Just read this titled article on FoxNews.com and was wondering what the other Coasties think. In my own opinion, I am adamantly against it for a wide variety of reasons. I do think that it will be fought against by top military leaders. How successful their fight will be is yet to be determined. Even if repealed, the policy won't change the majority of the member's opinions and outward shows (jokes, other talk) of anti-homosexuality.

I think the biggest concern is logistics...specifically how to berth gay males, straight males, gay females and straight females, ie 4 seperate berthing areas? If men and women aren't "comfortable" bunking together, I would think the same would hold true for gay/straight mixes in the same gender. That seems cost prohibitive to me. In the end, I think if gays are going to be able to serve openly, then everyone is going to have to bunk together. Starship troopers aboard CGC NEVERHOME!

How do the commands of our allies who allow all to serve manage it? The fact is that in virtually every EU country and the rest of Europe, gays serve openly in their militaries. In Spain, married gay couple-yes, it's legal to have same sex marriages in Spain, serve together.

I like the French' habit of poking fun of our puritanical ways. They say their policy is basically "Don't Ask, Don't Care."

Ah, Starship Troopers, on a side note, and completely off topic.

My father is a doctor and works in both an adult ER and peds ER.

He was on the kids side, looking through the movie selection for the rooms...typical stuff, Thomas the Toy Engine, Barney, Toy Story, and Starship Troopers.

Imagine that could have been a very exciting hospital stay for some little kid.

I agree with LEDETOIC with the berthing situation, it would make people uncomfortable and how could it be justified for them to share berthing areas with gay and staright. Just to point something out but straight male and female can't berth together so in turn it comes back to the money, time and space needed to create these extra berthing areas or simply don't allow them to get underway. Personally I don't care anymore if they serve or not but certain issues will have to be taken care of. Just my 2 cents.

Do like the Navy does with the nuc subs. Gold and Blue crews. There should be enough colors in the rainbow to handle it.

If you have nothing but time on your hands, feel free to read the discussion from the main board in Point/Counterpoint.

BEWARE: It ain't pretty.

http://forums.military.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/409192893/m/9760053112001

Don

On an offshoot to this conversation, I get a chuckle every time I hear this discussion as proposed!

DADT does not allow gays to serve.
DADT does not prohibit gays from serving.

DADT prohibits the government from asking w/o cuase and reminds the members (and potential members) that if they admit that they violate the OTHER POLICIES that prohibit homosexual activities, that they will be held responsible.

SO, ending DADT will have one effect: We can start 'screening' at accession again, as well as at other points, and prohibit people with a greater propensity to violate the no homosexual acts policies/requirements from serving.

In order to allow gays to serve, it is OTHER policies that must be changed which would make DADT moot.

quote:

Obama to End Policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

You know, this is only a part of the problem with this country. This country has a broken spine and just let's all of these different types of groups walk all over them. Repealing the DADT policy itself does not bother me, it's that joined with every other "PC" thing to do.

I'm sick and tired of the Government not wanting to hurt anyones feelings. How about for once, say "NO".

One Nation, under "GOD"

Merry Christmas

Don't fix it, if it aint broke: DADT

It's a federal crime to fly another countries flag atop of the U.S flag on American soil. So why is it legal to pee on, poo on, burn, stomp, rip in protest and/or completely destroy the flag on U.S soil?

I could go on, but I'm starting to get sick now. How about for once, the U.S. just say no, I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings.

I am not quite sure I understand how its appropriate for Hetrosexual men to shower with Homosexual men.

Serving is fine, its your business and your call, but the question above still remains my only objection.

T

quote:

men to shower with Homosexual men.

Showers on all CG ships I've been on (up to 270') have single person showers, literally only enough room for one person for a short sea shower.

As for shoreside berthing areas/duty rooms/barracks - other than basic training and perhaps still some C school facilities, showers are also only for a single person, not group showers.

So, I'm just kind of curious where so many men are showering together, other than possibly those few places, and only at times when people are really in a hurry.

Where's the dead horse emoticon?

As has been posted before, every time this topic has come up, YOU ARE ALREADY SERVING WITH GAY PEOPLE. You share berthing areas with them. You shower next to them. Etc., etc., etc.

Doing away with DADT does NOT change any of the rules regarding sexual behavior in the work place.

When the late Senator Barry Goldwater was asked what he thought about gays serving in the military his response was basically that he didn't give a damn as long as they could shoot straight.

And one more thing....what makes you think you are hot enough to warrant a gay's attention?

Your right,

This issue is a on-going debate......When I was in that issue was joked about...BUT what really comes down to is this:

As noted before: You are serving with gays.
Until or unless someone admit's that fact, nothing is done.

My concern was "Can the people who work for you do the job"! Not standing around the scuttlebutt with there hands in the pockets slacking...

If this is the only topic on your mind in the work place, then maybe it's time to find your supervisor for work......

Regards
Dave

comschek78 right on! agree 100%. This country is going to he** in a hand basket. If this is obamas way of thinking we are in deep....

good point gm take it one step futher many years ago when they brought african american in or alittle later when they brought females in...the sky is falling what will we do????

The way I see it... I don't care if they are open or not. You touch me, and I guess I'll be seeing the green table, because there's going to be some fists flying!

I personally do not care. I grew up in DC and had many openly gay friends and still do. I have worked with openly gay people before (both male and female). I came to realize that in the end it doesn't matter.

So what if they don't like women they way I do. They might be darn good at thier job. But how could we know?

I remember reading an article in the Navy Times a while back about top Navy brass and this topic. I also recall over 100 Navy Flag Officers requesting the ability for members to serve openly.

gowyo1- my sentiments excatly. Who is anyone to tell another human being that they cannot do something because of thier views, sexuality, or beliefs? I think some people left another country a long time ago to avoid religous persecution.

I feel that people need to get past this feeling that they have and realize that if someone is serving next to them, then they love this Country as much as you or I.

BM1 sends

It has always been risky to drop your soap in the shower after days at sea.

This isn't in the best interest of the military, it is in favor of gays (just my opinion, nothing to debate). I have nothing against gay folks, but this WILL create some major problems, again, IMHO. This is like allowing unisex berthing.

Doesn't affect me, though...I'll be out very soon. However, this affects some folks...I would not be ok with it if I were staying in. The majority may be ok with it. Either way, my opinion holds no weight.

Have fun with it shipmates.

remember at sea it is not gay you are just helping out a shipmate....inport it's gay