Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gays in military would undermine defense
Sun Sentinel ^ | December 13, 2010 | Cal Thomas

Posted on 12/13/2010 2:06:02 PM PST by Red Steel

People who take polls for a living will tell you that, depending on the methodology, the sample, how a question is asked and the understanding of the ones being polled, the outcome can pretty much be predetermined.

If you are dependent on a superior for your job and that superior tells you he wants a certain conclusion reached about a policy he wishes to implement, that, too, can affect the outcome.

Such is the case with President Barack Obama, who has told gay rights groups he intends to end the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military. From the comments by Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, it appears the president's message has placed their job security above what is best for the military and the country. Many lower-ranking officers do not share their opinion about the effects openly gay service members would have on our military.

The Pentagon poll touted by Gates and Mullen was "rigged," said a recent editorial in The Washington Times, which noted, "From the outset, the Pentagon had no interest in eliciting honest responses from the troops about whether the law … should be preserved or repealed. Instead, soldiers, airmen, sailors and Marines were addressed in terms of implying that repeal is inevitable."

Furthermore, said the newspaper, "63 percent of respondents live off-base or in civilian housing and consequently answered that a change in policy might not affect them. Those in combat roles — where unit cohesion and trust are life-and-death concerns — gave a different response."

-snip-

The military is one of our primary national underpinnings. So is marriage. No wonder the gay rights movement seeks to undermine both.

(Excerpt) Read more at sun-sentinel.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: dadt; dontaskdonttell; gays; homosexualagenda; homsexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-283 next last

1 posted on 12/13/2010 2:06:05 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Gays in the Military would Undermine Defense

I think that's the idea, Einstein. (not you, Red).

2 posted on 12/13/2010 2:07:44 PM PST by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Undermine defense? Well DUH!!! That’s the POINT, Cal!!!!


3 posted on 12/13/2010 2:14:48 PM PST by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

So it’s not enough that they come out of de closet they have to get outside de fence too?


4 posted on 12/13/2010 2:20:35 PM PST by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/28/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Fast forward... one year from now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYW3He_1JdU&feature=related


5 posted on 12/13/2010 2:30:54 PM PST by Gator113 (Sarah Palin can win, and she will win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

They might undermine defense but just think what they could do with the uniforms......


6 posted on 12/13/2010 2:31:11 PM PST by ninonitti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; Steely Tom; Tiger_eye

The Washington Times said they would publish the below letter.

Politicians supporting repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) rely for justification on a single number contrived by the Department of Defense (DOD). This military survey, which proclaimed 70% see positive or no effect for repealing DADT, replaces national defense with social alchemy as the armed forces’ primary mission.

DOD followed traditional practices for fabricating results. The poll was conducted after Congressional Representatives had voted for repeal of DADT. Therefore, only 29% responded by completing half or more of the questions, under the compelling logic that nobody really cared. DOD contacted equal numbers of reserve and active troops and spouses, and only 20% to 30% of those whose military specialty could place them in harm’s way. Also, nearly one third had never deployed. Supposedly all these responses provided valid information, even though people in base housing, civilian neighborhoods, and CONUS bureaucracies never experience firefights and IED’s.

The entire military exists to serve Marine and Army combat infantrymen. DOD accomplishes nothing of lasting significance until infantrymen walk the ground formerly held by an enemy, and well over half of those trigger-pullers oppose repeal. Only they understand the unimaginable totalitarian leadership and obedience demanded by their chaotic and brittle environments.


7 posted on 12/13/2010 2:33:24 PM PST by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
Always been Queers in the military; most I knew about kept it hidden and did their job. I bet there are a couple in every company and nobody knows it. The ones I found out about when I was in the army didn't cause any problems, Don't ask, don't tell is basically how it has always been.

Here's a funny one for you all. When I was at Ft BRagg, we had this blk sp 5 that was gay. All the blks knew it but most the whites didn't. The blks were embarrassed but didn't out this guy. Most everybody lived off post, but this sp 5 had a room in the barracks. So us white guys thought this guy was ok, pretty classy, not racist, good guy. None of the blks would associate with him. So anyway, this gay sp 5 got caught down Hay St dressed up like a woman, working as a prostitute. Got to be the most embarrassing thing could happen to anybody , ha ha. Anyway, then all the whites guys steered way clear of the sp 5. I started calling all the blk guys in my company by his name, stir it up some; they got hot quick about that sorts thing h a ha.

But still, you ain't going to keep them all out. As long as they do their job and don't go out flag waving their disease; I say let them alone; feel sorry for them rather than hate them.

8 posted on 12/13/2010 2:33:27 PM PST by Eska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Don’t Look At or Touch My Junk Soldier!


