In comments to this post on the DADT repeal, Bushwack says:
Seriously the DADT issue is so stupid it hurts...First off and this is really the pisser, why is it so important for the gay folks to be "Openly GAY? should we now start being "Openly Heterosexual" Should we start wearing shirts that label us by our sexual desires?
I don't give a damn if your gay or not gay, but I find it ridiculous that a sexual preference is how you wish to be known...
Also I worry about the next step. The gay agenda, much like every lefty issue is never satisfied. The new cry will be "I was reprimanded because I am gay" the new cause will be there needs to be a quota of gays in each unit. (These are just possible not saying it's going to happen) then there's the morale issue with some, say it's 10% of Marines who have a serious issue with it, that's a lot of soldiers that are now going to branded as Homophobes by their own as they are fighting to protect them.. This, again I say shouldn't even be a damn issue....BE gay, have fun but keep what you do in private private.
Where to start? How about:
The issue of being "openly heterosexual." Seriously? All heterosexuals are openly heterosexual. We're by far the dominant sexuality, so we don't even think about it.
I was a submariner's wife in a past life. When the Boise was deployed, the FSG sold raffle tickets to determine who'd get First Kiss. It wasn't called that on accident, you know. In fact, the Boise just got back from another deployment. With apologies for the "play" symbol in the middle ('cause I suck at trying to get clear thumbnails of videos):
Here's another flagrant display of sexual orientation:
Straight folks just don't hide it.
As for the t-shirt issue...Plenty of dudes do, in fact, declare their sexual orientation in that manner. To wit:
And that's just from one site. (I love you, t-shirt hell.)
Hell, I have it on very good authority that, at one time, the entire TM division on the Boise knew my bra size.
So yeah, you can say you want gays back in the closet. But don't pretend that straights are circumspect. 'Cause, well, we're not. And gays aren't any more out there than we are. Even in their own territory, they aren't in your face about being gay. I can rattle off a whole list of gay-owned businesses here in San Antonio. I can tell you who on Mary Alice Cisneros's staff is gay. I know homosexual lawyers, homosexual bartenders, homosexual social workers, homosexual waiters, homosexual business owners, and at least one homosexual loan officer. NONE of these men are in the closet, but if you talked to them while they were on the job, you wouldn't know they were gay.
It is ridiculous to think that gays who are openly homosexual are any more demonstrative of their sexuality than heterosexuals are. And you know what? That's not what this is about, anyway. That's not what the functional change of DADT's repeal will be. When I was married the first time, I was able to go onto the pier and welcome my husband home. Why in the living hell should gays not be able to go welcome their sailors home too, without fear of ending his career? Why shouldn't homosexual military members be able to carry a picture of their partner just the way heterosexual military members can? THAT is how the repeal will manifest itself.
Also, as usual, Skippy has the perfect take on the issue:
I support the repeal because I know that being gay isn’t the same thing as being a leering, perverted rapist.Really, read the whole thing. You'll be glad you did.
I support the repeal because I know that the sphincters of uptight open bigots are not as irresistibly desirable to homosexuals as many people are afraid of.
I support the repeal because I have known many fine soldiers, airmen, seamen and marines who were gay. After they had been kicked out.
I support the repeal because I have served with several fine soldiers who were functionally out of the closet, to no ill effect. (I’m looking in your direction Mr. “Don’t Ask” vanity plate.)
I support the repeal because I served with a man who, for the sake of his own career denied his true orientation to me despite being a good friend, even though he wasn’t fooling anyone.
8 comments:
Okay you took one part of my comment and made a good point. However you failed to address the other points about the next step? Do you honestly believe that the "Gay agenda is now appeased and will quietly slip away? Do you not think there will be serious next steps?
And since the gay agenda seems to have got you all warm and fuzzy, lets take a look at "Openly Gay" unfettered... I can post pics from Frisco that would turn your gut, that's totally acceptable in the streets out there.
