Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer [Archive] - Page 2 - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Army general is military's first openly gay flag officer


Pages : 1 [2]

KalashniKEV
08-13-2012, 14:09
(Personally, I hold Officers to a higher standard than Enlisted personnel.)

What about haircuts? The higher the fade, the higher the standard, right?

And shouldn't Lieutenants be allowed to have sideburns? I mean come on... give 'em something...

(j/k... there's only one standard... THE ARMY STANDARD. It doesn't matter what you have on your collar)

Not so fast, we are still waiting on the unnatural carnal copulation definition.

No, we're not... you must have missed the last few pages.

UCMJ article 125 leaves it open for interpretation it seems.


No... it's not. Read post #121 or click my lmgtfy link and read the first reference.

Thats why shes a General and you're all keyboard kommandos.

/thread.

OctoberRust
08-13-2012, 14:34
You just make reference to their supposed desire to destroy the institution of the family and point to, as evidence, a supposed 'homosexual manifesto.'

:rofl:


Zing! :rofl:

OctoberRust
08-13-2012, 14:42
Well, no, not really. The real truth is that PC promotions and Affirmative Action always result in lowered standards and a weaker military. Many of us see that and are saddened by it.

So yeah, my team lost.


Yea, just pulled up the text now.

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient
to complete the offense.

Hmmm, so oral isn't natural.

I think you should man up and apologize for the ignorant posts you and Chute have put into this thread. I'm not holding my breath though, integrity here is next to non-existent.

fnfalman
08-13-2012, 15:24
What about ring knockers getting promoted before others? It's been going on for ages now, so which part of Affirmative Action/Political Correctness is that?

Sadly, that was (is?) true in some cases. When Affirmative Action was first instituted, the services jumped through the hoops in an effort to level the playing field as quickly as possible. There was a period when the field was over-tilted beyond level; and things were more "affirmative" than they should have been.

It's just a fact of life that military promotions at the upper echelons have always been influenced, to a degree, by politics. It's equally true that non-whites being considered for higher ranks in the early days of Affirmative Action reaped the benefits of "being in the right place at the right time."

I've been retired too long to know if the same situation still exists; but I suspect it is less of an issue now than it was during the seventies.

napp32
08-13-2012, 15:42
What about ring knockers getting promoted before others? It's been going on for ages now, so which part of Affirmative Action/Political Correctness is that?

Read my post that you quoted again. Nowhere did I use the term Political Correctness. The ring knocker example you mentioned was/is a big part of the political process. No doubt about that. However, it can hardly be compared with Political Correctness. It is more closely related to the "good ol' boy" syndrome in local politics.

engineer151515
08-13-2012, 16:07
Anyone surprised? Really??



In an age when Nobel Prizes are handed out for doing absolutely nothing, no. I am not.

Fox
08-13-2012, 17:08
The real question is was she promoted because of her sexuality or in spite of it?

Regardless...promotion party following the ceremony to be held at the "Don't ask don't tell club."

This is a political general put on the fast track of promotion by the Obama Administration.

The Left is cementing their power by taking over more of the establishment.

nmk
08-13-2012, 17:23
This is a political general put on the fast track of promotion by the Obama Administration.

The Left is cementing their power by taking over more of the establishment.

Any evidence to back this up?

Paul7
08-13-2012, 17:24
Nice precedent here, military personel only have to follow orders they agree with.

Fox
08-13-2012, 17:26
Any evidence to back this up?

How about the fact that her qualification for the post is that she is an open homosexual?

Yes, it's a major accomplishment for the Obama administration to have made a lesbian into a general.

Again, the far left has been taking over the establishment. The Saul Alinsky playbook is to destroy from within. It's all about "fundamentaly changing America", A culture war.

NeverMore1701
08-13-2012, 17:32
How about the fact that her qualification for the post is that she is an open homosexual?

Yes the liberals have been saying that it's a major accomplishment for the Obama administration to have made a lesbian into a general.

Again, the far left has been taking over the establishment. The Saul Alynskin playbook is to bore from within. It's all about fundamentaly changing America. A culture war.

Those sneaky homos.....

Fox
08-13-2012, 17:43
Those sneaky homos.....

