This is a Mil.com news article, but there is no link to a forum discussion...just almost 200 posts at the bottom of the article. It certainly seems suited to P/CP so I'll "give it a go"...

http://www.military.com/news/article/obama-may-end-militarys-ban-on-gays.html

some real interesting comments those are, too.

From a comment left by DShirley at the link you provided:

"Recent US Army Times survey STRONGLY indicate members of the force do not support repeal"

The same was said back before the services integrated racially too. The was widespread opposition to sharing a barracks with "N------."

Who still thinks that was a bad idea now?

And get ready for the "but that's different!" chorus to begin. There was a good deal of grumbling, but eventually, most servicemembers got over it. I'm sure the same will happen if/when gay and lesbian servicemembers are allowed to openly serve.

If he does repeal it, authorize gays to enlist and gay marriage is legalized it will certainly liven up meetings of the Officers Wives Club...

Interesting to me..., those supporting this initiative are either non-military (will never serve &/or hold disdain for our Warriors) or retired from the military...

Also interesting..., Military.com has posted a survey currently showing 64% of responses against the openly gay service idea...

Sure glad I'm a retired infantryman.

NOTE. If this initiative passes..., then its very likely that initiatives (while in uniform) for male facial makeup (non-camouflage), ear rings, haircut policy amended, and on, and on, will be the follow-on . . .

IMHO, No longer the premiere Fighting Force.

naw i wouldnt hold your breath...

quote:

Originally posted by ELLIOTT1980:
Interesting to me..., those supporting this initiative are either non-military (will never serve &/or hold disdain for our Warriors) or retired from the military...

Also interesting..., Military.com has posted a survey currently showing 64% of responses against the openly gay service idea...

Sure glad I'm a retired infantryman.

NOTE. If this initivative passes, then its very likely initiatives (while in uniform) for male facial makeup (non-camouflage), ear rings, haircut policy amended, and on, and on . . .

IMHO, No longer the premiere Fighting Force.

Ah, the old slippery slope argument.

I'm still active duty, and I have no problem with gays serving. I've known a few (some who were kicked out, mostly female). Didn't bother me in the least.

quote:

Originally posted by ELLIOTT1980:
Interesting to me..., those supporting this initiative are either non-military (will never serve &/or hold disdain for our Warriors) or retired from the military...

Alot of people have not noticed that. That's the way it has been. Civvies telling how the military "should" be when they have either no idea themselves or are justing pushing pushing pushing their agenda in places where it does not belong.

As Maindawg moved another thread to where it belonged, he needs to move this one too.

quote:

Originally posted by SignalSgtWilliams:

quote:

Originally posted by ELLIOTT1980:
Interesting to me..., those supporting this initiative are either non-military (will never serve &/or hold disdain for our Warriors) or retired from the military...

Alot of people have not noticed that. That's the way it has been. Civvies telling how the military "should" be when they have either no idea themselves or are justing pushing pushing pushing their agenda in places where it does not belong.

As Maindawg moved another thread to where it belonged, he needs to move this one too.

What??? A thread about Ending the Military's Ban on Gays belonging in the "Gays in the Military" section. Why....what are you thinking???

quote:

Originally posted by adminnco1:
If he does repeal it, authorize gays to enlist and gay marriage is legalized it will certainly liven up meetings of the Officers Wives Club...

Most likely there will be another "club" created.

Gay Officers Club or something.

What would change if this happened? I mean really. Isn't fraternization among troops in the same deployed units at sea or on land against the rules of the UCMJ anyway? Whatever happens that violates the UCMJ would result in disciplinary action. It seems to me that too many conservatives are afraid they're going to get hit on by a fellow soldier in the combat zone.

quote:

Originally posted by KoRnAdvocate:
What would change if this happened? I mean really. Isn't fraternization among troops in the same deployed units at sea or on land against the rules of the UCMJ anyway? Whatever happens that violates the UCMJ would result in disciplinary action. It seems to me that too many conservatives are afraid they're going to get hit on by a fellow soldier in the combat zone.

IMHO and experience, I agree. Not only conservatives though. I know a few dem/moderates that just don't agree with the lifestyle. Personally I don't care either way, however if it effects troop morale, then some kind of triaing should be done. the worst thing we can do is be at war with lower troop morale due to something other then actual combat.

quote:

IMHO and experience, I agree. Not only conservatives though. I know a few dem/moderates that just don't agree with the lifestyle. Personally I don't care either way, however if it effects troop morale, then some kind of triaing should be done. the worst thing we can do is be at war with lower troop morale due to something other then actual combat.

