Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Proud to be an American.....

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
BearClaw View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 August 2003
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2101
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BearClaw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 February 2006 at 5:17pm
"The men appeared on a pornography Web site that has a military theme, the Army said."

THAT ALONE MAKE WHAT THEY DID WRONG AND ILLEAGL.  IF they want to adverse in that kinda activity else were thats one thing.  BUT they signed papers at the beggining that were to uphold that of the armed forces standards and part of those standards are to not submit sex scenes to a WEB SIGHT.

Whats so hard to see about that??  The fact that they are Homosexual only puts the fact in the newspaper.  If it was a heterosexual deal it probly would not have been big in news but the punishements would be the same.

AS for the BANNING all abortions i 100% whole hartedly wish that desichion was done WORLD WIDE.  Abortion is Murder no matter witch way you look at it.
AGD RT ULE AUTOMAG
TIPPMANN SL68II
DANGEROUS POWER E1
TIPPMANN A5
SHERIDAN PGP2
AGD 68 AUTOMAG
TIPPMANN PRO-CARBINE
EMPIRE TRRACER
Back to Top
rednekk98 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Dead man...

Joined: 02 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rednekk98 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 February 2006 at 7:18pm

Although I do find the military in general to be extremely homophobic, the people in that story are retarded.

It's disgusting and unprofessional to do a military-themed porn, no matter what sexual preferance it panders to. I'm sure there are homosexuals in the military, I don't have a problem with them, but I do have a problem with perverts and exhibitionists. I wouldn't want to be in a squadbay with one of those guys any more than somebody who'd make a porn of themselves having kinky sex with women.

Even if they were **edited**, they were stupid to make porn.

Back to Top
Badsmitty View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member

Parental Advisory Non Conformist

Joined: 22 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1760
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Badsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 February 2006 at 8:07pm
As a medic, I found the hetero sleazes of both sexes who kept coming into my STD clinic burning and whining with the clap to be just as bad.  Especially the military intelligence people at Bad Aibling, Germany.  They were disease infested scumbags. 
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 February 2006 at 8:49pm
Originally posted by rednekk98 rednekk98 wrote:

Although I do find the military in general to be extremely homophobic, the people in that story are retarded.

Back to Top
brihard View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Making stuff up

Joined: 05 September 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 10156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brihard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 February 2006 at 10:26pm
You stick a bunch of guys riddled with testosterone together in a job that basically defines the stereotyped male macho culture, and there's going to be a hypermasculine culture that will naturally discriminate against anyone outside of that culture, homosexual males in particular. I'm not saying it's right by any means, but it's certainly normal, and unreasonable to expect much better behaviour from men employed for their ability to break and kill things. I'm not saying that all of us in the military are this way, but most are, and it's naive to think that any degree of political correctness will change that. Maybe I'm a bit jaded by my experience in the forces, but I don't see this changing any time soon. Some of us hold ourselves to a higher moral standard, but any effort to enforce that morality on your less enlightened comrades just gets you laughed at and potentially shunned. It's a losing battle.

Regulations and orders can stifle outward displays of certian prejudices, but it will not change the fundamental attitudes. Anti-homosexuality is not a problem that comes form the military, but form the larger society from which we recruit. Joining the army won't make you like or dislike homosexuals; all of the people who express those views had them prior to joining. You can't blame the military for a problem that belongs to society as a whole.
"Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation."

-FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011.

Yup, he actually said that.
Back to Top
mbro View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Original Forum Gangster

Joined: 11 June 2002
Location: Isle Of Man
Status: Offline
Points: 10743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mbro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 12:58am
Them being homosexual infringes on the other soldiers freedom, that's why they shouldn't be allowed in the army. Stupid hippy

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Back to Top
Destruction View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 August 2003
Location: Burundi
Status: Offline
Points: 3440
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Destruction Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 3:33am
A homosexual person is actually less of a person for being born that way. Likewise with minorities and foreigners.

anyway....


Soldier Never Knew What Freedom Was Until He Left The Military.
       -credit to The Onion

Edited by Destruction - 27 February 2006 at 3:37am
u dont know what to do ur getting mottor boatted

Men are from Magmar, women are from Venusaur.
Back to Top
DBibeau855 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
IIIIIMMMMM BAAACCCKKK

Joined: 26 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11662
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DBibeau855 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 3:42am
Good.

As members of an elite unit and members of our armed forces, they are expected to conduct themselves in a gentlemanly maner.

I have a feeling a lot of you dont know why we have a dont ask dont tell military policy in place.

Its because of brain dead rednecks, and baptists.

On a battlefeild, a homosexual man can pull a trigger just as well as a straight man if he were so inclined, but what we dont need, is acusations of mistreatment of officers or inlisted men because of sexual orientation.

