Political & Elections

longprime · Guru

DADT about to disappear

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

One is not necessarily prejudiced because they do not want to view open homosexuality.

Among the "open homosexuality" prohibited by DADT was mentioning a same-sex partner or spouse, in the same casual way that heterosexuals mention their boyfriend, girlfriend, husband or wife: Jack and I were shopping for a couch; Sue and I went to the see the new movie yesterday; We're trying to decide whether to go to Jose's parents or mine for Thanksgiving; Yeah, that's a picture of Alan, we've been together for since high school; Little Jessica said, "Dad, can you fix my hair," but I told her, "Honey, go ask your other dad, he's better with braids."

The military rightly has regulations against PDAs. But heterosexuals have always been allowed public displays of a relationship; homosexuals have not. If a person doesn't want to see public and open display of a relationship between two gays, that's prejudiced.

Wildwood · In exile

Okay. I take it back. I'm generalizing to "most kids" based on my daughters' school (they attended an American school in a country where gay marriage is legal) and based on how frequent and naturally it is portrayed on so many tv shows popular with youth. And, of course, the polls that show the marked correlation between youth and tolerance.

Maybe there are many areas of the U.S. where homophobia is still prevalent among kids, but you can't doubt that the difference between the situation 20 years ago and the present is hugely changed--and hopefully another 20 years from now attitudes that distinguish between the appropriateness of public affection between gays and straights will have almost disappeared.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

CelticClan07 wrote:

One is not necessarily prejudiced because they do not want to view open homosexuality. And I disagree, we live in a very deep blue progressive area, and I would not say even the kids here think 'nothing' of open homosexuality. Be careful there with that broad brush of yours.

Now that DADT has been repealed, I hope to see recruiting stations with lines of people around the block. The military needs good people, willing to serve our country to help take the stress off the system.

There are some people who are opposed to PDA of any kind, gay or straight. I suppose people are just guilty of being uptight than prejudiced.

But if you believe that homosexuals, unlike heterosexuals, should be more mindful of being overt with their sexuality, then yes, you are being prejudiced.

busdriver11 · Guru

John McCain is only about himself, and his stance on anything is really not worth even considering. He is merely a self absorbed politician, going whichever way the winds blow to get himself re-elected.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Most kids today think nothing of open homosexuality and while there are still pockets of predjudice, in another generation this whole debate will seem archaic and silly.

I strongly, STRONGLY disagree with you. While homosexuality is much more accepted in my generation and that just below me, it is just plain wrong to say that "most kids" think nothing of open homosexuality. My residential college at my U is VERY far left wing and we think nothing of open homosexuality, but then again we are FAR left wing. Homosexuality is still met with a lot of resistance, even by kids... just look at all the young suicides in the news.

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

One is not necessarily prejudiced because they do not want to view open homosexuality. And I disagree, we live in a very deep blue progressive area, and I would not say even the kids here think 'nothing' of open homosexuality. Be careful there with that broad brush of yours.

Now that DADT has been repealed, I hope to see recruiting stations with lines of people around the block. The military needs good people, willing to serve our country to help take the stress off the system.

Wildwood · In exile

President Clinton got a lot of crap from both the left and the right about DADT.

No one seems to see it as an important intermediate step in the journey from active oppression to equality.

"We MUST do everything AT ONCE or we aren't a fair and just people".

Evolution not revolution works best with societal mores and social customs.

I always tell my kids that it's amazing how quickly society has evolved on this issue. Remember the Roseanne kiss with Mariel Hemingway in a 1994 that caused such controversy? That episode was titled "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". Nowadays, it is perfectly natural to have gay romance and sex featured in many popular T.V. shows. I couldn't help thinking about this once again with the wonderfully sweet number in the last Episode of Glee with Kurt and his gay crush (Let it Snow duet). Most kids today think nothing of open homosexuality and while there are still pockets of predjudice, in another generation this whole debate will seem archaic and silly.

-- Edited by Wildwood on Tuesday 21st of December 2010 07:15:11 PM

BigG · Guru

President Clinton got a lot of crap from both the left and the right about DADT.

