| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
12 Mar 2005 09:35:56 PM |
| Object: |
Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
A perfect compromise to this issue would be the creation of all gay
units. Gays could serve their country freely and openly and America
could benefit from the skills these soldiers could offer.
http://news.newkerala.com/world-news/?action=fullnews&id=79562
Bill submitted to allow gays in military:
Fifty-two Democrats and a single Republican Wednesday sponsored a
bill that would allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, and
give those who left under the policy banning gays a chance to rejoin
the armed forces.
.
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 11:02:29 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 03:51:17 GMT, Dionisio
<moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
Andrealphus wrote:
Sanders Kaufman <usenet@kaufman.net> wrote:
Never crossed the equator on a Navy ship, have you?!
I have... Shellback is a very strange ritual. I hear that it's been
sanitized a bit since I was in.
Either one of you care to enlighten those of us not "in the know"?
http://www.desausa.org/pollywog_to_shellback.htm
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:24:21 PM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:Su5_d.74248$r55.63177@attbi_s52...
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
The military has no problem with homosexuals in the military, it is
the
homosexual lifestyle that the UCMJ makes illegal. What they do not
want
is
someone showing up in uniform in a Gay Pride Parade. Or showing up
at a
unit family picnic in drag.
HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Never crossed the equator on a Navy ship, have you?!
HA HA HA HA HA HA
Damned glad i didn't as well. I'd hate to have to crawl through
a garbage pile and kiss the blue baby's belly inside.
I knew a fella who was initiated into the Engineering
Dept. They packed his ***** with grease, blued his balls,
and when they was done with him, he stood to attention
and saluted them one and all.
They should be damned glad it wasn't MY ***** they were trying to
grease, cause like -you- say, "consenting adults" and I wouldn't
consent to begin with not to something like that. Somebody
would have gotten seriously hurt trying to pack MY *****, NO
doubts in my mind on THAT!!!
It is the homosexual lifestyle that is disruptive. The way Don't
Ask,
Don't
Which homosexual lifestyle?
Like I said before, it all depends on what -you- consider a
"sexual encounter" cause nearly EVERYman gets his ***** grabbed
at *least* once.
enough. It is that you openly engage in activities that would
bring the
military into dishonor.
There's nothing dishonorable about consenting adults having sex.
Last I heard they were NOT giving Dishonerable Discharges just
for admitting you were Gay and using it to get out.
Of course one only gets out of the military what one puts into
it like you would anything else.
bd4u
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:44:33 PM |
|
|
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111029861.103874.197110@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
I knew a fella who was initiated into the Engineering
Dept. They packed his ***** with grease, blued his balls,
and when they was done with him, he stood to attention
and saluted them one and all.
Those are just stories the Shellbacks tell to scare the ***** out of Rickies.
The humiliation part is true, crawling through garbage and such.
But the violence doesn't happen.
There's nothing dishonorable about consenting adults having sex.
Last I heard they were NOT giving Dishonerable Discharges just
for admitting you were Gay and using it to get out.
In 1986 onboard USS Gray, our storekeeper was having a *very* hard time
dealing with ship life.
He went to the SupO and told him he was gay and was a civillian a coupla
months later.
He got an OTH (Other than Honourale) Discharge.
6 Months later, with no civillian troubles, his discharge was automatically
changed to "administrative".
An Admin discharge is honourable.
It simply means there was an error that was nobody's fault.
Of course one only gets out of the military what one puts into
it like you would anything else.
Assuming, of course, that you are not working with a corrupt organization.
There's nothing to be gained by working with evil-doers except grief.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:08:02 PM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111029861.103874.197110@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
I knew a fella who was initiated into the Engineering
Dept. They packed his ***** with grease, blued his balls,
and when they was done with him, he stood to attention
and saluted them one and all.
Those are just stories the Shellbacks tell to scare the ***** out of
Rickies.
The humiliation part is true, crawling through garbage and such.
But the violence doesn't happen.
What I just described actually happened, while I was onboard. I knew
the fella who transfered from MY division, the WHOLE ship of 700
knew about it as well. He laughed and joked about it afterwards
and told about it all. He walked kinda funny from that day forward
as well.
There's nothing dishonorable about consenting adults having sex.