9 posted on 12/13/2010 2:40:23 PM PST by TexasCajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eska
Always been Queers in the military; most I knew about kept it hidden and did their job. I bet there are a couple in every company and nobody knows it. The ones I found out about when I was in the army didn't cause any problems, Don't ask, don't tell is basically how it has always been.

I work out in a gym that has a lot of gay members. No, I'm not gay but straight and married for 20 years -it's close to work.

If people only knew how many active and reserve military folk visit that gym who are gay....like you said don't ask and don't tell.

10 posted on 12/13/2010 2:44:30 PM PST by hoyt-clagwell (5:00 AM Gym Crew Jerking Iron.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Anyone that has ever been in the military understands totally why homos are not allowed in the services.

Butt buffers just want to prevert everything good and decent, thats all.


11 posted on 12/13/2010 2:45:00 PM PST by fuzzybutt (Democrat Lawyers are the root of all evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

What would you expect from a marxist-in-chief out to destroy the United States. They don’t quite have the military under their thumb yet, thanks to the Christian paradigm.

Create a homosexual military like the SS Nazi Brownshirts and the ancient Greek and Roman pederasts and you kill Christianity and make the Bible hate speech.

You also get to kick all those who dare to think the Christian paradigm is superior to all other ideologies (which it is—that is why Marxists hate it).
That way when homosexuals harass the heterosexuals the Christians will be kicked out for being a “homophobe” and VOILA!!!! You have a military of immoral troops who are capable of killing their own citizens because they are devoid of Judeo/Christian morality—what bambi wants to do.

Homosexuality always includes pederasty and Judeo/Christian beliefs are the only culture that condemned that paradigm in the ancient and modern world. All Marxists want no sexual morality so you destroy the family loyalties and can control children. Christian morality is what made this country work and the best in the history of the world—most freedom for the most diverse.

You can not make unnatural immoral behavior legal in the military. You destroy the character and honor that HAS to exist in such a powerful entity unless you want evil like the homosexual brownshirts did to Germans.


12 posted on 12/13/2010 2:49:39 PM PST by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

You mean like thishttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol5Dfs7jqFI&feature=related


13 posted on 12/13/2010 2:52:26 PM PST by eastforker (Visit me at http://www.eastforker.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Who is going to want to serve? Always looking behind to see who is trying to pick you up, while trying to do your job? It sure will keep a lot of good people from wanting serve.


14 posted on 12/13/2010 3:09:20 PM PST by FreedBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eska

Your post is a good illustration why DADT should NOT be repealed.


15 posted on 12/13/2010 3:31:13 PM PST by ohioman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
here's the deal, two fags are having sex in the same unit, and one day the unit gets hit.

will one or both of them sacrifice YOU and or the whole unit to save their queer sex partner???

it's as simple as that

16 posted on 12/13/2010 3:31:53 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedBird
It sure will keep a lot of good people from wanting serve.

And you're going to find a lot of present military resigning their commissions and warrants and enlisted folks deciding to not re-up.

Those of the queer persuasion may find themselves in a neat situation, i.e., satisfying their odd sexual desires and getting paid for it.

17 posted on 12/13/2010 3:38:52 PM PST by OldPossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Chode

Is it not ironic that that the same was said about female soldiers serving with men? lol


18 posted on 12/13/2010 3:39:17 PM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FreedBird

What happens in a few years when the gays have been promoted into all levels of command and your superior officers take a shine to you? Who you gonna choose?


19 posted on 12/13/2010 3:50:44 PM PST by sodpoodle (Despair; man's surrender. Laughter; God 's redemption.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: verity
to tell you the truth, i wouldn't trust ANYBODY banging ANYBODY in the same unit to cover my back.
20 posted on 12/13/2010 3:53:46 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Eska
But still, you ain't going to keep them all out. As long as they do their job and don't go out flag waving their disease; I say let them alone; feel sorry for them rather than hate them.

Troll Alert! You're talking about an agenda here to accept homosexuality as normal. Gay pride day in the Marines, well it's coming fool. These fudgepackeres can't be stopped. You give 'em and inch they'll shove it in a mile.

21 posted on 12/13/2010 4:18:40 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: verity; Jim Robinson

Women have no place in the military either. Jim Robinson is NOT a supporter of repealing DADT. STFU.


22 posted on 12/13/2010 4:20:15 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Chode

What happens if one of those disgusting fudgepackers happens to come into your line of fire with the enemy. You gonna stop shooting?


23 posted on 12/13/2010 4:22:26 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: hoyt-clagwell
If people only knew how many active and reserve military folk visit that gym who are gay....like you said don't ask and don't tell.