I can agree with that logic. Perhaps right now isnt the right time for it to happen, but its going to happen eventually, and people need to get with the program.

quote:

Originally posted by ELLIOTT1980:
Interesting to me..., those supporting this initiative are either non-military (will never serve &/or hold disdain for our Warriors) or retired from the military...

Also interesting..., Military.com has posted a survey currently showing 64% of responses against the openly gay service idea...

Sure glad I'm a retired infantryman.

NOTE. If this initiative passes..., then its very likely that initiatives (while in uniform) for male facial makeup (non-camouflage), ear rings, haircut policy amended, and on, and on, will be the follow-on . . .

IMHO, No longer the premiere Fighting Force.

I agree. If they allow gays to inlist, I hope they wait until I'm retired.

quote:

Originally posted by SignalSgtWilliams:

Alot of people have not noticed that. That's the way it has been. Civvies telling how the military "should" be when they have either no idea themselves or are justing pushing pushing pushing their agenda in places where it does not belong.

As Maindawg moved another thread to where it belonged, he needs to move this one too.

This is on the opening page of mil.com and is asking for a vote of opinion, so this IS the forum where it belongs. If you don't like it you don't have to open or read this thread. It stays here.

"http://www.military.com/hp/poll?poll=undefined

The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" statute is the only federal law that mandates firing a person because of their sexual orientation. The statute forces patriotic lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans who want to serve our country to compromise their integrity for their right to serve. No one willing to volunteer to serve in a time of war should have to sacrifice their right to be honest about who they are as a condition of their military service. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a discriminatory law and it is wrong.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" applies to all Americans serving in the U.S. Armed Forces, including active duty, Reserve, and National Guard personnel. Over two million Americans serving in uniform today are bound by this discriminatory law; among them, an estimated 65,000 lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans in uniform live with the constant threat of a career-ending discharge under the ban. This is no way to treat patriotic Americans who volunteer to serve our nation in its time of need.

Over 12,500 Americans have been discharged under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the last twelve years - an average of two people per day. Our government has spent over $363 million in tax payer dollars firing desperately needed military linguists, pilots, doctors, intelligence analysts, nurses, and others with critical skills we need in this time of conflict. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is wasteful, discriminatory, and harms our military.

quote:

Originally posted by IHAWKER:

quote:

Originally posted by SignalSgtWilliams:

Alot of people have not noticed that. That's the way it has been. Civvies telling how the military "should" be when they have either no idea themselves or are justing pushing pushing pushing their agenda in places where it does not belong.

As Maindawg moved another thread to where it belonged, he needs to move this one too.

This is on the opening page of mil.com and is asking for a vote of opinion, so this IS the forum where it belongs. If you don't like it you don't have to open or read this thread. It stays here.

"http://www.military.com/hp/poll?poll=undefined

Yes sir!!!! Mr Mod.

quote:

Originally posted by IHAWKER:
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a discriminatory law and it is wrong.

If it was then why was it established in the first place??????? Seems it pacified everyone for awhile but not now, why is that??? Flexing agendas maybe!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by IHAWKER:

quote:

Originally posted by SignalSgtWilliams:

Alot of people have not noticed that. That's the way it has been. Civvies telling how the military "should" be when they have either no idea themselves or are justing pushing pushing pushing their agenda in places where it does not belong.

As Maindawg moved another thread to where it belonged, he needs to move this one too.

This is on the opening page of mil.com and is asking for a vote of opinion, so this IS the forum where it belongs. If you don't like it you don't have to open or read this thread. It stays here.

"http://www.military.com/hp/poll?poll=undefined

It's too bad the discussion boards seem to work in every topic area except "Gays in the Military". But since that seems to be a place where you can't have this discussion, don't be too surprised if you find others with an opposing view, expecially in Point/Counterpoint.

quote:

Originally posted by IHAWKER:

quote:

Originally posted by SignalSgtWilliams:

Alot of people have not noticed that. That's the way it has been. Civvies telling how the military "should" be when they have either no idea themselves or are justing pushing pushing pushing their agenda in places where it does not belong.

As Maindawg moved another thread to where it belonged, he needs to move this one too.

This is on the opening page of mil.com and is asking for a vote of opinion, so this IS the forum where it belongs. If you don't like it you don't have to open or read this thread. It stays here.