So, it has been made a non issue, its against policy to ask anyone if they are homosexual, and its against policy to divulge this information. Its for the safety of our homosexual soldiers, yes, we have them and they are doing a fine job.

Any soldier can act this way, their homosexuality shouldnt be called into question, they were on a porn site with a military theme.. This would have been fround upon if it were a straight web site.
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 5:16am

Originally posted by DBibeau855 DBibeau855 wrote:



I have a feeling a lot of you dont know why we have a dont ask dont tell military policy in place.

Its because of brain dead rednecks, and baptists.

Sounds like you don't know either.

Bill Clinton put the don't ask don't tell policy into place.

Also, I don't see any problem for homosexual men in the armed forces. The policy states that soldiers may not engage in homosexual activities. Well, you're not supposed to be engaging in any sexual activites when you're not on off time, if I'm certain.

A soldier is there to fight, not to be "**edited** and loud". When you join the military you throw alot of ideals out the door.

Let me remind you what the military does-it kills. It is a killing organization, where men and now women are pushed to their limits to learn how to kill. Sexuality shouldn't even be a matter here. So what if you have to keep your mouth shut?

Should we lock men and women up together while in basic? Granted, we should trust their restraint, they won't bang each other during the night. But do you really think a bunch of 18 year old guys are going to stay focused with a roomful of girls the same age in their underwear all around them?

So then if a man finds men attractive in the same way, you engage the same problems.

I don't understand where all the g.ay rights organizations get off moaning because g.ay men can't be boyscout leaders. Let's stick some men over little girls why don't we?

You can't trust anyone to control their sexual inhibitions. Would anyone here with children or younger siblings leave their younger daughters or sisters with a total stranger teenage guy? I mean, very few teenage guys have predatory feelings towards little kids right? But you wouldn't take the chance.

Which is why you wouldn't mix coeds in bootcamp, which is why you don't want openly g.ay men in with other men.

And before some dumbass jumps up and says "zOMG! he sed g.ay men is rap0rz!" I simply said that you can't leave the control of sexual tendencies up to the individual. It would be nice if you could, but you can't.

That said, I'm sure 99% of all g.ay men go through boot camp without feelings for their bunkmates (no pun intended). I'm sure they're fine soldiers and whatnot, but I know being placed in a roomful of female cadets would make me a little uncomfortable, so I would think a g.ay man would feel the same way with men.

That's my analysis. Flame away (once again no pun intended)

Back to Top
__sneaky__ View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Voted 2010 Most Improved Forumer

Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: Uncertain
Status: Offline
Points: 5286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote __sneaky__ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 8:09am
Originally posted by dodan44 dodan44 wrote:

Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

"pandering, sodomy and wrongfully engaging in sexual acts with another person while being filmed with the intent of broadcasting the images over the Internet for money."


Wow it wouldn't be bullets you'd be watching your back for in a foxhole with those guys.

thats just disgusting.
I thought it was rather funny.
"I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl


Forum Vice President
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 9:35am

Ok, strato, I'll flame away.

You accuse DBib of not knowing what he talking about, and then you spew a big pile of random nonsense and speculation.  gg.

Yes, Clinton put the don't ask, don't tell policy in place.  This was a significant RELAXATION of the prior policy.  A big step for g.ay rights.  Also, with a GOP congress, he wouldn't have been able to get any more.  I'm am surprised he got even this much.  Clinton has always been outspoken in favor of g.ay rights, decades before he went to the White House.   (And, of course, he is a redneck baptist)

Originally posted by strato strato wrote:

Well, you're not supposed to be engaging in any sexual activites when you're not on off time, if I'm certain.

At least you acknowledge this as speculation.  On and off time is a bit theoretical.  But more to the point - here's nice tidbit:  women in the military are CONSTANTLY getting pregnant (Lynndie England, anyone), particularly on Navy ships, and often while married to other men.  Does the military take disciplinary against the men/women engaging in adultery/fornication?  No - they send the women on paid maternity leave. 

Bottom line - straight folk in the military have lots of sex - with civilians, with each other, and with themselves.  But it is a VERY rare situation when straight people get disciplined for sexual behavior, unless it involves rape or an officer's wife.  G.ay people are treated differently.

Originally posted by strato strato wrote:

But do you really think a bunch of 18 year old guys are going to stay focused with a roomful of girls the same age in their underwear all around them?

OE NOEZ!  Quick, delete this post, before Al-Qaeda realizes that all they have to do to defeat our highly trained soldiers is send in some strippers!!

You have a very sad view of the military.

This point is so idiotic that it doesn't even warrant detailed rebuttal.  But I will make one quick observation - various armies throughout time have included men, women, and/or homosexuals, and they have all done quite well.  Spartans, anyone?  And, of course most of our allies around the world (Israel, all of Europe) allow men, women and/or homosexuals to serve together with little or no restriction. 

