages:
    3,673
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I think this is less about Republicans being anti-gay than being seen as not supporting the findings of the heads of the Armed Services. If the heads of the Armed Services had come out in favor of repeal, I think you'd see a majority of Republicans support repeal.
     
  8. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    308
    Ratings:
    +569 / 22 / -19

    Good point.
     
  9. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,468
    Likes Received:
    378
    Ratings:
    +907 / 6 / -9

    I highly doubt that. More Republicans, sure. But most of them will still oppose it since it will be seen as another legislative victory for Obama and the Democrats.

    Regardless, it's a bit of a lame excuse since, if I understand correctly, this merely repeals the law while the policy remains intact pending the completion of the military's review. If these Republicans really wanted cover for the likely non-existent political fallout, I think citing Mullen and Gates' support would suffice.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2010
  10. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    Is friendly fire also the solution for heterosexual troops who are flamboyant obnoxious clowns?
     
  11. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    174
    Ratings:
    +425 / 8 / -4

    I think you're right on all counts.
     
  12. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,417
    Likes Received:
    400
    Ratings:
    +775 / 14 / -6

    #24 Jersey

    But, but, but------look what's going to happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The admission of open and active homosexuals into the U.S. military could very well result in the spreading of deadly HIV-tainted blood throughout the ranks.

    There is a 10 minute YouTube video available at America's Survival entitled "Asking for Trouble," which notes that gays are currently prohibited from donating blood because of the diseases they carry.

    "A vote to repeal the homosexual exclusion policy would inevitably mean more disease and death for members of our Armed Forces," stated Cliff Kincaid, the veteran journalist who runs ASI. "It is unconscionable to add this danger to the risks they already face in fighting for our freedom around the world."

    Another danger, the video explains, would be the admission of transgendered individuals who want to dress up as members of the opposite sex and would cry "discrimination" if they are not allowed to do so.

    "If Congress repeals the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' homosexual exclusion policy," declared Kincaid, "Corporal Klinger could become a reality in the Armed Forces."

    "Klinger may now give way to the Pentagon actually permitting transgendered male soldiers that look like Klinger to openly wear women's clothing," noted the ASI president.


    But wait!! There's more - the danger isn't just HIV/AIDS. A 60-page ASI report by researcher Dale O'Leary makes the points that other life-threatening infections could be in gay blood for which there is no scientific test yet available.

    Disease-tainted Gay Blood Threatens Our Troops - Christian Newswire

    Has anyone told these morons that 50% of the people affected with AIDS are women? That would make your risk of contracting AIDS by having sex just about equal - regardless of what sexual persuation your partner was.

    Transmission from heterosexual contact will be greater in the next two years than either transmission from injected-drug use or male homosexual/bisexual contact. .

    Minorities, women are fastest growing AIDS populations. - Free Online Library


    There's also the dread danger of the "oral assault while sleeping" to worry about, according to The Family Research Council.

    Here's how the Family Research Council envisions things going if Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed: first, more straight soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines will be fellated in their sleep against their will. Then, commanders afraid of being labeled homophobes will refuse to do anything about it. Eventually, the straight service members will quit out of fear.

    On a conference call with reporters today, FRC Senior Fellow for Policy Studies Peter Sprigg delivered the results of what he said was the first-ever study of "homosexual assault" in the military. Joined by several former military officers opposed to allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces, he warned Congress that the DADT repeal language currently under discussion with the agreement of the White House will turn the U.S. military into a terrifying free-rape zone where no heterosexual is safe.


    Family Research Council: End Of DADT Means More Gay Rape In The Military | TPMDC

    I'm terrified, all right.....terrified of Peter Sprigg and Cliff Kincaid.
     
  13. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I don't really have a strong opinion on this particular issue, but there's something you really just don't understand: Serving in the military is not a civil right (and it most certainly is not a "human right"). A right is something that no one can deny you, at least not without due process. But you can be denied from serving in the military for many, many things. Not being physically fit, having certain medical conditions, not having enough education, etc, etc.

    And here another newsflash to clue you in: When you're in the military, you don't have all the civil rights that the rest of us have. The military can and will control many aspects of your behavior.

    Of course, equating this to ending slavery is the height of ridiculousness, but I am not surprised your disgusting racism sees slavery of black people as the equivalent of gays not being allowed to serve in the military.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2010
  14. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    308
    Ratings:
    +569 / 22 / -19

    No, I wasn't equating it, I was merely providing examples where the federal government steamed rolled over states rights to grant human rights to Americans, whether they were black, women, gays, Muslims, etc. I have no idea where you got the idea I was equating the tragedy of slavery to the discrimination of gays.

    As far as civil rights goes in the military, it's quite obvious that troops are subject to a different standard than the rest of us, but I have no idea why you're pointing that out. No one expects gay troops to be treated differently from any other troops. In fact that's the whole point here.
     
  15. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Actually equating the concepts is exactly what you are doing, which shows your own racism by comparing gays serving in the military to slavery.

    Yeah, those 2 concepts are completely identical. :rolleyes:
    Your OP shows you clearly believe serving in the military is a human right, as you have congratulated the government saying

    "This is a good example of the fedral government taking the lead in human rights,"

    Maybe you misspoke, but your own words show that you consider serving in the military to be a human right. And I'm just telling you it isn't.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2010
  16. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,718
    Likes Received:
    53
    Ratings:
    +151 / 20 / -17

    You never hear Patters pandering for the one minority that still is not
    allowed into the military.....

    What about the poor people with Flat Feet?
     
  17. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    We should just pick some island in the middle of the Pacific and take all the people with flat feet and bring 'em there and leave 'em. Maybe they can have Kauai. I think both us and them would be much, much happier. :rocker:
     
  18. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,950
    Likes Received:
    308
    Ratings:
    +569 / 22 / -19

    I think most people would disagree with your reasoning here. Whatever ....

    Serving in a taxpayer funded volunteer military is certainly a human right, or do you think the government has the right to exclude whoever it wants? That said, there are many areas where the military has every right to discriminate -- specifically those who exhibit or have exhibited very behavior, such as criminals, drug addicts, alcoholics, blatant racists and sexists, and so on. It's understood the military must keep order, and I certainly respect issues with regard to the need to abide by the rules of behavior in the military.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2010
  19. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Um, when it comes to the military, yes they do have the right to exclude whomever they want. As another poster pointed out, the flat-footed need not apply. You cannot join if you are not within certain ages. You cannot join if you have certain medical conditions or diseases.

    For example, freedom of speech is a civil right which cannot be taken away from a law abiding citizen. If you get cancer, you can still speak your mind. But if you get cancer, you cannot join the military (or if you're already in it, they will discharge you).

    You're doing what liberals always try to do, which is redefining terms like "civil rights" or "human rights". You do not have the right to serve in the military becuase no such right exists. It is something you have to be qualified to do.
    Add perverts and deviants to your list, and I think we will be in pretty much total agreement.
     
  20. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,718
    Likes Received:
    53
    Ratings:
    +151 / 20 / -17

    Maybe Hank Johnson should request that all the flat feet people go to
    Guam in case the island capsizes.

    Hank Johnson Worries Guam Could "Capsize" After Marine Buildup - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

    They could use their flat feet as paddles and push the island to the
    mainland.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2010

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>