Takes on to know one, you thinking about switch hitting?

24 posted on 12/13/2010 4:24:35 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: central_va
i'm not suicidal
25 posted on 12/13/2010 4:49:33 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Chode
i'm not suicidal

What does that mean?

26 posted on 12/13/2010 4:51:05 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: central_va
i'm not suicidal as in, i'm not going to shoot some fagazz and put the unit a gun down in a fight when you need all weapons brought to bear without good cause if that's what you mean...
27 posted on 12/13/2010 4:59:37 PM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Chode
i'm not going to shoot some fagazz

That kind of trigger discipline is hard to find. It is a great temptation.

28 posted on 12/13/2010 5:01:18 PM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Takes on to know one, you thinking about switch hitting?

See my profile page...nuff said...and my wife is all I need anyway. I can barely keep up with her :) as is. 2 times per week in her late 40's.... No internet e-standards..The gym does that to her.

29 posted on 12/13/2010 5:03:50 PM PST by hoyt-clagwell (5:00 AM Gym Crew Jerking Iron.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Women have no place in the military either

You have lost a credibility. This woman was awarded the Silver Star. What have you done armchair commando??

Photobucket

30 posted on 12/13/2010 5:09:54 PM PST by hoyt-clagwell (5:00 AM Gym Crew Jerking Iron.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: central_va; Jim Robinson
Women have no place in the military either

A mom receiving the flag at Arlington for her daughter who was KIA in Iraq...You need to STFU. These women have more balls than you ever will. You make conservatives look like loons

http://www.life.com/image/53467794

31 posted on 12/13/2010 5:14:41 PM PST by hoyt-clagwell (5:00 AM Gym Crew Jerking Iron.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ninonitti

Not a lot one of ‘em told Michael G.New years ago that the UN patches were necessary because they made the Uniforms”look fabulous.”


32 posted on 12/13/2010 6:01:20 PM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hoyt-clagwell

Well said.


33 posted on 12/13/2010 7:15:51 PM PST by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: verity

By law, women do not serve in front line combat units.


34 posted on 12/13/2010 9:03:03 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: hoyt-clagwell

I stick by my statement, no women in the military. You STFU.


35 posted on 12/14/2010 3:34:17 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: hoyt-clagwell

She shouldn’t be there. Putting young women in harms way is not a conservative value. We won WWII without women in combat, it was in all of the history books.


36 posted on 12/14/2010 3:36:18 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
The Pentagon poll touted by Gates and Mullen was "rigged," said a recent editorial in The Washington Times, which noted, "From the outset, the Pentagon had no interest in eliciting honest responses from the troops about whether the law …

We all knew the Pentagon was lying... In the long run, becoming known liars will work against them.

37 posted on 12/14/2010 3:55:00 AM PST by GOPJ (Sharpton wants Limbaugh off the air- if you don't hate liberals yet, you're not paying attention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

There are no front line combat units in its asymmetrical warfare. Moreover, females can serve in CSS units many of which are in direct support of and in close proximity to combat units.


38 posted on 12/14/2010 5:31:30 AM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Asshole.

Sober up so you can follow a conversation.

And I do not give a damn what Robinson's position is on any subject.

39 posted on 12/14/2010 5:34:49 AM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: verity
"Is it not ironic that that the same was said about female soldiers serving with men? lol"

Are you implying that homosexual males are to be segregated from the men just like the females? Reverse that to the female carpet munchers (They will not want to bunk with their fellow homosexuals with the opposite genitals by the way).

So you have separate quarters/hot bunking comprised of straight males, homosexual males, straight females, and homosexual females (In order to make everyone comfortable). Next we have the HIV status for deployment in case their is a breakout with one infected homosexual (Who seem to spread HIV more easily with anal sex) spreading the disease. Sounds like a cluster f* of special rights afforded to those who stick penises in men's anuses. Good for you and your behavioral (Remember, women are segregated) experiment as well as never being content with what is working.
40 posted on 12/14/2010 5:47:39 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: verity; central_va; metmom; little jeremiah; xzins; P-Marlowe; trisham; Darkwolf377; ...
Asshole.

Sober up so you can follow a conversation.

And I do not give a damn what Robinson's position is on any subject.

You are the the biggest troll on FR and have been for years, why is it not surprising that you are pushing the homosexual agenda.

41 posted on 12/14/2010 6:21:27 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: hoyt-clagwell

Isn’tit a pity that “men” want to see women do THEIR jobs.

Yes, they LOWER standards for women because they LACK the physical body upper strength to do a man’s job. Now we have “men” cheering them on. The gender blender illusion goes on.