"http://www.military.com/hp/poll?poll=undefined

I could reply, then let those wanting to vote in the poll, go there. The poll is void anyway. Too many civvies voting that has no idea about the military. This impacts the military not San Fransisco.

If PE Obama does work with Congress to repeal DADT (and Congress is the one who would have to repeal it anyway), then it would allow those openly gay persons who want to serve (but would be discriminated against serving by DADT) and those who currently serve in silence (for fear of being drummed out) to serve openly, without fear of recrimination.

Our government has forced out thousands of servicemembers with desperately needed skills such as Arab linguists, medical personnel, cryptoanalysts, ect under DADT. That would be what came to an end.

As for those folks who let their prejudice against gays get in the way of their military professionalism can't handle serving with openly gay members, then perhaps it is time for them to go. Prejudice has no place in the military - or any part of society.

This will be a good thing.

This is a precursor to reinstating the draft, and eliminating reasons to be "unfit for duty". Charles Rangle will be bringing up reinstating the draft again real soon.

The Gays can either serve their country, or move somewhere else to avoid the draft. We have fought for their rights and freedoms, now let THEM fight their rights and freedoms beside us.

Most gays will NOT be stampeding anytime soon to be in the military.

With gays it's all about "in your face", talking the talk.....now let them walk the walk. BRING BACK THE DRAFT and give them ALL a chance to serve their country!

quote:

Originally posted by esample1:

quote:

Originally posted by ELLIOTT1980:
Interesting to me..., those supporting this initiative are either non-military (will never serve &/or hold disdain for our Warriors) or retired from the military...

Also interesting..., Military.com has posted a survey currently showing 64% of responses against the openly gay service idea...

Sure glad I'm a retired infantryman.

NOTE. If this initivative passes, then its very likely initiatives (while in uniform) for male facial makeup (non-camouflage), ear rings, haircut policy amended, and on, and on . . .

IMHO, No longer the premiere Fighting Force.

Ah, the old slippery slope argument.

I'm still active duty, and I have no problem with gays serving. I've known a few (some who were kicked out, mostly female). Didn't bother me in the least.

Fine..., open the USAF to all that . . . except your SPEC OPNS types (CCTs, PJs, FACs)

The Line (combat) Units ain't got time to deal with this . . ., there's a War going on.

You believe that gay’s are not already in those units? If you believe that then you are extremely naives.

quote:

Originally posted by IHAWKER:
You believe that gay’s are not already in those units? If you believe that then you are extremely naives.

name one then...

quote:

Originally posted by IHAWKER:
You believe that gay’s are not already in those units? If you believe that then you are extremely naives.

Duck Hunter...,

No doubt there are gays serving, with distinction, BUT not forcing their sexual orientation acceptance on everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by EspritDeCorps:
This will be a good thing.

This is a precursor to reinstating the draft, and eliminating reasons to be "unfit for duty". Charles Rangle will be bringing up reinstating the draft again real soon.

The Gays can either serve their country, or move somewhere else to avoid the draft. We have fought for their rights and freedoms, now let THEM fight their rights and freedoms beside us.

Most gays will NOT be stampeding anytime soon to be in the military.

With gays it's all about "in your face", talking the talk.....now let them walk the walk. BRING BACK THE DRAFT and give them ALL a chance to serve their country!

I served for 20 years. How long did you serve???

He may do some tweaking of the law but it will still remain “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” this is kind of stuff that helped the Republicans to take control of congress last time. I don’t see Obama committing political suicide by going down this road again.

America is becoming more and more of a tolerant nation but I’d say the ban being dropped completely is still about 20 to 25 years away.

I mean look how long it took for America to elect a black man as POTUS and I think there are a lot of people out there that are not racists but still have issues with gays. PROP 8 in California pretty much can be the poll that proves that.

I know saying that someone who discriminates against gays is not racist doesn’t really make all that much sense but I believe the word homophobe is used instead of racist.

This is just way too much of a hot button issue and it’s not worth the risk of giving control of America back to the Republicans after the disaster of the last 8 years. To much hard work has gone into taking back Our Country and I hope Obama doesn’t doing something radical that gives it back to the Republicans.

The current Republican Party is in total disarray between their moderates and radicals fighting over what direction they should go and lifting this ban could give them a common issue to rally around and make a come back.

This issue could be used by the Republicans to get moderates and independents to come back to there party much in the same way Democrats have used the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Dobson, Robertson, Coulter, and Palin to get moderates and independents to come over to there party.

If Obama did this it would be a huge Christmas present for the radical right.