She was certainly that for much of her military career. Had she been open in the beginning then she would never have been allowed to join the military.

BTW, How about the sneaky marxist we got for a president?

The "flying under the radar" strategy seems to be working.

NeverMore1701
08-13-2012, 17:59
She was certainly that for much of her military career. Had she been open in the beginning then she would never have been allowed to join the military.

BTW, How about the sneaky marxist we got for a president?

The "flying under the radar" strategy seems to be working.

They'll take over before we know it!

Fox
08-13-2012, 18:13
They'll take over before we know it!

The point of this discussion thread is that they just did!

Fox
08-13-2012, 18:16
Obama promised to "fundamentally change America" and this is part of it. It's a culture war, one that the far Left has been waging since the late 1960s.

That some here have bought into it is because they are generally young and have been weaned on the PCism of the Clinton years.

NeverMore1701
08-13-2012, 18:17
Soon they'll make us all be gay too!

OctoberRust
08-13-2012, 18:33
Not about gay marriage per se, but the image still fits the shoe. :supergrin:


http://blog.lib.umn.edu/meriw007/myblog/gay-marriage-pie-chart-jpg.jpg

devildog2067
08-13-2012, 18:38
How about the fact that her qualification for the post is that she is an open homosexual?


Do you have information that indicates that her only qualification for the post is that she is a homosexual?

She's a flag officer. Even if you ignore this most recent promotion, that means she's gone before officer selection boards many, many times before in her career, and managed to get promoted to bird colonel without telling anyone that she was a homosexual.

You, if I remember correctly, are an Army plumber.

Do you honestly think that you are more qualified to evaluate whether this woman is capable of performing at flag rank than the officer selection board that put the stars on her shoulder?

NeverMore1701
08-13-2012, 18:45
Do you have information that indicates that her only qualification for the post is that she is a homosexual?

She's a flag officer. Even if you ignore this most recent promotion, that means she's gone before officer selection boards many, many times before in her career, and managed to get promoted to bird colonel without telling anyone that she was a homosexual.

You, if I remember correctly, are an Army plumber.

Do you honestly think that you are more qualified to evaluate whether this woman is capable of performing at flag rank than the officer selection board that put the stars on her shoulder?

Maybe he sits on such boards.









Somehow I doubt it.

Glock13
08-13-2012, 18:50
I get that many on the right are against gays in the military. We get it. However, the vitriol shown in this thread towards someone who is serving our country is really disturbing. Are you really telling me that being gay trumps everything she did in the military for 20+ years?

Tiro Fijo
08-13-2012, 18:52
In matters such as these the chickens always come home to roost. Few today know that Colin Powell was made a brigadier not due to merit, but rather because President Carter asked Sec. Harold Brown why there were no minorities on the promotion list on his desk. Last election we saw the proverbial dog return to their own vomit. :upeyes:

The Military has been neutered.

OctoberRust
08-13-2012, 18:53
Do you have information that indicates that her only qualification for the post is that she is a homosexual?

She's a flag officer. Even if you ignore this most recent promotion, that means she's gone before officer selection boards many, many times before in her career, and managed to get promoted to bird colonel without telling anyone that she was a homosexual.

You, if I remember correctly, are an Army plumber.

Do you honestly think that you are more qualified to evaluate whether this woman is capable of performing at flag rank than the officer selection board that put the stars on her shoulder?


Hey man! Someone's gotta make sure her turds get flushed, while complaining about her sexuality, and other things that have nothing to do with whether or not she can or can't do the job. :rofl::supergrin:

certifiedfunds
08-13-2012, 19:00
Soon they'll make us all be gay too!

Nooooooooooo!

NeverMore1701
08-13-2012, 19:02
Nooooooooooo!

At least when they do, we'll have each other!



:tongueout:

certifiedfunds
08-13-2012, 19:05
At least when they do, we'll have each other!



:tongueout:

I'd make the worlds worst gay.

Some years back I was assigned a gay guy as a hotel roommate at a corporate meeting. After the first day he demanded his boss get him his own room.

I'm like gay repellant.

NeverMore1701
08-13-2012, 19:06
I'd make the worlds worst gay.

Some years back I was assigned a gay guy as a hotel roommate at a corporate meeting. After the first day he demanded his boss get him his own room.