No one seems to see it as an important intermediate step in the journey from active oppression to equality.

"We MUST do everything AT ONCE or we aren't a fair and just people".

Evolution not revolution works best with societal mores and social customs.

I can walk around the world, just not today.

When President Truman integrated the military, there had been a history of honorable and significant service on the part of African -Americans in segregated units. The "conceptual leap" to integrated sevice was not that great despite "poll" results.

DADT gave gays a path to establishing themselves as valuable members of the military.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Poetsheart wrote:

Once again, John McCain shamefully positions himself on the wrong side of history. A few years ago, he admitted that his opposition to the institution of Martin Luther King Day as a national holiday had been wrong. Will he live long enough to recognize and admit that his vehement opposition to the repeal of DADT was equally wrong?

Quote:
Good Lord - can you imagine if they had taken a poll when they decided to integrate? allow females into service academies? allow females on ships? /quote

They actually did conduct a poll prior to Truman's decision to end racial segregation of the armed forces. A march 1948 poll found that 63% of military personel objected to the integration of military troops. General Omar Bradley argued that the mixing of black and white soldiers would "destroy the Army."

Nevetheless, in July 1948, a few months prior to the Presidential election, President Truman signed Executive Order 9981 into law, entirely by-passing the guaranteed filibuster of a Congressional bill to that effect by Dixiecrats and other social conservatives. This order declared that "There shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services, without regard to race, color, religion or national origin." It also declared it a violation of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) for military personel to issue racist statments or remarks.

History has born out the success of that decision, despite the dire predictions of Gen. Bradley, and the segregationists. Undoubtedly, the repeal of DADT will follow suit, thereby once again shaming the likes of Sen. McCain and other social conservatives.

It's often been asked why President Obama did not use his position as Commander-in-Chief to issue an executive order, repealing DADT, as Truman did to end segretation of the armed services. Indeed, one might also ask why President Clinton acquiesced to social, congressional and military pressure, and instituted DADT, instead of using the authority inherent in his role as CIC to do the right thing by the gay and lesbian troops of the armed services. These are both interesting questions whose answers are undoubtedly complicated. What do you think those answers might be?

-- Edited by Poetsheart on Monday 20th of December 2010 09:35:43 PM

The obvious answer to the question in your last paragraph is that gays are nowhere near the political force that blacks are. In addition, racial segregation and DADT are not quite comparable since to some degree, a gay soldier could've "passed" for a straight soldier whereas a black soldier can't pass for a white soldier.

That being said, I believe Obama did the right thing since the hyper-sensitive right would undoubtedly have decried "activist executive branch!" for at least a generation if Obama signed an executive order. It would've been one more bullet point in their case for the plight of America's most persecuted group: straight white Christian males.

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Once again, John McCain shamefully positions himself on the wrong side of history. A few years ago, he admitted that his opposition to the institution of Martin Luther King Day as a national holiday had been wrong. Will he live long enough to recognize and admit that his vehement opposition to the repeal of DADT was equally wrong?

Quote:
Good Lord - can you imagine if they had taken a poll when they decided to integrate? allow females into service academies? allow females on ships? /quote

They actually did conduct a poll prior to Truman's decision to end racial segregation of the armed forces. A march 1948 poll found that 63% of military personel objected to the integration of military troops. General Omar Bradley argued that the mixing of black and white soldiers would "destroy the Army."

Nevetheless, in July 1948, a few months prior to the Presidential election, President Truman signed Executive Order 9981 into law, entirely by-passing the guaranteed filibuster of a Congressional bill to that effect by Dixiecrats and other social conservatives. This order declared that "There shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services, without regard to race, color, religion or national origin." It also declared it a violation of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) for military personel to issue racist statments or remarks.

History has born out the success of that decision, despite the dire predictions of Gen. Bradley, and the segregationists. Undoubtedly, the repeal of DADT will follow suit, thereby once again shaming the likes of Sen. McCain and other social conservatives.

