Discharged for being gay, veterans face problems in re-enlisting

• Con_Alma

  isadore;1039074 wrote:Of course you are, people consider state sanctioned marriage a basic right and you want to deny it to them. If it was 1955 Birmingham Alabama and a black man wanted to use the white public restroom, you would be arguing the government just should not provide restrooms for anyone, we should all provide our own.

  What people consider doesn't make it legally so.
  
  It's not birmingham and it's not 1955
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1038300 wrote:It is not necessary and that isn't the righ twe are discussion. Benefits are not rights but rather "benefits" that I should be available to all people who we as a society aggree to make them available to. The are not rights, however. Those benefits can be made available with a simple power of attorney or affidavit.
  
  There is no need to havethe State grant permission to be married.

  We as a society consider state sanctioned marriage a positive and something to be rewarded. It helps our society so we provide it with benefits.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1039100 wrote:We as a society consider state sanctioned marriage a positive and something to be rewarded. It helps our society so we provide it with benefits.

  That's great. We are also a society of laws. Provdse those benefits to all people without making them get permission with regard to whom they must be in a relationship with to gain them.
  
  There's no reason for the State to sanction a relationship for people to be married.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1039089 wrote:What people consider doesn't make it legally so.
  
  It's not birmingham and it's not 1955

  Pretty much the same, some states rights or libertarian type, claiming to be for freedom while helping to deprive someone of a basic right. Here on the thread its your attempt to deny gays the right to state sanctioned marriage by claiming to want to abolish civil marriage.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1039105 wrote:That's great. We are also a society of laws. Provdse those benefits to all people without making them get permission with regard to whom they must be in a relationship with to gain them.
  
  There's no reason for the State to sanction a relationship for people to be married.

  It is a right that people want. The state sanctioned marriage is a positive for society and the couple should be rewarded and reenforced. Not all relationships should be sanctioned or rewarded such as between an incestous couple or group.
• dwccrew

  

  isadore;1039100 wrote:We as a society consider state sanctioned marriage a positive and something to be rewarded. It helps our society so we provide it with benefits.

  isadore;1039130 wrote:It is a right that people want. The state sanctioned marriage is a positive for society and the couple should be rewarded and reenforced. Not all relationships should be sanctioned or rewarded such as between an incestous couple or group.

  How is state sactioned marriage a positive for society? Would it be negative if people didn't get state sanctioned marriage? I am curious as to why you feel it benefits society to have the state sanction marriages.
• I Wear Pants

  isadore;1039130 wrote:It is a right that people want. The state sanctioned marriage is a positive for society and the couple should be rewarded and reenforced. Not all relationships should be sanctioned or rewarded such as between an incestous couple or group.

  How is state sanctioned marriage a positive? Does the government saying "okay you guys love each other" make anything better?
  
  I think gay marriage should definitely be legal if the state is going to have a hand in marriage. But I don't see why it does.
• Gblock

  I Wear Pants;1039346 wrote:How is state sanctioned marriage a positive? Does the government saying "okay you guys love each other" make anything better?
  
  I think gay marriage should definitely be legal if the state is going to have a hand in marriage. But I don't see why it does.

  it certainly helps with taxes...since getting divorced my tax rate damn near doubled...thats bs..you shouldnt get hosed in taxes just because you arent married or don't have kids...we wonder why people keep having too many kids.
• I Wear Pants

  Gblock;1039379 wrote:it certainly helps with taxes...since getting divorced my tax rate damn near doubled...thats bs..you shouldnt get hosed in taxes just because you arent married or don't have kids...we wonder why people keep having too many kids.

  Exactly why state sanctioned marriage is stupid.
• Con_Alma

  I Wear Pants;1039455 wrote:Exactly why state sanctioned marriage is stupid.

  ...along with many more reasons.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  isadore is a thread destroyer
• isadore

  dwccrew;1039268 wrote:How is state sactioned marriage a positive for society? Would it be negative if people didn't get state sanctioned marriage? I am curious as to why you feel it benefits society to have the state sanction marriages.

  Personally I think state sanction for marriage is a positive at a time when a sense of personal selfishness is disintegrating our society. The idea of always these personal contracts is pie in the sky at best and much more likely a major step for the further dissolution of the family. Society is best served by stable families for the sake of the children and for the sake of the partners. Civil marriage is not the reason for the increasing dissolution of the family but a break against it. Gay couples want this protection and should have it. State sanctioned marriage is a right, as police protection is a right, as the right to the protection of a common defense and protection of the general welfare is a right. And the requirement to register for this right is as basic as is the right to register to vote.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1039508 wrote:...along with many more reasons.

  are you one of the many libertarians who want to do away with the age of consent.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1039684 wrote:are you one of the many libertarians who want to do away with the age of consent.

  Not completely. The age of consent[LEFT] doesn't respect the clear differences in young people's development, and as such 'punishes' the fast developers in order to protect the slow developing.
  [/LEFT]
  Until there's a clear and accurate means of discerning the ability of a young adult to care for and not harm themselves, I think we have an obligation to maintain the age of consent.
  