I guess you didn't see the part where I said be as gay as you want. I am not running around trying to convince gays not be gay, I am not flaunting my heterosexual desires on shirts or in public. I don't go around hating gays either. I just think our nation has MANY Bigger problems than who is doing what to whom in what hole ... Maybe it's just me but again why is a sexual desire grounds for a label? I like big boobs, round butts and long haired females should that be how I'm addressed? That;s what the gays are telling us to do, acknowledge their sexual desires and accept it as their tag line... Oh well, I guess the Romans were cool with it too...Have a blast.
One more thing: You should check this out From Kevin Jackson
That's my point exactly. It's not that I care one way or the other I think it's a dumb issue. I also think it's not so much for "Openly gay" as it is for OPENLY ANTI-GAY's"
Since there are laws regarding hate crimes and speech again I see this DADT issue as a waste of time.
Gotta laugh at all those macho guys who don't know they've been serving side-by-side with gays, and don't realize that they already love them like brothers. DADT should be viewed as a transitional phase, and it's time to put the whole business to rest. Non-issue, just like race, just like gender. Dudes's, get the hell over it already. We have work to do.
There is no gay agenda. I've been a fruit fly pretty much my whole life, and trust me they'd have let me in on the world domination plans by now. Mainly because I like to poke things with sticks.
The repeal of DADT does not give gays any special rights. It merely restores to them the exact same rights that their heterosexual brothers-in-arms have always had. The military has long recognized the importance of loved ones for morale purposes. Allowing homosexuals to serve openly merely lets them partake of that.
I just think our nation has MANY Bigger problems than who is doing what to whom in what hole
All the more reason for DADT to not exist. There are many fine soldiers/sailors/airmen/Marines who have been kicked out of the military because of whom they prefer to screw, and many more who never joined because they didn't want to be forcibly shoved in the closet. DADT's repeal hopefully solves that problem.
Since there are laws regarding hate crimes and speech again I see this DADT issue as a waste of time.
Except for the fact that under DADT, none of that applied to gay people, I'd agree with you.
The fears expressed over the repeal of DADT simply don't make sense. Integrating the military didn't lead to special rights for black servicemembers. Allowing women to serve alongside men didn't lead to any more sexual stupidity than there was before, though it arguably made it easier. To expect that suddenly not being able to kick a lesbian out of the Army when she brings her girlfriend to the command picnic will equal a demand for more lesbians in the command structure is wholly illogical.
Do you honestly believe that the "Gay agenda is now appeased and will quietly slip away? Do you not think there will be serious next steps?
Forgive me, but I must answer your questions with a question: does that mean we should let an unjust law stand, because of fear the pendulum will swing to far the other direction? Or, maybe another way to ask the question would be, how did you feel about the Washington, D.C. gun ban?
Do tell.
tweaker
Bushwack, I'm with Sabra. What "gay agenda?" Do all of your gay friends have the exact same political views? Mine don't. If you're basing your opinions on the "agendas" of a few narrow radicals, don't waste your time. There are radicals of every ilk, and those with small minds are a small minority. The military (and the rest of the country) is never going to give "special rights" to gays; there is simply no reason for gays to be denied the SAME rights as everyone else. Is there?
Or, maybe another way to ask the question would be, how did you feel about the Washington, D.C. gun ban?
Mm, the answer to THAT question is going to be quite illuminating. I have a feeling I know what it's going to be, though.
The most annoying thing about this whole DADT argument is that the gay guys have always been there. And I guarantee you the people they are serving/living with KNOW they are gay.
When I was in the Navy from 1993-2002, we had a guy on the boat that was known to be gay. On a submarine, or I'm guessing an Army or Marine Platoon, there ARE no secrets(much like you said everyone in the TM Division knew your bra size).
The only people that couldn't OFFICIALLY know where the Chief of the Boat, the XO or the CO.
Never once did I catch the guy staring at me too long in the shower room, or see him act any more gay than 90% of the guys on the boat. He did his job, and did it good, and played a good game of cribbage.
Nothing else really mattered to the people he was serving with. we trusted him to do the right thing if the Schumer hit the fan, and that was the end of the story.
If he is still in the Navy, I am happy for him...it must have been lame having to go to the boat Holiday Party and Picnic alone, while all those Openly Hetro Heathens engaged in PDA's in front of him.
Post a Comment