Don't Ask, Don't Tell
-
cbus4lifeFrom what i've seen, the top brass seem to say yes, the senators on the Armed Forces Committee seem to say no.
What do you think? -
derek bomar
Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve -
2quik4u
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve -
LJ
Honestly, the policy should be "Don't ask, don't tell, don't care"
Your sexual preference makes no difference to how you can fight. When you get hired for a job they don't ask your sexual preference, but they don't fire you if they find out you are gay. -
queencitybuckeye
Exactly what I thought. Who cares?LJ wrote: Honestly, the policy should be "Don't ask, don't tell, don't care"
To the vast majority of the homophobes here, I would point out that just as women as a group don't find you attractive, neither do gay men. You have nothing to worry about. -
IggyPride00
I would keep the spirit of it alive, but I don't think if someone is found out to be gay that they should be fired if they aren't bringing it into the workplace. -
Swamp FoxBill Murray said it the best. "It just doesn't matter!"
-
Ytowngirlinfla
It shouldn't matter at all, everyone knows typically who's gay and who's not. Most people don't care at all. I don't believe you should ever be kicked out for it. -
derek bomar
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve -
LJ
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve -
derek bomar
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then -
LJ
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then -
derek bomar
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
LJ
I already told you I don't agree with your logic, so stop trying to explain yourself to me.derek bomar wrote:
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
Glory Days
what about straight guys who dont like big ole titties but would lie to feel like part of the group?derek bomar wrote:
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
derek bomar
and I don't agree with your disagreement...bottom line is gays can't openly serve. Can't really see how you can think not being able to be open is somehow not lying, but whatever broLJ wrote:
I already told you I don't agree with your logic, so stop trying to explain yourself to me.derek bomar wrote:
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
derek bomar
he wouldn't have to lie, he could say I like small titties, or medium titties, etc...the gay guy has to lie in order to stay.Glory Days wrote:
what about straight guys who dont like big ole titties but would lie to feel like part of the group?derek bomar wrote:
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
LJ
So not being openly hetero is lying too? I honestly don't believe any sexual preference should be allowed to "openly" serve. It's of no consequence on being able to perform their duties, therefore should not be discussed or of anyone's concern.derek bomar wrote:
and I don't agree with your disagreement...bottom line is gays can't openly serve. Can't really see how you can think not being able to be open is somehow not lying, but whatever bro -
Glory Days
and the gay guy could say "no, i dont like big titties". where is the lie there?derek bomar wrote:
he wouldn't have to lie, he could say I like small titties, or medium titties, etc...the gay guy has to lie in order to stay.Glory Days wrote:
what about straight guys who dont like big ole titties but would lie to feel like part of the group?derek bomar wrote:
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
derek bomar
lol...he is lying. That's the point.Glory Days wrote:
and the gay guy could say "no, i dont like big titties". where is the lie there?derek bomar wrote:
he wouldn't have to lie, he could say I like small titties, or medium titties, etc...the gay guy has to lie in order to stay.Glory Days wrote:
what about straight guys who dont like big ole titties but would lie to feel like part of the group?derek bomar wrote:
I don't think you get what I'm saying...LJ wrote:
While I agree that it should be "don't ask, don't tell, don't care" I just don't agree with that logic at all. Also, nobody can ask.derek bomar wrote:
They're going into an arrangement where they know ahead of time if they admit something truthful about themselves if ever asked, or tell someone off the cuff something truthful about themselves, they won't be allowed to serve. I just don't see the fact that just because somebody doesn't ask you something, it's not lying that you didn't tell them.LJ wrote:
That just don't make any sense. How can they be untruthful if you aren't allowed to ask?derek bomar wrote:
not if they are truthful2quik4u wrote:
they do servederek bomar wrote: Boggles my mind why you wouldn't let them serve
It's a lie of omission in my book. And I would venture to guess most if not all are asked in some form by their buddies or higher ups in a social setting, i.e. talking about all the girls back home or what not... and they'd be forced to lie then
say you're gay and me and I'm your buddy in the service and we're out for beers one night and we start shooting the shit.
"say LJ, look at the broad over there...big ole titties huh?..."
you get the general direction where that convo would head. Just because you can't "ask" if someone's gay doesn't mean you can't talk to each other like a guy, and in some cases a gay dude would either be forced to lie, say nothing, or be honest. One instance he's outright lying, one he's lying by omission, and the third he's gettin booted out of the service... -
derek bomar
In a perfect world, sexual preference shouldn't matter. But since there is a policy of not allowing gays to openly serve, being openly gay causes you to be discharged...you're looking at things as if they happen in a perfect world where people don't talk about things like sex and relationships, but they do. So when that happens, the gays are forced to lie, and the straights don't have to.LJ wrote:
So not being openly hetero is lying too? I honestly don't believe any sexual preference should be allowed to "openly" serve. It's of no consequence on being able to perform their duties, therefore should not be discussed or of anyone's concern.derek bomar wrote:
and I don't agree with your disagreement...bottom line is gays can't openly serve. Can't really see how you can think not being able to be open is somehow not lying, but whatever bro -
cbus4lifeMullen should be praised for his comments, as should SecDef Gates.
"No matter how I look at the issue," Mullen said, "I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens." Noting that he was speaking for himself and not for the other service chiefs, Mullen added: "For me, it comes down to integrity — theirs as individuals and ours as an institution."
So nice to hear him talk about "integrity" in regards to this issue. Really impressed by the way he handled himself in fron of the Armed Services Committee. -
LJ
Well excuse me for wanting a policy that makes sense enacted. I just think it's funny that you refuse to acknowledge the heterosexual people who are "lying by omission" when not stating their sexual preference one way or another.derek bomar wrote:
In a perfect world, sexual preference shouldn't matter. But since there is a policy of not allowing gays to openly serve, being openly gay causes you to be discharged...you're looking at things as if they happen in a perfect world where people don't talk about things like sex and relationships, but they do. So when that happens, the gays are forced to lie, and the straights don't have to.LJ wrote:
So not being openly hetero is lying too? I honestly don't believe any sexual preference should be allowed to "openly" serve. It's of no consequence on being able to perform their duties, therefore should not be discussed or of anyone's concern.derek bomar wrote:
and I don't agree with your disagreement...bottom line is gays can't openly serve. Can't really see how you can think not being able to be open is somehow not lying, but whatever bro -
derek bomar
It doesn't matter if straights lie by omission or not, since there job doesn't depend on it and there's not a policy prohibiting them from being honest about something.
There shouldn't be a policy on sexual policy at all, but the current one we have forces one set to lie in order to keep their job and doesn't force that same stipulation on the other set of people... -
majorspark
If a straight soldier is banging someone else's wife or if he is married and is banging somone else, he could lose his job. The military just decides which sexual practices get discliplined.derek bomar wrote: It doesn't matter if straights lie by omission or not, since there job doesn't depend on it and there's not a policy prohibiting them from being honest about something.
There shouldn't be a policy on sexual policy at all, but the current one we have forces one set to lie in order to keep their job and doesn't force that same stipulation on the other set of people...