I'm like gay repellant.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

What did you do?!

:rofl::rofl:

frank4570
08-13-2012, 19:07
So now that she is openly gay she is moving up in rank just like she was before she was openly gay. Seems like it was never worth worrying about.

frank4570
08-13-2012, 19:09
The Military has been neutered.

What? Are we getting our asses kicked all over Afghanistan?

certifiedfunds
08-13-2012, 19:17
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

What did you do?!

:rofl::rofl:

Nothing. Just being normal me.

devildog2067
08-13-2012, 19:33
In matters such as these the chickens always come home to roost. Few today know that Colin Powell was made a brigadier not due to merit, but rather because President Carter asked Sec. Harold Brown why there were no minorities on the promotion list on his desk.

OK. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that your wild unsubstantiated allegation is true, and that Colin Powell was not made a brigadier due to merit.

Did his incompetence manifest itself suddenly, when he was up for flag rank?

How did he get promoted from 2nd Lieutenant to Colonel, in his 21 years of active service before he pinned on stars?

How did he manage to get promoted 3 more times, in the 10 years that he was a flag officer?

Did he get selected as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs because he was incompetent?

Even if he was not promoted due to merit, but for political reasons, there is ample evidence that he was more than capable of performing the job. He managed to do so for two decades before you allege he was promoted "not due to merit" and another decade after.

devildog2067
08-13-2012, 19:37
Few today know that Colin Powell was made a brigadier not due to merit, but rather because President Carter asked Sec. Harold Brown why there were no minorities on the promotion list on his desk.

Let me add that General Powell isn't anywhere close to being the first black man promoted to flag rank: Benjamin O. Davis, Sr. has him beat by almost 40 years. Daniel James Jr. made 4-star rank in the Air Force 4 years before Powell made flag. Roscoe Robinson Jr. was promoted Brigadier General at in the Army 5 years before Powell.

Detectorist
08-13-2012, 19:48
The fact is that Colin Powell got a White House Fellowship way back in 1972. His 'Godfather' since then was Casper Weinberger.

If I'm not mistaken he was promoted ahead of a bunch of other Officers to Colonel.

His philosophy of 'don't rock the boat' served him well.

kat1950
08-13-2012, 19:51
What would McArthur, Patton, Bradley, Nimitz, Sgt. York and Audie Murphy think of this crap?


This is not the same Country as when these men were here, we have been become a disgrace and these morals and the morality of this country will eventually be its demise.

Ummagumma
08-13-2012, 20:12
UCMJ code violation is UCMJ code violation. The violater knew about the code yet purposely flaunted it. I therefore question every military man and woman's ethics and integrity for doing so.

No, because only the queers lied, the rest were plain ignorant ;) /sarcasm

BTW, it disturbs me too when certain groups of people are being promoted for political reasons. It's fundamentally unfair and being a straight white male, this works against me. However, unlike some other fellow GT'ers, I don't hold it against the persons being promoted. It's a rotten system and they are simply benefiting from it, not creating it. After 20+ years in business I've seen people being promoted because they were exceptionally good at their work, or because they played golf with the right group of people, or because they were married to owner's niece, or because they had sex with the right person, or because they were a "right" kind of minority, or because they were really skilled at taking credit for the good work of others and blaming others for their mistakes. It's that last type I really don't like, the rest of them I will treat as good or as bad as that particular person deserves. Surprisingly, I met quite a few "I married into my position" types that were not bad people at all, and decent workers.

So, if the Army decided to promote someone, in part, for being gay - bad for the Army (as it's a wrong reason to promote a person), good for her, and since it seems that she did pretty good work up to date, congratulations. And if she lied about having "unnatural" sex, so did most other straight service members, so it doesn't bother me a single bit.

JuneyBooney
08-13-2012, 21:11
Being that she's a gay flag officer, does her car have little rainbow flags on the front fenders when she's driven around?

:dunno:

:rofl:I still find it repulsive but I guess America has changed over the years.

Ummagumma
08-13-2012, 21:28
:rofl:I still find it repulsive but I guess America has changed over the years.

It's ever changing.

