Results 1 to 10 of 21
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksHybrid View
-
12-16-2010, 02:37 PM #1Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Posts
- 42
Thanked: 3
You are aware that straight people get HIV too, i myself am straight but find it very wrong that people have this idea that gay people are more likely to have aids.
I'm british and did training for RAF through ATC at a young age, although i dont have any plans on joining the RAF or army.
We had a Gay person in our squadron and he did get high ranked, he was not treated differently, but remember the policy was introduced in 1993 when there were alot of people who were homephobic, the policy was (from what i understand) brought in, to stop soldiers and high ranking officers from treating a person differently as in i combat situation this could result in daanger for the person if they are disliked.
In an ideal world all people would be treated equally, its sad that we dont live in this world.
Just my 2p worth
Regards
Stocky
-
12-16-2010, 03:02 PM #2At this point in time...
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- North Idaho Redoubt
- Posts
- 27,086
- Blog Entries
- 1
Thanked: 13249
Hmmmm...
Believe it or not, I agree with you too BJ2, must be cold in hell today
DADT was a stopgap measure, it is past it's time...
However I think what you do on your own time is your business, but you better respect the uniform of the US while your are in it, Gay or Straight...
On the HIV issue I would fall to the side of, yes there should be mandatory testing for any dangerous communicable disease in the Military...
-
12-16-2010, 03:11 PM #3Senior Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Topeka, KS
- Posts
- 109
Thanked: 24
I think the issue most people have with DADT is this. If you allow gays to serve in the military, then that opens the floodgates to other gay rights. I think it's obvious that gays should have the same rights as everyone else, and 50 years from now people will look back on this issue the same way I look back on segregation in the south. A sort of "What the hell were they thinking?"
-
12-16-2010, 05:15 PM #4Still learning
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Posts
- 1,043
Thanked: 240
video relevant
YouTube - 'Gays Too Precious To Risk In Combat'
Reply With QuoteThe Following User Says Thank You to markevens For This Useful Post:
goaT (12-16-2010)
12-16-2010, 08:30 PM
#5
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Location
- Southwest Georgia
- Posts
- 63
Thanked: 14
As a veteran, I have known many gay individuals that served alongside me over the years. The only problem I have with repealing DADT is the logistical issue. Hear me out. If an openly gay male enters basic training, where is he supposed to rack? Do you allow him to rack with the straight males? Do you make him rack with females? Or do you build new barracks to accommodate? Once Basic Training is complete, I have zero issues. Just food for thought.
Oh, and when I joined ('92) I had to state that i wasn't a homosexual or a communist. Both of which are off of the paperwork now.
12-16-2010, 08:39 PM
#6
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Location
- Maine
- Posts
- 199
Thanked: 50
KingsRam, I think you make a very good point. I am not sure what my view here is, I would say, however, that the very last thing I think I would have thought about is if the guy over in the next rack was checking me out. I was waaaaaaaay to preoccupied with not getting on the bad side of my Drill Instructors, memorizing orders and trying to stay awake. Oorah.
12-16-2010, 08:50 PM
#7
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
- Location
- Shreveport, LA
- Posts
- 1,741
Thanked: 760
Sleeping arrangements
I don't understand homophobia... I really don't
It never occurred to me to give a rip about someone's sexual orientation. When I was sharing hotel rooms with guys (sometimes up to 5) when traveling for team sports, my policy was "I don't care where you sleep, but I'm sleeping in one of those two beds..." I think I'd be fine if the barrack were full of gay guys; just give me a rack.
Having showered in plenty of open rooms, I don't think that would bother me either because who among us seriously are good looking enough to think anyone is really going to be checking us out?
Ok... I am, but still
12-16-2010, 08:45 PM
#8
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Location
- Middle of nowhere, Minnesota
- Posts
- 4,624
- Blog Entries
- 2
Thanked: 1371
There probably is, and I don't disagree with that as part of someone's medical record. I don't think it is information that should be disclosed to everyone though.Originally Posted by gssixgun
The point I was trying to make is that it would be wrong to not render aid to someone, even if they did have a communicable disease. In both civilian and military medicine people are taught to use standard precautions (also called universal precautions or body substance isolation) so it is irrelevant if someone has a disease or not.
The argument that knowing someone in the military is gay might somehow prevent HIV infection on the battlefield is ridiculous.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
