Alexander

[Fonnicker]

Soldiers that cannot uphold the standards of conduct as outlined in the UCMJ should be discharged from the service. This goes for any soldier whether they be male, female, gay, or straight.

[Kipruss]

My opinion of your point of view, Bluesman, changed with your continuing the myth that homosexuals chose their lifestyle. Why would anyone choose to be treated like a second class citizen by people like you? The intolerant appear to rule.

I stand by my statement that you should expect more of those trained to follow orders. If they can't follow that order how do you stop them shooting unarmed wounded soldiers...oh yes, you can't.

Shame, I thought we could have a civil argument.

[Bluesman]

My opinion of your point of view, Bluesman, changed with your continuing the myth that homosexuals chose their lifestyle. Why would anyone choose to be treated like a second class citizen by people like you? The intolerant appear to rule.

I stand by my statement that you should expect more of those trained to follow orders. If they can't follow that order how do you stop them shooting unarmed wounded soldiers...oh yes, you can't.

Shame, I thought we could have a civil argument.

Oh, relax. Nobody got uncivil, here. I mean, until you did.

Re-read what I wrote with a smile on your face and the edge out of your voice. I meant no offense, but if you can't seem to read it that way, well, you ended the discussion because you couldn't tolerate a different point-of-view, I suppose.

Once more - I didn't insult you. I disagreed with you. Not the same thing, unless you want to read it that way.

And I maintain that a homosexual person DOES choose his lifestyle. I believe, as I believe you do as well, that they DO NOT choose their orientation.
Your assertion in the quote above was to the contrary, and I'd like to know if you really believe it. I believe you misspoke, there. Because there is a difference, and in the matter of gays in military service, it is THE crucial matter on which the entire question hangs. It's not semantics, either. It matters. A lot.

Alright, back into it (if you care):
I'm not intolerant of gays and how they choose to live. Again, read what I wrote about the honorable service of gays serving without making a private matter into a matter of public concern. But openly-practicing homosexuals are incompatible with military service, in my opinion.

And I'm waiting for that report, Colonel Kipruss, on how we are going to house these gay troops of ours without causing an erosion of their effectiveness.

[porsteamboy]

Well, Kipruss, your bare minimum acceptable behavior is rather too low a bar to meet in a functioning military unit. 'Refraining from rape' is what I meant by 'behaving like a perfect gentleman' (as well as a helluva lot more) in the presence of females in various situations which would ordinarily be private.

And as far as equating military units functioning at some given level of performance, perhaps you'd grant me that strangers staying overnight in a mixed-gender sleeping room is some great length away from what we're talking about.

And I find your assigning the cure of more and better discipline to be naive in the extreme. People have risked death to have sex. The Royal Navy used to hang homosexuals, and it did not stop it. How much harsher can discipline bloody well get, and do you REALLY believe that telling 'em not to will stop healthy, overstressed individuals from doing what comes very, very naturally? They're not robots; you had better not expect them to be, and set your standard accordingly. They will fail that test. So would you and I.

No. That won't answer. As far as intengration of race is concerned, non-white troops are not barred by any practical consideration from serving alongside white troops. Gays and lesbians DO present unique problems. I know you don't recognize them as problems, but they are.

Keep in mind, also, that the military is not some kind of jobs program or a career any person has an entitlement to. We are not equal opportunity employers, and we discriminate on many different criteria. One's choice of lifestyle MAY be used to bar one from military service, and that shouldn't ever change, due to the nature of what is asked of military people. We are like no other segment of society, and if we were made to be...we would fail.

I want to know WHERE and WITH WHOM you would quarter the representative 5+% gay and a lesbian soldiers in your unit, Colonel Kipruss. The barracks assigned to you are adequate for lower enlisted to live three to a room, junior NCOs to have a single roommate, and senior NCOs will room singly. Officers will have a BOQ assigned to them, one to a room.

So, work out WHO goes WHERE, and report to me something that will not lead to a total destruction of your unit's effectiveness. You can find me in the bar at the O Club, figuring out what to tell the General caused your unit and mine to turn into Club Med.

In all due respect, I have to agree with Kipruss. Discipline and leadership are the key. The problem could be your over thinking the problem and a little to much time at the O Club.

[Bluesman]

Okay, fair enough. But nobody has yet to tackle the practical problem:

Who are they rooming with?

[Bill]

"In all due respect, I have to agree with Kipruss. Discipline and leadership are the key. The problem could be your over thinking the problem and a little to much time at the O Club."

Have you ever been in the military?

If not, your opinion on the matter is somewhat less than useful.

[Fury]

Personally, i think that men and women in the military should be completely segretated in same-sex units.

I dunno if this is just a rumor but in swedish army men and women share the same living quarters

My unit was the biggest bad-ass company in the whole brigade, we did everything twice as hard as everyone else. We didn't had any women in our unit

[porsteamboy]

"In all due respect, I have to agree with Kipruss. Discipline and leadership are the key. The problem could be your over thinking the problem and a little to much time at the O Club."

Have you ever been in the military?

If not, your opinion on the matter is somewhat less than useful.

Yeah, have you?

[porsteamboy]

Okay, fair enough. But nobody has yet to tackle the practical problem:

Who are they rooming with?

Master Sergeant, I have a question for you...do you know for a fact these people are gay?

[Bill]

" Yeah, have you?"

So it's rumored...

[Bluesman]

Master Sergeant, I have a question for you...do you know for a fact these people are gay?

Presumably, if they say they are.

See, we're talking about taking in OPENLY PRACTICING homosexuals.

