Don't ask, Don't tell

[Lady's Human]

But aside from that - people are people, gay or straight, black or white...
PEOPLE should have the right to pursue any occupation they desire.

In an ideal world, yes.

But in an ideal world, we wouldn't need the military.

As an aside, does that mean my wife, who has a minor physical disability, should be able to be a soldier if she wants?

Or should I be able to be an F-15 pilot, despite the fact I wear glasses?

[LokiDog]

In an ideal world, yes.

But in an ideal world, we wouldn't need the military.

As an aside, does that mean my wife, who has a minor physical disability, should be able to be a soldier if she wants?

Or should I be able to be an F-15 pilot, despite the fact I wear glasses?

I think if she or you wants to be part of the military, you have that right. As long as you feel you are capable - and can prove it - you should be allowed to. There are many paths in life that you have to prove your capabilities... pass the bar to be a lawyer, pass the MCAT to get into medical school... I think if you are able to prove yourself in your chosen field, you should be allowed to do it.
Things should NEVER be based on you race, sexual orientation...

But aside from all that, to answer you questions. If we have no military on the planet. Why would you fly F-15's?

[Puckstop31]

I think if she or you wants to be part of the military, you have that right. As long as you feel you are capable - and can prove it - you should be allowed to. There are many paths in life that you have to prove your capabilities... pass the bar to be a lawyer, pass the MCAT to get into medical school... I think if you are able to prove yourself in your chosen field, you should be allowed to do it.
Things should NEVER be based on you race, sexual orientation...

But aside from all that, to answer you questions. If we have no military on the planet. Why would you fly F-15's?

I think you are missing the part about this not having ANYthing to do with ability.

[wombat2u2004]

Has anyone any thoughts on rank structure ????
Say for instance.........the sergeant is gay and the private in his outfit is not gay.
I know that if the powers that be did approve of gays in the forces, then they would certainly have new military laws against pulling rank in sexual situations.
But that wouldn't stop the sergeant from giving that private a bad time on the side....would it ????
And how would the private treat that, if say for instance the sergeant made sexual advances on him privately.......the poor old private would have no defence in a military court.
Where would it stop ????? Look at the problems in the military now with both men and women.....sexual harassment cases all the time....even rape !!!!!

[Karen]

It is completely and absolutely forbidden to "pull rank" and demand sexual favors ever within the military, regardless of sexuality. It may happen anyway, but it IS absolutely against the rules.

I am all for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" being lifted, as long as it is done correctly, and with thought about the situations people are in. And in my opinion, it shouldn't be anyone's business and if someone does not WANT to reveal his or her sexuality, it should not be forced.

[Lady's Human]

It is completely and absolutely forbidden to "pull rank" and demand sexual favors ever within the military, regardless of sexuality. It may happen anyway, but it IS absolutely against the rules.

It happens, and it frequently happens in the reverse, as well.

Many Drill Sergeants have had their careers ended by charges of that nature.

Whether or not the charges held up is immaterial. Once the integrity of a sergeant is challenged in that manner, they're DONE. It is incredibly easy for a Private to end the career of a Drill Sergeant.

It's easier to recover your career from a DUI or drug offense.

[wombat2u2004]

It happens, and it frequently happens in the reverse, as well.

Many Drill Sergeants have had their careers ended by charges of that nature.

Whether or not the charges held up is immaterial. Once the integrity of a sergeant is challenged in that manner, they're DONE. It is incredibly easy for a Private to end the career of a Drill Sergeant.

It's easier to recover your career from a DUI or drug offense.

Then if the law is passed, won't the problems you already have in the military become greater ????

[LokiDog]

I think you are missing the part about this not having ANYthing to do with ability.

Your right. I'm sorry if you took it that way. I was responding to the post by Lady's Human on whether they could serve in the military.

I believe you should not be discriminated against just because of sexual orientation.

If I remember my history. Blacks were not allowed in the military until they proved themselves as Buffalo Soldiers, or special units during the civil war...

Not allowed to be pilots until the Tuskegee Airmen in WWII and so on.

I DON'T think that gays need to prove themselves as capable before being allowed to serve. But might this be a way to opening the door to universal acceptance?
I don't know - just a thought.

[Lady's Human]

Blacks were part of the US Military since the Revolutionary war.

The military's treatment of blacks wasn't always proper, and was shameful in many respects, but they were allowed to serve.

Pres. Truman changed that with his order to the military to integrate NOW!

This is a different kettle of fish. The main reason for the segregation of the military was the presence of many southern aristocrats in the senior ranks who carried their prejudice with them. Rank and file enlisted didn't care, they could fight, they knew they could fight, it was an issue with the leadership, not the troops (For the most part.....racism still exist in the military, and will, always, as long as the military is made up of people)


It will take more than an executive order to change this.

[wombat2u2004]

I believe you should not be discriminated against just because of sexual orientation.

I'm sorry, I don't agree with this new age term "Sexual orientation".
I'll just call it what I always have "A sexual perversion"
I'm sorry if I have offended, but I do have an opinion and a belief that these so called groups just want rights. I suppose it's a shame that evolution never equiped humans to be asexual, so that gay men can have children, but I guess that's just tough luck....eh ????

[smokey the elder]

*trout slap* I SO don't agree with that statement. *sigh*. I'll grant that there are UCMJ (I used the term "SOP" because in a regulated environment these have the force of law BTW) rules that I, as a civilian, have no clue about. However, I still stand by my lay opinion that the UCMJ rules, over time might be modified. Maybe the armed forces aren't ready for this kind of liberal thinking. If so, that's unfortunate, that the armed forces, in a time of slow recruitment, may be missing out on some very good soldiers/sailors/Marines.

All of the above is solely MY opinion, and not intended to flame anyone.

[wombat2u2004]

Blacks were part of the US Military since the Revolutionary war.

The military's treatment of blacks wasn't always proper, and was shameful in many respects, but they were allowed to serve.

Pres. Truman changed that with his order to the military to integrate NOW!

This is a different kettle of fish. The main reason for the segregation of the military was the presence of many southern aristocrats in the senior ranks who carried their prejudice with them. Rank and file enlisted didn't care, they could fight, they knew they could fight, it was an issue with the leadership, not the troops (For the most part.....racism still exist in the military, and will, always, as long as the military is made up of people).

Very true !!!! We had a Searchlight team with us in Nam.....there was one black guy and two white guys, and I remember one of the white guys was from Alabama. They gave that black guy real crap, all of the time treated him so badly. I won't tell you what eventually happened here on this thread, I'll PM you some time and tell you the story.....not good.

[sasvermont]

......and will continue to change, thank goodness.

[Alysser]

I'm sorry, I don't agree with this new age term "Sexual orientation".
I'll just call it what I always have "A sexual perversion"
I'm sorry if I have offended, but I do have an opinion and a belief that these so called groups just want rights. I suppose it's a shame that evolution never equiped humans to be asexual, so that gay men can have children, but I guess that's just tough luck....eh ????

Wow, I cannot even believe the amount of ignorance in that post. There is offering an opinion, and then there's just being blatantly rude.

[Catty1]

It will be a more peaceful day, I think, when humans are just referred to as "sexual" with no prefix in front of the word.

That should include just about everyone.