It's often been asked why President Obama did not use his position as Commander-in-Chief to issue an executive order, repealing DADT, as Truman did to end segretation of the armed services. Indeed, one might also ask why President Clinton acquiesced to social, congressional and military pressure, and instituted DADT, instead of using the authority inherent in his role as CIC to do the right thing by the gay and lesbian troops of the armed services. These are both interesting questions whose answers are undoubtedly complicated. What do you think those answers might be?

-- Edited by Poetsheart on Monday 20th of December 2010 09:35:43 PM

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

Now the Bitter Old Men Brigade of McCain and Graham are threatening to delay START as "payback" for DADT.

Really? You're going to take the welfare of the world hostage because a policy that the military and American public overwhelmingly wanted to end did indeed end against your own impotent prejudice?

The new START is supported by the likes of Gen. Powell and Pres. H.W. Bush. Obama has all the leverage to nail these stupid Republicans for being as pointlessly partisan as it gets.

-- Edited by nbachris2788 on Monday 20th of December 2010 05:46:56 PM

BigG · Guru

The attribution of John Edwards' odiousness to all politicians is the beginning of wisdom.

"But our guy/gal is different, they stand for truth, justice and the American way!!!"

I don't care what they stand for, I don't care what they believe, I don't care who they sleep with (except NO pedos). I am only interested in RESULTS!!! Fix the dam economy or get out of the way!!!

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

I was about to be smug about those people hookwinked by McCain when I remembered I was bamboozled by the odious John (Dead to Me) Edwards.

justamomof4 · Veteran Member

John McCain - his true colors showed through. I don't think he was ever pro-repeal of DADT. He could 'support' it because he honestly thought it stall and die. It's easy to support something with no chance of passing. I am embarrassed to say I actually voted for him.

As soon as bits of the report was leaked he claimed he needed more information. Him calling for a poll of all military servicepeople was seriously out of line. Those who serve don't make the rules - they follow them.
Good Lord - can you imagine if they had taken a poll when they decided to integrate? allow females into service academies? allow females on ships?
His entire temper tantrum was bad form. Invoking the name and opinions of his son Jimmy (an enlisted Marine) was equally bad form.

There are already plenty of distractions to our troops. They serve deployment after deployment some with nary a break. Is he sympathetic to the hardships of a servicemember who has served 8 of the last 10 years on deployment or training for deployment? Is he sympathetic to the servicemen and women who have served 4 or 5 (or more) deployments in a war zone? I just have not seen that sympathy of distraction out of him.

Cartera · Guru

I think there is more evidence that McCain is not such a good man, but I think there are some very flawed men who can be great politicians. McCain seems even more wishy washy in his positions than most. His goal is to be contrary to whomever he doesn't like at the moment. He enjoyed being a thorn in George Bush's side - no doubt because of the things done to him in the election. However, now that Obama is President, he is happy to reverse his stand as long as he can stick it to Obama. Perhaps he was never a maverick at all but just lacked conviction. Now he just looks like a fool.

BTW - if he is saying that the the soldiers lost their limbs because they were distracted, then he needs to tell us by what. He can't blame gay soldiers for those. I guess that, like the location of Bin Ladin, is another little secret of his.

-- Edited by Cartera on Monday 20th of December 2010 08:51:22 AM

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

I have always thought John McCain was a good man.

That said, he wasn't on my list of top choices to be the Presidential candidate for my party.

I supported him, but was not thrilled, like so many other in my party, that his opinions weren't always consistent. He took the maverick label to heart, which I don't think is always a positive if people hear you say one thing and you do another thing, instead.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

It's a shame. McCain's moderate positions like his support of the repeal of DADT was one of the reasons I was excited that he ran in 08 (I wasn't really a Hillary fan at the time). I was sorely disappointed to see how far he had fallen from being a free thinker and independent. It's a shame really. (I applaud his wife and daughter though for sticking strong in things like the No H8 campaign though despite John's views...)

I will never understand politicians.

ETA:
Whoops, gotta pull my support from Cindy. Apparently she supports her husband's new stance on DADT. Um... what? Ma'am, you have repeatedly spoken out agains this dumb and dangerous policy.