I find a lot of things "normal" people do repulsive. I am sure a lot of what goes on among gay people would gross me out, too. But ultimately, it's their life. As long as they don't hurt anyone, as long as they don't force me to live by their standards, as long as they make an attempt to live by the general rules of civil society, they should be free to do as they please in their private lives.

KalashniKEV
08-13-2012, 21:29
Let me add that General Powell isn't anywhere close to being the first black man promoted to flag rank: Benjamin O. Davis, Sr. has him beat by almost 40 years. Daniel James Jr. made 4-star rank in the Air Force 4 years before Powell made flag. Roscoe Robinson Jr. was promoted Brigadier General at in the Army 5 years before Powell.

Those facts do not support the agenda of the Kookistani Patriot Movement.

Only whites* make their rank on merit... whenever anyone else does it's "political."

;)

*white men I should say

lunarspeak
08-13-2012, 22:19
McArthur, Patton, Bradley, Nimitz, Sgt. York and Audie Murphy

i just suggest that one might have been gay and some of you guys freak out...

for one its very possible one or more was secretly gay...its also possible that one or more cheated on thier wives ,drank too much,cheated on their taxes...these guys were men with all the flaws as the rest of us

and if one are all were gay so what,they wouldnt be your heros ..if you found out patton and bradly were a couple you wouldnt watch the patton movie anymore??? you would forget all the great things these guys did because of who they were sleeping around with,,,thats pathetic

fnfalman
08-13-2012, 22:26
Read my post that you quoted again. Nowhere did I use the term Political Correctness. The ring knocker example you mentioned was/is a big part of the political process. No doubt about that. However, it can hardly be compared with Political Correctness. It is more closely related to the "good ol' boy" syndrome in local politics.

And the Good Ol' Boy network was better than Political Correctness?

PC kills the military but GOB ain't no thang?

DaGump
08-13-2012, 22:39
Now that we've broken through the openly gay barrier, I look forward to the day when we have our first polygamist flag officer. If three or more consenting adults love each other, then who are we to say that it's wrong? The perfect candidate would be in loving 4-way bisexual relationship.

Hopefully this individual would be a competent officer too.

boby
08-13-2012, 23:05
Obama promised to "fundamentally change America" and this is part of it. It's a culture war, one that the far Left has been waging since the late 1960s.

That some here have bought into it is because they are generally young and have been weaned on the PCism of the Clinton years.

What exactly is this culture war? When exactly did it start? What are the goals of this war?

boby
08-13-2012, 23:08
This is not the same Country as when these men were here, we have been become a disgrace and these morals and the morality of this country will eventually be its demise.

What does homosexuality have to do with morality?

SDDL-UP
08-13-2012, 23:09
Ummagumma and everyone else making this comparison....

Being black and being a practicing homosexual is not the same thing!!!

One is behavior based and one isn't. It's nice for your "cause" or whatever to make that comparison, but it really isn't an apples to apples comparison.

Glock13
08-13-2012, 23:36
Ummagumma and everyone else making this comparison....

Being black and being a practicing homosexual is not the same thing!!!

One is behavior based and one isn't. It's nice for your "cause" or whatever to make that comparison, but it really isn't an apples to apples comparison.

You are born black and born a homosexual. Yes, it is the same thing.

tsmo1066
08-13-2012, 23:41
You are born black and born a homosexual. Yes, it is the same thing.

Beat me to it!

Nobody chooses to be homosexual any more than we on the hetero side of the fence choose to be attracted to the opposite sex. It's just how you're wired.

tsmo1066
08-13-2012, 23:48
McArthur, Patton, Bradley, Nimitz, Sgt. York and Audie Murphy

i just suggest that one might have been gay and some of you guys freak out...

for one its very possible one or more was secretly gay...its also possible that one or more cheated on thier wives ,drank too much,cheated on their taxes...these guys were men with all the flaws as the rest of us

and if one are all were gay so what,they wouldnt be your heros ..if you found out patton and bradly were a couple you wouldnt watch the patton movie anymore??? you would forget all the great things these guys did because of who they were sleeping around with,,,thats pathetic

In Patton's case, since he believed in reincarnation and felt he was (among other things) a footsoldier in ancient Greece, and a Carthagenian soldier in Roman times, there's a real chance he might have been a practicing homosexual in any number of past incarnations.