Last I heard they were NOT giving Dishonerable Discharges just
for admitting you were Gay and using it to get out.
In 1986 onboard USS Gray, our storekeeper was having a *very* hard
time
dealing with ship life.
He went to the SupO and told him he was gay and was a civillian a
coupla
months later.
He got an OTH (Other than Honourale) Discharge.
6 Months later, with no civillian troubles, his discharge was
automatically
changed to "administrative".
That's because OTH doesn't exist, except in the Navy. But
I bet they got a NO re-enlistment code.
An Admin discharge is honourable.
It simply means there was an error that was nobody's fault.
It's an across the board swap for freedom. Like I said
a person get's out of the military what they put into it.
Of course one only gets out of the military what one puts into
it like you would anything else.
Assuming, of course, that you are not working with a corrupt
organization.
There's nothing to be gained by working with evil-doers except grief.
Hmph, tell that to the people in there, see if they don't laugh
in your face. It's easy to say that when -you- are out, but just
TRY taking that attitude when -you- are in. See how far -you- get!
bd4u
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:16:06 PM |
|
|
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111032482.899002.202570@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
The humiliation part is true, crawling through garbage and such.
But the violence doesn't happen.
What I just described actually happened, while I was onboard. I knew
the fella who transfered from MY division, the WHOLE ship of 700
knew about it as well. He laughed and joked about it afterwards
and told about it all. He walked kinda funny from that day forward
as well.
More than 20 years ago, right?
Now-a-days, a snitch just has to call the 1-800 Fraud waste and abuse line
to start a Congressional investigation.
With so many religious nuts flocking to the military, that kind of stuff
would be darn difficult to get away with.
He got an OTH (Other than Honourale) Discharge.
6 Months later, with no civillian troubles, his discharge was
automatically
changed to "administrative".
That's because OTH doesn't exist, except in the Navy. But
I bet they got a NO re-enlistment code.
No - OTH is done by every branch.
The UCMJ stopped that practice of one branch being structured too
differently from the other.
Of course one only gets out of the military what one puts into
it like you would anything else.
Assuming, of course, that you are not working with a corrupt
organization.
There's nothing to be gained by working with evil-doers except grief.
Hmph, tell that to the people in there, see if they don't laugh
in your face. It's easy to say that when -you- are out, but just
TRY taking that attitude when -you- are in. See how far -you- get!
Tell them what? There's nothing to be gained by working with evil-doers
except grief?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:52:58 PM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111032482.899002.202570@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
The humiliation part is true, crawling through garbage and such.
But the violence doesn't happen.
What I just described actually happened, while I was onboard. I
knew
the fella who transfered from MY division, the WHOLE ship of 700
knew about it as well. He laughed and joked about it afterwards
and told about it all. He walked kinda funny from that day forward
as well.
More than 20 years ago, right?
Now-a-days, a snitch just has to call the 1-800 Fraud waste and abuse
line
to start a Congressional investigation.
With so many religious nuts flocking to the military, that kind of
stuff
would be darn difficult to get away with.
That goes back to what I said before about the ACLU, and Human Rights
activists. I worry about the level of preparedness of the troops
currently being deployed by the US, especially if they are handing
out "stress cards" in bootcamp.
He got an OTH (Other than Honourale) Discharge.
6 Months later, with no civillian troubles, his discharge was
automatically
changed to "administrative".
That's because OTH doesn't exist, except in the Navy. But
I bet they got a NO re-enlistment code.
No - OTH is done by every branch.
The UCMJ stopped that practice of one branch being structured too
differently from the other.
OK, I was wondering if they were ever gonna streamline it to
fit ALL branches at once. Just goes to show, it ain't the
same military i was in 20 years ago, and because of that
it makes me wonder what they got on the front lines
RIGHT NOW!!!
Of course one only gets out of the military what one puts into
it like you would anything else.
Assuming, of course, that you are not working with a corrupt
organization.
There's nothing to be gained by working with evil-doers except
grief.
Hmph, tell that to the people in there, see if they don't laugh
in your face. It's easy to say that when -you- are out, but just
TRY taking that attitude when -you- are in. See how far -you- get!
Tell them what? There's nothing to be gained by working with
evil-doers
except grief?