In the old days it used to be a high insult to say,

“Your mom wears army boots.”

Yes, we’ve come a long way, haven’t we?


42 posted on 12/14/2010 6:51:14 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: hoyt-clagwell

I also like consistency.

I don’t want males who are totallyt confused on WHO they are supposed to be attracted to in the military. I don’t care what position they are in. Gays are NOT normal. There is NOTHING normal about a male emulating a female as the “other half”. By birth a female or pretending to be a female has NO PLACE.

When you mix the genders, there is problems. Any ship that has straight males and females bunking together ... the pregnancy rate goes through the roof. DUH, I wonder why. Now they want “wifey” who is a faggot next to their queer serving together. It doesn’t work.

Keep the males and females SEPARATE.Keep females OUT of combat positions and get rid of ALL the “gays”. I don’t care if the “gay” is the “cow” or the “bull”. Throw them the hell OUT and get them HELP for their EMOTIONAL issues they act out sexually.


43 posted on 12/14/2010 6:56:14 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Eska

“But still, you ain’t going to keep them all out. As long as they do their job and don’t go out flag waving their disease; I say let them alone; feel sorry for them rather than hate them. “

So NORMAL people are supposed to endure PERVERTS?

We don’t want EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED faggots in our military. They should be REQUIRED to get professional help for their EMOTIONAL ISSUES THEY ACT OUT SEXUALLY. There is NO sane reason in the world why NORMAL people have to endure PERVERTS.

Yes, feel sorry for them but do NOT subject NORMAL people to their issues when it could be a matter of life and death. How dare you suggest we put perverts on a pedestal! HOW DARE YOU! Have RESPECT for those that are NORMAL. To NOT want to be around ABNORMAL people, doesn’t necessarily imply “hating” them. It just means they have NO PLACE in our military. It’s like wanting a serial killer in the military - we don’t want that either.


44 posted on 12/14/2010 7:03:38 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: verity; wagglebee; P-Marlowe; little jeremiah; scripter; Lancey Howard; pissant; jazusamo; ...
Chode: here's the deal, two fags are having sex in the same unit, and one day the unit gets hit. will one or both of them sacrifice YOU and or the whole unit to save their queer sex partner???

Verity: Is it not ironic that that the same was said about female soldiers serving with men? lol

If you're saying that a female/male romance could disrupt a unit, then you are wrong to suggest that it doesn't. I have an entire career in the military that says it does. In fact, there have been murders committed over the issue. You really need to deal with your area of expertise...and it isn't the military.

DADT is about preventing the service of homosexuals in the US military. The goal of the military is simple: "Win America's Wars." Anything that adds to the combat ability to do that should be added to the military and anything that detracts from our ability to win should be prevented. Combat multipliers should be encouraged. Combat detriments should be excluded.

Flat feet, fat recruits, too tall or too short, those with uncorrectable vision, those with diabetes, those with tuberculosis, and a host of other attributes or conditions are deemed combat detriments. Those people are discriminated against in their efforts to join the military. And it is right that we do so.

The same with homosexuality. It is a combat detriment, and as such, it will injure the ability to win wars. You mention on item on a long list. The "gay lovers" issue is a combat detractor that on the list of detriments regarding homosexual service. There are so many others that I'm not going to repeat the list for you.

Suffice it to say that the injury to combat operations is far greater than any benefit gained.

And remember, there is no such thing as an equal right to serve. Tell that to the guy with flat feet or the guy with diabetes. They might be the most brilliant in the world, but they can support the war effort in another capacity that is not involved in combat operations.

Finally, FR opposes the gay agenda, to include DADT. I think you make a big mistake supporting it here.

45 posted on 12/14/2010 7:14:52 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain & proud of it: Truly Supporting the Troops means praying for their Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: verity
There are no front line combat units in its asymmetrical warfare. Moreover, females can serve in CSS units many of which are in direct support of and in close proximity to combat units.

EVEN more reason to ban women from the military. It's just plain wrong. Just because the other feminized Euro-piss-on countries do doesn't mean we have to.

46 posted on 12/14/2010 7:23:21 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Excellent post, xzins.


47 posted on 12/14/2010 7:24:37 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Exactly right.


48 posted on 12/14/2010 7:25:35 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nmh
faggots in our military.

Great post, but doesn't fagot only have one 'g' in it. Maybe one of the FR bone smoker lovers can educate us on the proper use of the word.

49 posted on 12/14/2010 7:26:31 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I think verity is a man trapped in women’s body who is a homo. HE-SHE is very confused.


50 posted on 12/14/2010 7:29:30 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-283 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson