Regarding DADT:
 

Former Marine Officer Antonio Agnone Speaks Out Against 2008 Republican Candidates’ Debate
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
Hello, my name is Antonio Agnone. I’m a former officer in the United States Marine Corps.
Last night, the Republican candidates for president gathered together for a debate televised live to the world over CNN. They were asked on simple question — raise your hand if you support repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Not a single hand went in the air.
A little over a year ago, I finished my tour of duty in Iraq where I led a platoon of men to seek out and destroy IEDs — the weapon responsible for most of the casualties of American troops. In April, I chose to end my military service because of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
To Republican candidates “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” clearly means an opportunity to score a few political points with an anti-gay base. To me, it meant the end of a career and a family legacy of service. To our country, it meant one less person on the battlefield doing his part to return America’s sons and daughters home safely.
Over 60,000 gay and lesbian Americans are currently serving on active duty around the world. It makes me think about the Arabic-speaking gay soldier on the streets of Baghdad. What must he think when he hears a candidate running to be commander in chief calls his life a “disruptive issue.”
On Tuesday, June 12, in Iowa, I'll join with other veterans to kick off the Human Rights Campaign’s national tour to repeal “Don't Ask, Don't Tell.” The tour starts in the battleground state of Iowa — at the epicenter of presidential politics. Because last night those candidates did more than just not raise their hand. They dishonored my service and the sacrifice of my brothers and sisters. And we’ll never forget.

Agnone is a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” fellow for the Human Rights Campaign, and on Tuesday, June 12, 2007, in Des Moines, Iowa, he will join other veterans to kick-off a national tour to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

(from the HRC website)

But GC... Those fine, upstanding, defenders of morality and The American Way have a duty to protect our poor innocent troops from limp-wristed perverts who will ogle men in the showers and turn straight boys towards sexual degeneracy. :rolleyes:






(In case anyone doesn't know me by now, that was sarcasm.)

Since you are for the most part preaching to the quire here (although hackles will be raised when I say) and for the most part a quire dis-favorable to military culture. (also note I withheld several "anti-gay" puns playing off of hymn's relating to said quire )

I ask you what would be some pitfalls of openly gay servicemen? And if you can identify any, how do you feel they should be alleviated without disruption.

Now imagine yourself doing such in a VFW bar... it's easy if you try.

Three Words: Precious bodily fluids

It's an irrelevant question. What are some pitfalls of black servicemen? What are some pitfalls of really horny straight servicemen? What are some pitfalls of short servicemen? What are some pitfalls of servicewomen? What are some pitfalls of a half Italian, half German, American born serviceman named Klaus O'mally (the Italian side lived in Ireland for a couple generations and changed the name to assimilate) who's got one really short pinky toe and likes to collect baseball cards?

Who gives a crap if there are particulars that need to be figured out. Discrimination is discrimination and inviting people to start debating the minutia of exactly how to fix the moral outrage that is discrimination has no place in a discussion about whether to do away with said discrimination.

Why would one attempt to preach to a sheaf of paper?

I'm just kind of annoyed with myself at the moment. Anything and everything I write just seems painfully obvious to me, so I keep backspacing it.

Out of the interest of my sanity, I'll just say for now that I agree wholeheartedly with GD - and furthermore - no first step when it comes to civil rights comes without opposition. Just as many were aghast when blacks and women began serving in the military, there will be many that are now. (again, obvious)

You also allude to the VFW likely not willing to accept gays. I'm not entirely sure why you chose them, since they aren't the ones who even need to be concerned with the sexual preferences of those out on the battlefield. I also tend to think that my views, and the views of a majority of the last couple of generations differ vastly from the views of the octogenarian set. I don't think anywhere in a repeal of the DADT policy is there the option for a soldier to behave out of order, whether he or she is straight, gay, or somewhere in between... so I guess I'm just not seeing the problem.

The words "quire" and "choir" are interchangeable.

Hey, thanks KB!:cheers:

I don't mean to make light of whatever it is you were/are trying to say, Tram. Just trying to figure out what the hell you are saying is difficult enough.

When discussing archaic descriptions of Gothic architecture, maybe.