They are all just people paid to do a job. They got families
just like everybody else. If -you- got a beef send Bush an
e-mail, or write your congressman.
bd4u
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
17 Mar 2005 12:31:49 AM |
|
|
<gigo448@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1111035178.178768.59610@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
That's because OTH doesn't exist, except in the Navy. But
I bet they got a NO re-enlistment code.
No - OTH is done by every branch.
The UCMJ stopped that practice of one branch being structured too
differently from the other.
OK, I was wondering if they were ever gonna streamline it to
fit ALL branches at once. Just goes to show, it ain't the
same military i was in 20 years ago, and because of that
it makes me wonder what they got on the front lines
RIGHT NOW!!!
Dunno - I was speaking about 20 years ago.
That's when I was a Yeoman in the Navy.
There was a whole raft of OTH discharges for all 5 branches at DINFOS
because of some damn cute Army girls.
That was in Nov. 1985.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:33:49 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Sanders Kaufman wrote:
"Omega" <2121(d)@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:Su5_d.74248$r55.63177@attbi_s52...
"Mitchell Holman" <ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
The military has no problem with homosexuals in the military, it is
the homosexual lifestyle that the UCMJ makes illegal. What they do
not want is
someone showing up in uniform in a Gay Pride Parade. Or showing up
at a unit family picnic in drag.
HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Never crossed the equator on a Navy ship, have you?!
HA HA HA HA HA HA
Damned glad i didn't as well. I'd hate to have to crawl through
a garbage pile and kiss the blue baby's belly inside.
Man, that was such a bizarre ritual.
--
"Only Buddhism is compatible with science. It covers the smallest
particles to the largest creations of the cosmos. It is the only
religion capable of scientific truth."
Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:44:56 PM |
|
|
On 16 Mar 2005 19:24:21 -0800, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
They should be damned glad it wasn't MY ***** they were trying to
grease, cause like -you- say, "consenting adults" and I wouldn't
consent to begin with not to something like that. Somebody
would have gotten seriously hurt trying to pack MY *****, NO
doubts in my mind on THAT!!!
And your life on that ship would be over. You'd be labeled a hard
case, and not a team player.
My first jump out of Airborne School I wore a helmet that was painted
bright red, with a big spike on top labeled "lawn dart". It also had
"helpful" suggestions like "Flap hard, Cherry!" and "Aim for an
officer!"
I wore it, took my ribbing, and on the next jump gladly strapped that
abomination onto the newest Cherry jumper.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 10:31:47 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On 16 Mar 2005 19:24:21 -0800, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
They should be damned glad it wasn't MY ***** they were trying to
grease, cause like -you- say, "consenting adults" and I wouldn't
consent to begin with not to something like that. Somebody
would have gotten seriously hurt trying to pack MY *****, NO
doubts in my mind on THAT!!!
And your life on that ship would be over. You'd be labeled a hard
case, and not a team player.
My first jump out of Airborne School I wore a helmet that was painted
bright red, with a big spike on top labeled "lawn dart". It also had
"helpful" suggestions like "Flap hard, Cherry!" and "Aim for an
officer!"
I wore it, took my ribbing, and on the next jump gladly strapped that
abomination onto the newest Cherry jumper.
Look dude, I reported GU11s to the OOD, and pulled my
rotation on mail bouy watch like everybody else it was FUN.
But NObody and I mean NObody was gonna stick a grease gun
up my ***** without a bust to the chops.
It didn't HAVE to happen to begin with. He was a newbie,
and a geek and they had their animal fun. He could have
avoided it, but he didn't bother, he wasn't a man, he was
a mouse.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Boy Toy" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 12:11:04 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:49:40 -0600, Mitchell Holman
<ta2eneNo*Email@comcast.com> wrote in message
<Xns961A4FCC05D47ta2eene2@216.196.97.131>
wbt@privacy.net wrote in news:3o8d31lb0cq3ed3frt3bke8oj888cfdjei@4ax.com:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:50:20 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
Not my experience - I was gay for 13 years in the army - most everyone
knew including my batallion commanders and commanding generals - no one
really cared. Sure you have to have a thick skin for the occasional
assholes but other than that its not really any different than being
gay in most mixed urban environments. Of course having intelligent
commanders helps - as one told me about some 'accusations' I was gay,
"I've been accused of worse than this - heck I've DONE worse than this"
as he held the CID report :)
As long as commanders demand acceptance, their subordinates will give
it. As we've seen in all the other countries that have allowed gays the
changes occur almost overnight with good leadership.