Didn't stop him from kicking Hitler's ass!

Phaze5ive
08-13-2012, 23:49
If you have to consciously choose to be attracted to women, you might be gay.

Foxtrotx1
08-14-2012, 00:06
Now that we've broken through the openly gay barrier, I look forward to the day when we have our first polygamist flag officer. If three or more consenting adults love each other, then who are we to say that it's wrong? The perfect candidate would be in loving 4-way bisexual relationship.

Hopefully this individual would be a competent officer too.

You are using the same slippery slope logic that gun rights activists hate so much.

Foxtrotx1
08-14-2012, 00:07
I thought men loved it when women please each other?

tsmo1066
08-14-2012, 00:12
Now that we've broken through the openly gay barrier, I look forward to the day when we have our first polygamist flag officer. If three or more consenting adults love each other, then who are we to say that it's wrong? The perfect candidate would be in loving 4-way bisexual relationship.

Hopefully this individual would be a competent officer too.


Homosexuality is not a 'lifestyle choice' any more than heterosexuality is. Polygamy, however, is a lifestyle choice (and an illegal one).

The analogy above fails on that count.

Tiro Fijo
08-14-2012, 00:15
What does homosexuality have to do with morality?


They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-- who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (NIV, Romans 1:25-27)

boby
08-14-2012, 00:32
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-- who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (NIV, Romans 1:25-27)

Now try it without quoting a thousand year old book of fairy tales.

captdreifus
08-14-2012, 01:48
Now try it without quoting a thousand year old book of fairy tales.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:ZIIINGGG!!!!

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 04:40
And the Good Ol' Boy network was better than Political Correctness?I think so, yes. As bad as the GOBN is (and I've dealt with it all my life) it shares most of the fundamental values upon which America was founded. PC, OTOH, was introduced by the likes of Alinsky to factionalize our society and bully anyone who disagrees with the leftist party line. This thread is an excellent example.

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 04:42
Now that we've broken through the openly gay barrier, I look forward to the day when we have our first polygamist flag officer. If three or more consenting adults love each other, then who are we to say that it's wrong? The perfect candidate would be in loving 4-way bisexual relationship.Why are you so openly speciest and exclusionary? :supergrin:

Bren
08-14-2012, 05:03
Now try it without quoting a thousand year old book of fairy tales.

He believes in that book and moral system - you do not. I also don't believe it, but I know that doesn't make either one of you objectively morally correct.

ChuteTheMall
08-14-2012, 05:10
Now try it without quoting a thousand year old book of fairy tales.



a thousand year old book?

Whatever happened to education in this country?


:faint:

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 05:12
a thousand year old book?

Whatever happened to education in this country?


:faint:Too busy teaching about two moms and how MLK saved the world to bother with ancient history.

boby
08-14-2012, 05:13
a thousand year old book?

Whatever happened to education in this country?


:faint:

I'm sorry is it more like 4,000 years? Isn't that how old Christians think the world is?

G26S239
08-14-2012, 05:21
I'm sorry is it more like 4,000 years? Isn't that how old Christians think the world is?
Great burn there boby. First you got the age of the Bible wrong and followed up attributing a 4,000 year old Earth to Young Earth Creationist belief when they actually claim the Earth is 6,000 years old. Oh well, it's just numbers.

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 06:26
Homosexuality is not a 'lifestyle choice' any more than heterosexuality is. Polygamy, however, is a lifestyle choice (and an illegal one).

The analogy above fails on that count.


Actually, polygamy is the same as homosexuality. It can be just fine as long as it doesn't carry a victim, IE everyone is a consenting adult. Some are "wired" for polygamous relationships, just like how you said some are "wired" for homosexuality.

So yea, I won't mind if an office who is in an openly polygamous relationship gets the promotion. Big deal.....

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 06:28
I'm sorry is it more like 4,000 years? Isn't that how old Christians think the world is?

Winnn... :rofl::rofl:

Let them have fun with their delusional fairy tale. I know I like mine... ODIN is lord!!!!!!!

http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/odin-vs.-jesus.jpg

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 06:34
Too busy teaching about two moms and how MLK saved the world to bother with ancient history.


You can thank that due to the fact republicans have lost their way, and actually advocate a gov't getting involved with schools in the first place!

However, I highly doubt you're as conservative as me when it comes to keeping the gov't out of one's life, and you're likely for a public school system, the same thing that creates the very issues you're complaining about right now. :rofl:

Jon_R
08-14-2012, 07:36
Ok with me other than Tax Payers pay a not insignificant cost for medical coverage of military members and their families. If they can have more then one spouse with no upper bound could get pretty expensive. If a guy has 6 wives and each cranks out a kid per year... Wow money has to come from somewhere.

Now that we've broken through the openly gay barrier, I look forward to the day when we have our first polygamist flag officer. If three or more consenting adults love each other, then who are we to say that it's wrong? The perfect candidate would be in loving 4-way bisexual relationship.

Hopefully this individual would be a competent officer too.

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 07:52
Ok with me other than Tax Payers pay a not insignificant cost for medical coverage of military members and their families. If they can have more then one spouse with no upper bound could get pretty expensive. If a guy has 6 wives and each cranks out a kid per year... Wow money has to come from somewhere.


Sounds like benefits should be cut to fit the budget accordingly, not social freedoms.

ETA - OR put a cap on how many people (this includes children also) the plan covers under tax payer's dime.

KalashniKEV
08-14-2012, 08:10
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-- who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (NIV, Romans 1:25-27)

That still doesn't say anything about "morality."

What does your imaginary friend say about pork in there?

Because I LOVES me some BACON.

I thought men loved it when women please each other?

These are not men like you and I, they reject American values and culture and seek to substitute their own version of Biblical Sharia.

http://www.panicposters.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/f63dc5ec28f3175f8a7f615bd217eb71/P/P/PP106.jpg

kirgi08
08-14-2012, 09:24
Don't honestly care.He don't havta answer ta me.'08.

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 09:35
You can thank that due to the fact republicans have lost their way, and actually advocate a gov't getting involved with schools in the first place!

However, I highly doubt you're as conservative as me when it comes to keeping the gov't out of one's life, and you're likely for a public school system, the same thing that creates the very issues you're complaining about right now. :rofl:You're wrong, but at least you're consistently wrong.

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 09:45
You're wrong, but at least you're consistently wrong.


Says the guy who was called out and quoted. Still waiting for you to apologize to everyone for your silly posts in this thread. :whistling:

Like I said, I'm not expecting much out of you though.

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 09:52
Says the guy who was called out and quoted. Still waiting for you to apologize to everyone for your silly posts in this thread. :whistling:

Like I said, I'm not expecting much out of you though.1) The Republicans are not responsible for the idiotic things taught in the public schools.

2) I'm all for keeping the .gov out of schools.

So you're wrong on both points, i.e., you're consistent.

The rest of your drivel is nonsense.

Limedust
08-14-2012, 10:18
Ummagumma and everyone else making this comparison....

Being black and being a practicing homosexual is not the same thing!!!

One is behavior based and one isn't. It's nice for your "cause" or whatever to make that comparison, but it really isn't an apples to apples comparison.

No, they aren't the same thing, but the argument rests on the same principle; both have been discriminated against because of intrinsic, unalterable facets of their lives that aren't correlative to effective exercise of their abilities.

Multiple punctuation points don't make something so.

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 10:29
1) The Republicans are not responsible for the idiotic things taught in the public schools.

2) I'm all for keeping the .gov out of schools.

So you're wrong on both points, i.e., you're consistent.

The rest of your drivel is nonsense.


The republicans are equally responsible since their party platform has since taken out combating public education and making it more privatized.

The rest is Drivel to you because you were called out with UCMJ article 125. You fail to even address it, likely out of being humiliated over being schooled by quite a few GT members. :wavey:

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 10:46
The republicans are equally responsible since their party platform has since taken out combating public education and making it more privatized. I don't see how that makes them responsible for the crap I mentioned.

The rest is Drivel to you because you were called out with UCMJ article 125. You fail to even address it, likely out of being humiliated over being schooled by quite a few GT members. :wavey:What I said was "Could you post a link to cite that, please? I don't recall that ever being mentioned when I was in." He provided the cite as requested.