I will never understand politicians OR their spouses.

-- Edited by romanigypsyeyes on Sunday 19th of December 2010 11:51:07 PM

Cartera · Guru

Yes, evidently McCain believes that gay soldiers go "Hey, look over there!" When a soldier is distracted and looks that way, the gay soldier cuts off all his limbs - all of them.

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

In 2006 McCain said when the leadership of the military came to him and said we should change DADT, then we should consider changing it. Then when the military leadership came to him and said we ought to change DADT, he still demurred, saying we needed to figure out what effect the change would have on military effectiveness and preparedness. Then when the military said, OK, we've figured out that we'll still be fine with military effectiveness and preparedness, McCain still opposed the change.

McCain's latest statement was that we shouldn't get rid of DADT because there are Marines in Walter Reed Hospital who have no legs. Um, what? It's difficult to get past the idea that McCain just thinks gays are yucky and is looking for excuses to keep them out of the military.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Thanks. Google-ing "John McCain DADT" didn't yield many results as I had no idea what to look for...

soccerguy315 · Guru

here's an article romani: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/18/AR2010121803395.html

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

I was working while all the DADT things were going on... can someone quickly recap what McCain did? I'm a little lost.

soccerguy315 · Guru

Cartera wrote:

John McCain took another opportunity to embarrass himself. He went from hero to goat in record time. Sad.

I agree. Sad, really.

longprime · Guru

Even Boy dogs can be cute. Girl dogs too.

I only care if the dog loves me and befriends me.

I need to be cute from now on.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

^ I disagree. Cute wins always :p.

Yes longprime. Very cute.

Bullet · Senior Member

I was gonna reply about DADT, but I was too distracted by the CUTENESS of longprime's avatar.

Searching the internet for a picture now of a kitten disparately clinging onto a branch with one paw in a struggle to not fall off the Tree, with the words "Hang in there, baby!" written in a funny font across the bottom...

Nah, I'll just keep my F-35 pilot with his scary looking sci-fi helmet avatar. "Cool" beats "cute" every time...

poetgrl · Senior Member

Yes, longprime, I was also very excited when I found I was techy enuff to upload an avatar. biggrin

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

You need a lot of positive reinforcement, don't you longprime? ;)

Your doggy is very cute.

hayden · Senior Member

whoooo's a good boy, longprime? Whooo's a goood boy? Yes, you are! You're a good boy!

(yes, your avatar is terrific.)

longprime · Guru

I could care less.

However, I do know that you'd never want my DS carrying a weapon or watching your flank.. evileye

Any one like my avatar?

BigG · Guru

I am not a veteran, but I suspect that there isn't time in combat to determine sexual orientation.

The point being to kill or wound the adversary, not indulge in recreational sex.

-- Edited by BigG on Saturday 18th of December 2010 07:25:05 PM

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

So, gays can fight gays and straight vs straight? Sounds fair to me.

What?

Cartera · Guru

John McCain took another opportunity to embarrass himself. He went from hero to goat in record time. Sad.

geeps20 · Senior Member

So, gays can fight gays and straight vs straight? Sounds fair to me.

poetgrl · Senior Member

I am very happy our senator voted for this. He is the first and only republican I have ever voted for, and so far he is proving to be true to his socially moderate/fiscally conservative campaign.

DonnaL · Senior Member

Finally something from Congress to be happy about.

Hindoo · Senior Member

Oh, happy days! Yee-haw! biggrin

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

Of the women Republicans, Snowe and Collins are no surprise; those two Maine Senators are almost always the most likely to side with the Democrats. But good for Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Sheldon Brown (R-Mass), George Voinovich (R-Ohio) and Mark Kirk (R-Illinois).

I wonder why almost all Republican women voted to repeal DADT (Sen. Hutchison of Texas sided with the minority), and almost all Republican men voted to keep it.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Whooo! Now we can join ranks with the rest of the "civilized" world. Score one for equality.

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

CSPAN-2 now broadcasting from the Senate floor. The historic vote will happen in about an hour.