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
You miss the point. The fact that someone was
openly gay in the military for years refutes ALL
the homophobe arguments about how "disruptive"
it would be to drop the ban on gays.
The same arguments that resisted allowing blacks
into regular units are being used to block gays
from serving in regular units, and they are equally
wrong.
Realistically, I think it's pretty safe to assume Bill Taylor thinks
the same way about blacks, too. He'd be out burning crosses and
lynching blacks (and gays) if he could get away with it. He would
call this "equal rights."
--
Boy Toy
Toxic Toyz 4 Nasty Boyz
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sylvia Beach" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 05:58:24 AM |
|
|
wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:50:20 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
Not my experience - I was gay for 13 years in the army - most everyone
knew including my batallion commanders and commanding generals - no one
really cared. Sure you have to have a thick skin for the occasional
assholes but other than that its not really any different than being
gay in most mixed urban environments. Of course having intelligent
commanders helps - as one told me about some 'accusations' I was gay,
"I've been accused of worse than this - heck I've DONE worse than this"
as he held the CID report :)
As long as commanders demand acceptance, their subordinates will give
it. As we've seen in all the other countries that have allowed gays the
changes occur almost overnight with good leadership.
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
An officer has not only the right but the duty to disobey orders that he
or she feels are illegal or to the detriment of the service.
I know of many cases of this happening in the armed forces of the united
states, up to and including a marine corps lesbian drill instuctor.
--
Sylvia Beach
Shakespeare & Co., Booksellers
12 Rue de l'Odeon
Paris, France
.....A slender body, hands soft and white
For the service of my delight.
Two sprouting breasts
Round and sweet
Invite my hungry mouth to eat.
From whence two nipples firm and pink
Persuade my thirsty soul to drink
And lower still a secret place
Where I'd fain hide my loving face....."
Isadora Duncan
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RobertVB" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 02:36:36 PM |
|
|
In article <3o8d31lb0cq3ed3frt3bke8oj888cfdjei@4ax.com>,
<wbt@privacy.net> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:50:20 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
Not my experience - I was gay for 13 years in the army - most everyone
knew including my batallion commanders and commanding generals - no one
really cared. Sure you have to have a thick skin for the occasional
assholes but other than that its not really any different than being
gay in most mixed urban environments. Of course having intelligent
commanders helps - as one told me about some 'accusations' I was gay,
"I've been accused of worse than this - heck I've DONE worse than this"
as he held the CID report :)
As long as commanders demand acceptance, their subordinates will give
it. As we've seen in all the other countries that have allowed gays the
changes occur almost overnight with good leadership.
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Ha you don't understand how 'don't ask don't tell' is supposed to work,
do you? But then you've demonstrated your lack of ability to process
data to any significant degree just today in messages I've already
replied to. :)
--
"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply
because such constitutional violation has become traditional,"
-California Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 08:38:37 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:36:36 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
In article <3o8d31lb0cq3ed3frt3bke8oj888cfdjei@4ax.com>,
<wbt@privacy.net> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:50:20 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
Not my experience - I was gay for 13 years in the army - most everyone
knew including my batallion commanders and commanding generals - no one
really cared. Sure you have to have a thick skin for the occasional
assholes but other than that its not really any different than being
gay in most mixed urban environments. Of course having intelligent
commanders helps - as one told me about some 'accusations' I was gay,
"I've been accused of worse than this - heck I've DONE worse than this"
as he held the CID report :)
As long as commanders demand acceptance, their subordinates will give
it. As we've seen in all the other countries that have allowed gays the
changes occur almost overnight with good leadership.
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Ha you don't understand how 'don't ask don't tell' is supposed to work,
do you? But then you've demonstrated your lack of ability to process
data to any significant degree just today in messages I've already
replied to. :)
You Chain of Command was *****! They knew you were a ***** sucker and
failed in their duty to rid the military of you. They should all have
all gotten a General Court and been kicked out themselves.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sylvia Beach" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 06:19:33 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so.