Here, I'll address it: THANKS, FN!!!

As for not recalling sodomy ever being mentioned while I was in, I'm not going to apologize for that. Maybe they felt like they needed to mention it to you every day...

OctoberRust
08-14-2012, 10:57
I don't see how that makes them responsible for the crap I mentioned.

What I said was "Could you post a link to cite that, please? I don't recall that ever being mentioned when I was in." He provided the cite as requested.

Here, I'll address it: THANKS, FN!!!

As for not recalling sodomy ever being mentioned while I was in, I'm not going to apologize for that. Maybe they felt like they needed to mention it to you every day...



Ignorance is no excuse. We quoted the article, and 99%, if not all of the military would be discharged or "punished" if we went by your way of thinking.

Unless you want to tell me you've never engaged in oral sex, regardless if it was heterosexual or not.

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 11:34
Ignorance is no excuse. We quoted the article, and 99%, if not all of the military would be discharged or "punished" if we went by your way of thinking.My way of thinking? What would that be?

Unless you want to tell me you've never engaged in oral sex, regardless if it was heterosexual or not.Why would I want to discuss my sex life with some stranger on the internet, particularly one who seems to support military officers lying to their selection boards?

tsmo1066
08-14-2012, 11:49
Actually, polygamy is the same as homosexuality.

No, it isn't. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is genetically pre-determined. Just as God hard-wired you to like the opposite sex, some folks are wired to like the same sex. It's not like people simply flip a coin when they hit puberty and say "heads I'll be sexually attracted the opposite sex, tails I'll prefer my own."

Polygamy, however, has no genetic trigger whatsoever. It is a simply lifestyle choice, and as I pointed out earlier, it is an illegal lifestyle choice.

Peace Warrior
08-14-2012, 13:29
You just make reference to their supposed desire to destroy the institution of the family and point to, as evidence, a supposed 'homosexual manifesto.'

:rofl:
please define the work then...

Do you believe it is satire? What?

ETA: The author, Michael Swift, himself titled it, "The Homosexual Manifesto" when he wrote it in 1987.

What do you think it is?

Peace Warrior
08-14-2012, 13:40
If you call out barry "the first gay president" soetoro on his obvious lies, then you're a racist.

Call out a Officer on her supposed lies, then you're a homo-basher.

Yeah, the pattern is obviously clear.

NeverMore1701
08-14-2012, 14:16
If you call out barry "the first gay president" soetoro on his obvious lies, then you're a racist.

Call out a Officer on her supposed lies, then you're a homo-basher.

Yeah, the pattern is obviously clear.

Coming from you, "obviously clear" means less than nothing.

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 14:45
Coming from you, "obviously clear" means less than nothing.And yet, the pattern IS clear, and everyone can see it. You may choose to ignore it or even deny it, but the fact is that anyone who speaks out against the leftist plan for America is insulted and marginalized.

NeverMore1701
08-14-2012, 15:26
And yet, the pattern IS clear, and everyone can see it. You may choose to ignore it or even deny it, but the fact is that anyone who speaks out against the leftist plan for America is insulted and marginalized.

I'm not arguing that everyone wants to turn America into their version of "perfect". I am arguing that "the gay agenda" is even remotely important in the big scheme of things, and that "obviously clear" means less than nothing coming from a 9/11 conspiracy nutcase.

Peace Warrior
08-14-2012, 16:52
Ignorance is no excuse. We quoted the article, and 99%, if not all of the military would be discharged or "punished" if we went by your way of thinking.

Unless you want to tell me you've never engaged in oral sex, regardless if it was heterosexual or not.
Oh, here we are with more of what I refer to as "word magic."

Before the word magic of the militant homosexuals turned it into oral sex, it had always been referred to oral sodomy. The word magic tried to incorporate the word copulation, in that the militant homosexuals created the terminology "oral copulation" from the black hat of their word magic show.

Copulation today means sexual intercourse. Prior, and still held in the minds of many people, copulation actually meant sexual intercourse with the chance (and or intent) of procreation, which only occurs between a man and a woman

Now that this is currently being pointed out, I give the militant homosexuals less than a year to have all this redefined, by their own word magic, in less than the time it takes for next year's school books to be printed.