Well, okay, Master Chief. Let's put the matter aborad the USS Rusty Bucket. We have both sexes embarked, every sexual orientation, and everybody knows everybody else's business, because that's how it is on a long cruise.

WHERE, oh, where, do we bunk 'em, Master Chief? Nobody wants to get into the practical matter, but it is a matter of practicality. So, for the last time of asking, HOW do we accomodate this swirlin' mass of sexuality and runnin'-amok hormones?

Discipline and leadership? What happens when anybody in the chain-of-command - anybody with any rank AT ALL - is having an illicit relationship? (Don't tell me it won't happen, because it is happening now. There's dam' little to be done about it except to wreck as many careers as knew about it.) What happens when the gay guy gets to room with another gay guy? Does that mean we can all pair up? If they bunk with the straights, can the straights bunk with the sex that they prefer, too? If a lesbian is acting in a manner 'offensive' to her straight berthmates, but has never harassed them in any way...what then?

This is a gordian knot. It is not absolutely imperative for the military to take practicing gays and lesbians for it to function well. If we DID take 'em, it would be for the single reason that they could serve their country AND continue their lifestyle, and that's not a good enough reason, because the primary beneficiary in each case would be the individual.

Before you go there, I know that the same arguments were made about minorities and women. But we need minorities and women, and accomodation can be made when required for mixed-gender units. Mixed-sexuality units, though...

I am still waiting for a practical way to house 'em. Figure it out, talk me into it, and then I'll concede the point that we need a corps of Pink Berets. ;)

[Bill]

Bluesmen this is such a common sense problem that it utterly amazes me that anyone- let alone a military man- would even argue it.

Openly gay soldiers are just bad for the military. Closet gay military soldiers are problem enough. Hell, straight young horny soldiers are problem enough.

[Bluesman]

Bluesmen this is such a common sense problem that it utterly amazes me that anyone- let alone a military man- would even argue it.

Openly gay soldiers are just bad. Closet gay military soldiers are problem enough. Hell, straight young horny soldiers are problem enough.

As a mid-level NCO, I guess my squadron commander thought I was high-speed enough to be made a Flight Commander, a job held by a senior NCO or an officer. (In fact, I had 60 people, and six of 'em out-ranked me - an intolerable situation. I tried to resign, as Flight Commander, and she wouldn't let me.) Anyway, Of all the personnel problems I had (and I had plenty), they all boiled down to TWO basic issues: it was either about SEX, or STOP/LOSS. Even junior troops having money problems usually had a root issue involving sex. Drunk Driving? Sex, somewhere in the story. Failure to make formation on time? Sex.

How much more complicated can we make this without paying a price that the country can't afford, merely so individuals can pursue a military career AND their lifestyle? I would make 'em choose between the two, just like we do now.

Now, here's the thing: I am absolutely certain that I had one or two gays in my flight. Absolutely certain, although I chose not to take any official notice of what I did not have to. That is not an integrity violation, it's just thinking like a lawyer: "Can I prove it in a court? NO. Alright, then, this airman has done nothing detrimental to good order and discipline. But if he - or anybody else - does..."

It's got to be one or the other.

I have a SIGINT story as to the cost of permitting gays into the military, too, but I can't share it here.

[Bill]

The socail experimenters don't give a shiit about the effectiveness of the military, they only want to advance their political agenda.

[porsteamboy]

Presumably, if they say they are.

See, we're talking about taking in OPENLY PRACTICING homosexuals.

Well, okay, Master Chief. Let's put the matter aborad the USS Rusty Bucket. We have both sexes embarked, every sexual orientation, and everybody knows everybody else's business, because that's how it is on a long cruise.

WHERE, oh, where, do we bunk 'em, Master Chief? Nobody wants to get into the practical matter, but it is a matter of practicality. So, for the last time of asking, HOW do we accomodate this swirlin' mass of sexuality and runnin'-amok hormones?

Discipline and leadership? What happens when anybody in the chain-of-command - anybody with any rank AT ALL - is having an illicit relationship? (Don't tell me it won't happen, because it is happening now. There's dam' little to be done about it except to wreck as many careers as knew about it.) What happens when the gay guy gets to room with another gay guy? Does that mean we can all pair up? If they bunk with the straights, can the straights bunk with the sex that they prefer, too? If a lesbian is acting in a manner 'offensive' to her straight berthmates, but has never harassed them in any way...what then?

This is a gordian knot. It is not absolutely imperative for the military to take practicing gays and lesbians for it to function well. If we DID take 'em, it would be for the single reason that they could serve their country AND continue their lifestyle, and that's not a good enough reason, because the primary beneficiary in each case would be the individual.

Before you go there, I know that the same arguments were made about minorities and women. But we need minorities and women, and accomodation can be made when required for mixed-gender units. Mixed-sexuality units, though...

I am still waiting for a practical way to house 'em. Figure it out, talk me into it, and then I'll concede the point that we need a corps of Pink Berets. ;)

Master sergeant, I retired in 1985 and I'm still trying to get over women on ships! The reason I retired was , I had orders to a Destroyer Tender as Command Master chief, 60% women and a women XO. I saw the writing on the wall and I said then, that women on ships would blow a giant hole in the argument against gays in the military. So I transfered to Civlant. There is no practical way to house the openly gay by sexual orientation, nor should there be. If the military desides to accept openly gay they'll have to strike Article 125 of the UCMJ, and adopt a comrehensive criminal sexual conduct statue. once in place, kick ass and take names! Hey, If I have to go without leg on a 6 or 8 month deployment, so do they and I'll do everything in my power to make that happen! Gay life style, lets try military life style, I didn't join the military, to persue my civilian life style! What time did you say the club opened, I need a drink!