We are everywhere. We may even have a transsexual planted in the White
House Communications Office.....
Sylvia Beach
Shakespeare & Co., Booksellers
12 Rue de l'Odeon
Paris, France
.....A slender body, hands soft and white
For the service of my delight.
Two sprouting breasts
Round and sweet
Invite my hungry mouth to eat.
From whence two nipples firm and pink
Persuade my thirsty soul to drink
And lower still a secret place
Where I'd fain hide my loving face....."
Isadora Duncan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 07:36:08 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:19:33 GMT in alt.atheism, Sylvia Beach (Sylvia
Beach <BeachS@ShakespeareCoBooksellers.fr>) said, directing the reply
to alt.atheism
wbt@privacy.net wrote:
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so.
We are everywhere. We may even have a transsexual planted in the White
House Communications Office.....
Sylvia Beach
Shakespeare & Co., Booksellers
12 Rue de l'Odeon
Paris, France
That's you?!!!
Been there bought your English books!
And my sincere compliments on a *proper* bookshop.
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: www.Video2CD.com. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
Market Your DVD to The World For Almost Nothing: www.instantdvd.tv
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:56:51 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:19:33 GMT, Sylvia Beach
<BeachS@ShakespeareCoBooksellers.fr> wrote:
wbt@privacy.net wrote:
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so.
We are everywhere. We may even have a transsexual planted in the White
House Communications Office.....
Sweety, when you don't understand what's being discussed you really
should refrain from trying to discuss it. You know the old saying
about keeping your mouth shut and not divulging the fact that you're a
fool.
Sylvia Beach
Shakespeare & Co., Booksellers
12 Rue de l'Odeon
Paris, France
....A slender body, hands soft and white
For the service of my delight.
Two sprouting breasts
Round and sweet
Invite my hungry mouth to eat.
From whence two nipples firm and pink
Persuade my thirsty soul to drink
And lower still a secret place
Where I'd fain hide my loving face....."
Isadora Duncan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
18 Mar 2005 10:48:18 AM |
|
|
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:19:33 GMT, Sylvia Beach
<BeachS@ShakespeareCoBooksellers.fr> wrote:
wrote:
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so.
We are everywhere. We may even have a transsexual planted in the White
House Communications Office.....
Sweety, when you don't understand what's being discussed you really
should refrain from trying to discuss it. You know the old saying
about keeping your mouth shut and not divulging the fact that you're a
fool.
Don't do as you do, do as you say.
-- Fritz ...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:42:45 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Sweety, when you don't understand what's being discussed you really
should refrain from trying to discuss it. You know the old saying
about keeping your mouth shut and not divulging the fact that you're a
fool.
If a nomination for the Most Ironic Quote of the Year hasn't been made
yet, I hereby submit one.
--
Quoted in the New Scientist [1995]:
A Doctor at Yale has observed that all the fingers have names, but that only the big toe has a name. He thus proposes names for all 5 toes: porcellus fori, porcellus domi, porcellus carnivorus, porcellus non voratus, porcellus plorans domum.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 09:53:28 PM |
|
|
Dionisio <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wbt@privacy.net wrote:
Sweety, when you don't understand what's being discussed you really
should refrain from trying to discuss it. You know the old saying
about keeping your mouth shut and not divulging the fact that you're
a fool.
If a nomination for the Most Ironic Quote of the Year hasn't been made
yet, I hereby submit one.
You have my vote...!
--
"Only Buddhism is compatible with science. It covers the smallest
particles to the largest creations of the cosmos. It is the only
religion capable of scientific truth."
Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "RobertVB" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 10:13:22 PM |
|
|
In article <l77f311modc6htvvokj86leiuqk0c6f18o@4ax.com>,
<wbt@privacy.net> wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:36:36 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
In article <3o8d31lb0cq3ed3frt3bke8oj888cfdjei@4ax.com>,
<wbt@privacy.net> wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:50:20 -0800, RobertVB <nospam@4me.com> wrote:
Not my experience - I was gay for 13 years in the army - most everyone
knew including my batallion commanders and commanding generals - no one
really cared. Sure you have to have a thick skin for the occasional
assholes but other than that its not really any different than being
gay in most mixed urban environments. Of course having intelligent
commanders helps - as one told me about some 'accusations' I was gay,
"I've been accused of worse than this - heck I've DONE worse than this"
as he held the CID report :)
As long as commanders demand acceptance, their subordinates will give
it. As we've seen in all the other countries that have allowed gays the
changes occur almost overnight with good leadership.