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1039683 wrote:Personally I think state sanction for marriage is a positive at a time when a sense of personal selfishness is disintegrating our society. The idea of always these personal contracts is pie in the sky at best and much more likely a major step for the further dissolution of the family. Society is best served by stable families for the sake of the children and for the sake of the partners. Civil marriage is not the reason for the increasing dissolution of the family but a break against it. Gay couples want this protection and should have it. State sanctioned marriage is a right, as police protection is a right, as the right to the protection of a common defense and protection of the general welfare is a right. And the requirement to register for this right is as basic as is the right to register to vote.

  Providing the opportunity without gaining permission from the State to have a relationship recognized and the benefits that may come with it doesn't weaken the family, it helps strengthen them for many people that currently don't have that opportunity.
  
  
  There is no need for State's to sanction marriages.
  More important, it is not for the government to act so that the family is strengthened or weakened. It is for us to act.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1039702 wrote:Providing the opportunity without gaining permission from the State to have a relationship recognized and the benefits that may come with it doesn't weaken the family, it helps strengthen them for many people that currently don't have that opportunity.
  
  
  There is no need for State's to sanction marriages.
  More important, it is not for the government to act so that the family is strengthened or weakened. It is for us to act.

  Government sanctioned marriage is a basic right. And if in the very unlikely event government sanctioned marriage was abolished, the same movement would given it hatred of government in all probability repeal any of the financial benefits that are provided for married couples.
  For you who are so opposed to government sanctioned marriage there are countries that do not have it.
  You should consider relocation to escape this oppressive state institution. Many came to America to escape what they considered to be oppression. So where would you be going on freedom pilgrimage. Well it wont the Netherlands, Sweden or any of the other enlightened social democracies, In fact in most European nations a civil marriage is required, with a religious ceremony afterward if desired. No where you could go to escape well you could go Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan only offers civil marriage for foreigners. Several Muslim nations have no civil marriage. If I felt the level of persecution you feel, I would be gone. You should consider it.
• brutus161

  

  I don't usually get involved in this discussion, but I will throw in my two cents.
  
  As a recruiter: I don't care if your gay, straight, bi, or you'll only do yourself. If you are qualified, and want to join, I'll help you enlist.
  
  As a military member: I don't care if your gay, straight, bi, or you'll only do yourself. Just do your job, so that no one has to pick up the slack for you. After work, you do what the hell you want to do (within the constraints of the law)
• I Wear Pants

  brutus161;1040574 wrote:I don't usually get involved in this discussion, but I will throw in my two cents.
  
  As a recruiter: I don't care if your gay, straight, bi, or you'll only do yourself. If you are qualified, and want to join, I'll help you enlist.
  
  As a military member: I don't care if your gay, straight, bi, or you'll only do yourself. Just do your job, so that no one has to pick up the slack for you. After work, you do what the hell you want to do (within the constraints of the law)

  And that's how it should be.
• isadore

  brutus161;1040574 wrote:I don't usually get involved in this discussion, but I will throw in my two cents.
  
  As a recruiter: I don't care if your gay, straight, bi, or you'll only do yourself. If you are qualified, and want to join, I'll help you enlist.
  
  As a military member: I don't care if your gay, straight, bi, or you'll only do yourself. Just do your job, so that no one has to pick up the slack for you. After work, you do what the hell you want to do (within the constraints of the law)

  Thank you for giving us another reason to admire the American military. Your statements are a set of values our country should reflect.
• Thinthickbigred

  FairwoodKing;884348 wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/05/us/05reenlist.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2
  
  Don't Ask Don't Tell was flat-out wrong. The veterans who were thrown out because of this should be able to re-enlist without any problems and at their former rank.

  If you pass your tests and everything serve . They allow all kinds of people in . Gang members get in and learn different techniques and warfare . Chit we have Alqida in our military
• Footwedge

  Sounds to me that the gay soldiers are as fukcing stupid as the straight soldiers. Why in the world would you want to re-enlist? After finding out that these interventions were nothing more that propoganda, lies and fear mongering?
• majorspark

  

  Footwedge;1067355 wrote:Sounds to me that the gay soldiers are as fukcing stupid as the straight soldiers. Why in the world would you want to re-enlist? After finding out that these interventions were nothing more that propoganda, lies and fear mongering?

  You should see the nice brochure the Marine Corps just sent my 16yr old kid in the mail. Propoganda 101. You would flip you lid. I will suggest to him that if he ever seeks political office that he jumps on the offer. Would not want him to be labeled a chickhawk when we need to kick ass.
• FairwoodKing

  I've been trying to post some other gay-related threads but the mods, in their infinite wisdumb, have not approved them. I'll try posting them here.
  
  The State of Washington where I live is about to allow gay marriage. The state house passed the measure today and the senate passed it a week ago. The governor has promised to sign it.
  
  Some Christian groups are already getting signatures on a petition to put the issue on the Novermber ballot. If things go as they always do, liberal Seattle and Tacoma will vote for gay marriage and conservative Eastern Washington will vote against. I will predict that the pro-gay-marriage people will prevail.