Instead of speculate about the effect of homosexuals, all we have to do is basic observation of military organizations that have organized the distinction for years.



Edited by Clark Kent - 27 February 2006 at 9:35am
Back to Top
brihard View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Making stuff up

Joined: 05 September 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 10156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brihard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 11:14am
Clark, I would refer you to my post farther up on this page. I think I do a better job of explaining how it is within the military...
"Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation."

-FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011.

Yup, he actually said that.
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 11:49am

I saw your post, brihard, and I don't necessarily disagree, which is why I didn't respond.

My comment would simply be that it doesn't have to be that way.  History, both ancient and recent, tells us that it doesn't have to be that way.

A good friend of mine (West Point, Gulf War) who is VERY anti g.ays in the military, put the fairly persuasive argument to me (somewhat similar to yours) that the function of the military is to be effective, and the military should not be the place for social experimentation.  His view was that the military should lag, not lead, social trends.

That position has lots of merit.  It can, however, be taken too far.  Just like we ought not play social games with our killing machines, we ought not exempt them from basic morality either.  As much as the military has a function, it is also part of society.  The US military clearly does a very poor job of teaching their people basic people skills, as evidenced by the extremely high level of domestic abuse and/or murder within military families.

The military has a responsibility, both to itself and to society at large, to not allow fundamentally unacceptable attitudes and behavior to exist, let alone be institutionalized.  The military cannot get a pass on decent behavior.  This, of course, begs the question of whether the level of homophobia in the military rises to the level of "fundamentally unacceptable" - and that I think is where the discussion should be focused.  While I obviously have personal opinions on that point, I have no clear answer.

Separately, I note that virtually every single point raised in opposition to g.ays in the military was previously raised in opposition to blacks in the military.  The comparison to women is temporally convenient, but the closest substantive parallel is to blacks.



Edited by Clark Kent - 27 February 2006 at 2:34pm
Back to Top
mbro View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Original Forum Gangster

Joined: 11 June 2002
Location: Isle Of Man
Status: Offline
Points: 10743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mbro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:24pm
Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:


A good friend of mine (West Point, Gulf War) who is VERY anti g.ays in the military, but the fairly persuasive argument to me (somewhat similar to yours) that the function of the military is to be effective, and the military should not be the place for social experimentation. His view was that the military should lag, not lead, social trends.

So does he feel that Truman made a mistake desegregating the military? Should the military have waited till well after the Civil Rights Acts of '64 and '68? If so, how long does he think the military should "lag" behind? Going by his logic we'd probably just now be desegregating the military.

I'm guessing you've used that argument against him before.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Back to Top
Gatyr View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Strike 1 - Begging for strikes

Joined: 06 July 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Status: Offline
Points: 10299
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gatyr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:31pm
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

So what if you have to keep your mouth shut?


Then its rather obvious what the homosexuals would resort to in their sexual experiences.
Back to Top
Hades View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2003
Location: Virgin Islands
Status: Offline
Points: 12983
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:36pm
Exactly Mbro. How far back from society should the military be? Sodomy is so mainstream these days...

Just ask your local catholic preist.

Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:37pm

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

I'm guessing you've used that argument against him before.

Quite a few times.  He does not accept the black/g.ay analogy, primarily on religious grounds.  He is a serious fundamentalist.

Back to Top
Jack Carver View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 February 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1653
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jack Carver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:39pm
In order for you to compare blacks and g.ays, it seems the individual would have to be openly g.ay (ie, make it obvious to everyone around him).
Because it's pretty easy to tell a white dude from a black dude or a woman...
Back to Top
mbro View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Original Forum Gangster

Joined: 11 June 2002
Location: Isle Of Man
Status: Offline
Points: 10743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mbro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:41pm
Originally posted by Hades Hades wrote:

Exactly Mbro. How far back from society should the military be? Sodomy is so mainstream these days...

Just ask your local catholic preist.
Sodomy is the new black
Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

I'm guessing you've used that argument against him before.


Quite a few times. He does not accept the black/g.ay analogy, primarily on religious grounds. He is a serious fundamentalist.

So he doesn't see that as a social trend that was experiemented with in the military before society? Sounds like he uses truthiness in his arguments.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Back to Top
Hades View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2003
Location: Virgin Islands
Status: Offline
Points: 12983
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 February 2006 at 2:41pm
Originally posted by Jack Carver Jack Carver wrote:

In order for you to compare blacks and g.ays, it seems the individual would have to be openly g.ay (ie, make it obvious to everyone around him).Because it's pretty easy to tell a white dude from a black dude or a woman...

Except for the ones that are of a mixed race, because we all know East of California interracial couples are only seen in pr0n movies.......

Edited by Hades - 27 February 2006 at 2:42pm

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.