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Ha you don't understand how 'don't ask don't tell' is supposed to work,
do you? But then you've demonstrated your lack of ability to process
data to any significant degree just today in messages I've already
replied to. :)
You Chain of Command was *****! They knew you were a ***** sucker and
failed in their duty to rid the military of you. They should all have
all gotten a General Court and been kicked out themselves.
Demonstrating once again your lack of understanding about how the
military works or what their 'duty' is.
--
"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply
because such constitutional violation has become traditional,"
-California Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 11:06:51 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:49:36 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
I knew several gay soldiers. Some of whom were fellow Rangers. We
didn't give a damn that they hung out at different bars on the
weekends, they were good soldiers who had you back when we went into
the field.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 01:16:34 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ie5e31919uqeh14k6gspmmfg71crdsuv77@4ax.com...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:49:36 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
....Or that the or that the order was unlawful.
As the Federal Courts ruled this month - attacking gays for being gay is
uncostitutional, and thus unAmerican.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Po Boy" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 11:19:37 AM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ie5e31919uqeh14k6gspmmfg71crdsuv77@4ax.com...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:49:36 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
If the military definition of a "good soldier" is a heterosexual person, a
homosexual would not be a good soldier, would they?
I knew several gay soldiers. Some of whom were fellow Rangers. We
didn't give a damn that they hung out at different bars on the
weekends, they were good soldiers who had you back
Yea, I bet. In the showers too, huh? I knew two or three and heard about
several more. They usually wound up bailing off the base water tower, or
eating an M-16 or having a nervous breakdown because someone called them a
name.
The military has rules. If you want to play, obey. Queers have rules, if a
soldier wants to join up with a bunch queers, I suppose he would have to
fall in line as well. Get yourself a sign to hang around your neck that says
"Queers are an abomination to God". Wear it and go see how many gay and
lesbian organizations you can join up with.
--
A country boy will survive!
PoBoy
when we went into
the field.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 01:16:39 PM |
|
|
"Po Boy" <poboy@txnet.com> wrote in message
news:JOEZd.1425113$Zm5.220721@news.easynews.com...
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
If the military definition of a "good soldier" is a heterosexual person, a
homosexual would not be a good soldier, would they?
If that were the case, but it's not.
Yea, I bet. In the showers too, huh? I knew two or three and heard about
several more. They usually wound up bailing off the base water tower, or
eating an M-16 or having a nervous breakdown because someone called them a
name.
Clearly, the problem is you - not the gays.
It's interesting to see an American Veteran openly advocating the murder of
US soldiers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Boy Toy" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
16 Mar 2005 03:10:36 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:16:39 GMT, "Sanders Kaufman"
<usenet@kaufman.net> wrote in message
<owGZd.19700$YD4.14906@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>
"Po Boy" <poboy@txnet.com> wrote in message
news:JOEZd.1425113$Zm5.220721@news.easynews.com...
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
If the military definition of a "good soldier" is a heterosexual person, a
homosexual would not be a good soldier, would they?
If that were the case, but it's not.
Yea, I bet. In the showers too, huh? I knew two or three and heard about
several more. They usually wound up bailing off the base water tower, or
eating an M-16 or having a nervous breakdown because someone called them a
name.
Clearly, the problem is you - not the gays.
It's interesting to see an American Veteran openly advocating the murder of
US soldiers.
I guess he's out of reach of a court martial. Pity.
--
Boy Toy
Toxic Toyz 4 Nasty Boyz
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "RobertVB" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 02:42:22 PM |
|
|
In article <JOEZd.1425113$Zm5.220721@news.easynews.com>, Po Boy
<poboy@txnet.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ie5e31919uqeh14k6gspmmfg71crdsuv77@4ax.com...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:49:36 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
If the military definition of a "good soldier" is a heterosexual person, a
homosexual would not be a good soldier, would they?
Of course there is no 'heterosexual' requirement for a soldier. The
ideal soldier wouldn't be concerned with sex at all - very few mission
objectives have anything to do with the soldier having sex.
