Posted on 12/19/2010 7:28:10 AM PST by tobyhill
The gay Army lieutenant's heart had been racing all night.
Shuffling between meetings at his outpost in eastern Afghanistan on Saturday night, the 27-year-old officer kept popping his head into the main office to catch a glimpse of Fox News's coverage of the Senate debate that led to a vote lifting the ban on gay men and lesbians serving in the military openly.
"Don't cry," a 21-year-old specialist, one of the lieutenant's confidants, told his boss jokingly when news broke that 65 senators had voted to repeal "don't ask, don't tell."
"I'm completely numb," was all the lieutenant could mutter.
Across the world, other gay troops whose lives, careers and relationships have been indelibly, if sometimes quietly, shaped by the ban reacted to the news with a mixture of rapture and disbelief.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
It is an issue, and will be, because their homosexuality defines them.
If you ever listen to a homosexual describe themselves honestly to someone else, their sexual orientation is always at the top of the list.
I think people who spend time with others in close quarters for extended periods of time care about a lot of things.
Imagine all the dislikes and vendettas people have against each other in the military for a multitude of reasons. Now throw homosexual sex and homosexuality into that situation.
I don’t have a hard time imagining at all various aspects of it that people will have issues with.
But, as I said on other threads, the biggest long term problem here is that this is a part of a concerted efforts by liberals to destroy the military and normalize homosexuality.
Most people don’t understand the threat that open homosexuality poses to security, and it was highlighted in the Wikileaks incident.
Everyone is saying “How did this low level enlisted guy get his hands on so much classified material?” The simple explanation (and usually the right one) is that the security clearance and storage systems are so mangled, underfunded and poorly implemented that if it hadn’t been this guy, it could have been a thousand other people.
But another explanation could be a homosexual affair with someone who had higher clearance, coupled with blackmail. It is probably the oldest trick in the book.
Supporters of repealing DADT maintain that if homosexuality is normalized, this type of vulnerability will disappear because there will be no official stigma associated with it.
The problem with that view is that most people understand homosexuality is a perversion and not a normal, natural situation. Even if it is accepted by some governing agency (like the military) there are ALWAYS going to be people engaging in homosexuality who don’t want anyone to know, their families, friends, workplace, etc.
On a non-security/non-military level, this is simply a great, big, huge wedge, societally and legally, a massive bulldozer by the homosexual community to legitimize homosexuality and homosexual marriage.
If they win on this, every single piece of legislation out there that is viewed as unfair or limiting in some way by homosexual activists will fall like a house of cards, and they damn well know it. It will set a legal precedent for all aspects of society to be forcefully accessible to open homosexuality, from Scoutmasters to the Oval Office.
His father is gay?
Really?
I wonder how he managed to make two sons...
The end is nigh.....
Because when a unit is going into combat or on patrol, every thought and every sense must be focused on perceiving the enemy. A moment's hesitation or distraction may make the difference of an adversarial use of deadly force killing a friendly, and worse deciding a battle.
There are many, many, many things which may appear reasonable off the battlefield, which are never allowed anywhere near the deployed station to avoid such distractions to the thinking of the Marine/soldier in combat.
I have no doubt one could rationalize alcohol or drugs on the front lines, claiming those personnel under intense stress needed to relax periodically. On the contrary, the policy of no intoxicants whatsoever reinforces the ability to remain alert at all times in the event of immanent action.
When going into combat, even from the smallest infantry unit, each member has different functions which are reinforced by one another. The thoughts of each member focus upon their duties and having a homosexual in close proximity exposes multiple distractions to a righteous and just soldier/Marine/sailor/airman performing their duties.
Homosexuals are NOT trustworthy, nor faithful. Their entire modus operendi is to satiate their personal desires without respect for their fellow man and in blatant disregard for legality of their criminal behavior. They have honed their skills to hide criminal thinking, decisions and actions from the perceptions of others.
This is why homosexuality has been one of the key disqualifiers for security clearances, not only in the military, but especially in the intelligence community. In the last 20 years they have snuck in and formed clandestine communities ripe for extortion and treasonous behavior. Where they exist, have no doubt there are conspiracies and plots to remain undetected but to subvert the freedoms and legitimate behavior normal life for their personal interpretations of how they want society to live without respecting the majority view.
is that the same as bullshit? Then I agree.