I knew several gay soldiers. Some of whom were fellow Rangers. We
didn't give a damn that they hung out at different bars on the
weekends, they were good soldiers who had you back
Yea, I bet. In the showers too, huh? I knew two or three and heard about
several more. They usually wound up bailing off the base water tower, or
eating an M-16 or having a nervous breakdown because someone called them a
name.
Right. Like you have any likely hood of any military service.
The military has rules.
'don't ask don't tell' Gays are already allowed in the military.
If you want to play, obey.
Queers have rules, if a
soldier wants to join up with a bunch queers, I suppose he would have to
fall in line as well.
Same as straights.
Get yourself a sign to hang around your neck that says
"Queers are an abomination to God".
Why wear a lie around your neck?
--
"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply
because such constitutional violation has become traditional,"
-California Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 02:46:27 PM |
|
|
"RobertVB" <nospam@4me.com> wrote in message
news:1110919342.485992846a103503ee559dabf4025136@teranews...
In article <JOEZd.1425113$Zm5.220721@news.easynews.com>, Po Boy
<poboy@txnet.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ie5e31919uqeh14k6gspmmfg71crdsuv77@4ax.com...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:49:36 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
If the military definition of a "good soldier" is a heterosexual person,
a
homosexual would not be a good soldier, would they?
Of course there is no 'heterosexual' requirement for a soldier.
If that were true, there would be no controversy about whether or not gays
could join.
The
ideal soldier wouldn't be concerned with sex at all - very few mission
objectives have anything to do with the soldier having sex.
I knew several gay soldiers. Some of whom were fellow Rangers. We
didn't give a damn that they hung out at different bars on the
weekends, they were good soldiers who had you back
Yea, I bet. In the showers too, huh? I knew two or three and heard about
several more. They usually wound up bailing off the base water tower, or
eating an M-16 or having a nervous breakdown because someone called them
a
name.
Right. Like you have any likely hood of any military service.
The military has rules.
'don't ask don't tell' Gays are already allowed in the military.
If you want to play, obey.
Queers have rules, if a
soldier wants to join up with a bunch queers, I suppose he would have to
fall in line as well.
Same as straights.
Get yourself a sign to hang around your neck that says
"Queers are an abomination to God".
Why wear a lie around your neck?
--
"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified
simply
because such constitutional violation has become traditional,"
-California Superior Court Judge Richard
Kramer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 06:42:23 PM |
|
|
"Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:DQHZd.5257079$f47.952854@news.easynews.com...
"RobertVB" <nospam@4me.com> wrote in message
Of course there is no 'heterosexual' requirement for a soldier.
If that were true, there would be no controversy about whether or not gays
could join.
Wow - that silly claim must have taken a HUGE leap of faith to make.
There is not only NO requirement of heterosexuality, there are VOLUMES of
laws about how heterosexuality can be a crime.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RobertVB" |
|
| Title: Re: Bill submitted to allow gays in military |
15 Mar 2005 03:37:33 PM |
|
|
In article <DQHZd.5257079$f47.952854@news.easynews.com>, Maverick
<justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
"RobertVB" <nospam@4me.com> wrote in message
news:1110919342.485992846a103503ee559dabf4025136@teranews...
In article <JOEZd.1425113$Zm5.220721@news.easynews.com>, Po Boy
<poboy@txnet.com> wrote:
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:ie5e31919uqeh14k6gspmmfg71crdsuv77@4ax.com...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:49:36 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
Your Chain of Command was ***** if they knew you were queer and failed
to kick your ***** out. They swore that they would obey the orders of
their superiors and they failed to do so. That makes them "*****."
Maybe they realized that retaining a good soldier made more sense than
chaptering him for something that had no bearing on the job.
If the military definition of a "good soldier" is a heterosexual person,
a
homosexual would not be a good soldier, would they?
Of course there is no 'heterosexual' requirement for a soldier.
If that were true, there would be no controversy about whether or not gays
could join.
Apollonian reasoning error Just because one thing might be deemed less
desireable does not imply that the opposite thing is desired, required,
or part of being 'good'.
--
"The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply
because such constitutional violation has become traditional,"
-California Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|