This and other stories like it that I have read today make it sound as though the faggots are already in the majority.
There is a world of difference between those going in the Reserves and those who go directly active. Reserves=Education first Active=Military first.
Fraternization between officers and enlisted is a no-no. This will cause disciplinary problems whenever there is a breakup and they are in the same unit.
Wait till they start fragging their own.
As I have heard many times, if God doesn’t punish this country for this abomination then He owes Sodom and Gamorrah an apology. My money is on a quick and severe response, and soon...
Apparently, their father is bi.
Sick.
Get ready to see male soldiers holding hands, cupping buttocks, kissing, etc...in uniform.
Get ready to see gay, pink shorts wearing and hair-ribboned loved ones welcoming their soldiers back.
And all of this will lead to a ban on any type of display of affection...which will lead to open acrimony, etc.
Don’t even want to think about the lawsuits and assaults resulting from soldiers (both straight & gay) serving in the foxholes of Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Satan must be throwing a milestone party tonight.
What’s going to happen to these gay guys when they start wearing eye liner and lipstick while on duty?
Military Times conducts an annual survey of its readership; most of the respondents are career officers and NCOs. When the latest survey was released about a year ago, they trumpeted the fact that many military members didn’t seem to have a problem with the repeal of DADT.
But if you dig a little deeper into the numbers, you’ll see the real impact of yesterday’s decision. Almost one-quarter of the survey’s participants said they would consider not re-enlisting if gays were allowed to serve openly.
Now, imagine the impact if only 10 or 15% of our most experienced officers and NCOs decide to leave. These are the people you need to conduct combat ops, support troops in the field, analyze intel and perform a thousand other functions required to support the war effort. I don’t care how many “gay volunteers” sign up, you won’t be able to replace the lost experience for years.
Then, there’s the impact on recruiting. Where do most of our troops come from? I’ll give you a hint: it isn’t San Francisco, New York, or other metropolitan areas. The vast majority of our new soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines come from rural areas where many still view homosexuality as a sin and don’t like the idea of gays serving in our military. The job of meeting our enlistment quotas just became more difficult.
During my 20+ years as a military officer, I had at least two NCOs who were gay. Both were outstanding airmen, and I saw no reason to “out” them. What they did during their off-duty time wasn’t my concern—as long as it didn’t impact the readiness, morale and discipline of the unit. The gay NCOs who worked for me understood that and conducted themselves accordingly.
But yesterday’s ruling isn’t for those individuals. It’s aimed at the gay activist community, who want to use the military as a social experiment and advance their own agenda.
Panties, g-strings?
“Damn, fella, don’t anybody in your family like girls?”
“Yeah — my sister!”
Grouped By Vote Position
| YEAs ---65 | ||
| Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Begich (D-AK) Bennet (D-CO) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Brown (R-MA) Burr (R-NC) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Coons (D-DE) Dodd (D-CT) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Ensign (R-NV) Feingold (D-WI) |
Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Hagan (D-NC) Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Kirk (R-IL) Klobuchar (D-MN) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (ID-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murkowski (R-AK) |
Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (D-PA) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (D-VA) Webb (D-VA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) |
| NAYs ---31 | ||
| Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) |
DeMint (R-SC) Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Kyl (R-AZ) LeMieux (R-FL) Lugar (R-IN) |
McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Wicker (R-MS) |
| Not Voting - 4 | ||
| Bunning (R-KY) Gregg (R-NH) |
Hatch (R-UT) Manchin (D-WV) |
|
Snowe, Ensign, Brown, Ensign and Hatch are up in 2012.
Collins is up in 2014.
Burr is not up till 2016 (he thinks we'll forget)
It's been done. I remember my shock at learning that actor Robert Reed, dad on the Brady bunch, had died of AIDS. He had a marriage in his past and a grown daughter. Directer Tony Richardson, academy award for film Tom Jones, had three daughters by two woman and also died of AIDS.
“Want to bet NO ONE will be asking but a whole loy of drama queens will be TELLING. The quavering lip Lieutenant obviously had an enlisted “confidante””
The new Army.......Pederists and catamites.
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.