When you say, "oral sex," you are really speaking of, oral sodomy. ETA: One thing is true though, oral sodomy is not sex, it is sodomy, and this is true regardless of whether the oral sodomy occurs heterosexually or homosexually.

So now go back and review the article and formulate the standard that ALL Officers are accountable to. Did she lie? Most likely. Should she be able to lie and become a general by doing so? Nope.

Peace Warrior
08-14-2012, 17:01
I'm not arguing that everyone wants to turn America into their version of "perfect". I am arguing that "the gay agenda" is even remotely important in the big scheme of things, and that "obviously clear" means less than nothing coming from a 9/11 conspiracy nutcase.
What you call the "gay agenda" will never stop. Just in this thread you can read where the after homosexuality is acceptable, then "we" want polygamy to gain acceptance.

All of this of course is being played out on a public stage while back dropped by a riser proclaiming TOLERANCE.

The recent Chik-Fil-A proved beyond doubt how tolerance, to militant homosexuals, only means as long as you ddo not resist our views and way of doing things you are being tolerant. Much like the Communistic understanding of the word PEACE. In Russia, when no one resisted the Communists, the government declared it as PEACE, and yet at the same time MILLIONS were being murdered and or sent off to labor camps.

So, to the communists peace means no one resists, and to militant homosexuals one is tolerant if they do not resist. Gotcha!

gwalchmai
08-14-2012, 17:42
When you say, "oral sex," you are really speaking of, oral sodomy. ETA: One thing is true though, oral sodomy is not sex, it is sodomy, and this is true regardless of whether the oral sodomy occurs heterosexually or homosexually.So then Bill really DIDN'T have sex with that woman... :supergrin:

Peace Warrior
08-14-2012, 17:48
So then Bill really DIDN'T have sex with that woman... :supergrin:
For one time in his life he told the truth, and he didn't even realize he had.

:offtopic:

Some of us at a gun range had a bet going with the range master that hillary would stick behind "her man," during the monica fiasco, due to hillary's ability to allow the stuff that went on while he was da gubner to happen without losing her mind. We was right and all got a day FREE day at the range!

slick willy's stint as POTUS did pay off. :supergrin:

SDDL-UP
08-14-2012, 22:52
Glock13,

Please note I said "practicing homosexual" that is most definitely a lifestyle choice, just as some people choose celibacy, or monogomy, or polygamy, or vegenatarianism, or whatever - it is a CHOICE to act a certain way. I you want to argue we have no choice in the way we act that's up to you.

NeverMore1701
08-14-2012, 23:04
Glock13,

Please note I said "practicing homosexual" that is most definitely a lifestyle choice, just as some people choose celibacy, or monogomy, or polygamy, or vegenatarianism, or whatever - it is a CHOICE to act a certain way. I you want to argue we have no choice in the way we act that's up to you.

Just like a "practicing heterosexual", eh?



:upeyes:

OctoberRust
08-15-2012, 06:39
No, it isn't. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is genetically pre-determined. Just as God hard-wired you to like the opposite sex, some folks are wired to like the same sex. It's not like people simply flip a coin when they hit puberty and say "heads I'll be sexually attracted the opposite sex, tails I'll prefer my own."

Polygamy, however, has no genetic trigger whatsoever. It is a simply lifestyle choice, and as I pointed out earlier, it is an illegal lifestyle choice.


Someone who finds that a polygamous lifestyle suits them best was genetically wired that way too. Or are we just picking and choosing what we feel should be considered "genetically pre-determined" ?

Could you honestly say to yourself you'd be fine with a polygamous relationship one morning, and would desire that? Because if it's behavioral you can tell me you would be able to, and are attracted to that idea.

OctoberRust
08-15-2012, 06:43
Oh, here we are with more of what I refer to as "word magic."

Before the word magic of the militant homosexuals turned it into oral sex, it had always been referred to oral sodomy. The word magic tried to incorporate the word copulation, in that the militant homosexuals created the terminology "oral copulation" from the black hat of their word magic show.

Copulation today means sexual intercourse. Prior, and still held in the minds of many people, copulation actually meant sexual intercourse with the chance (and or intent) of procreation, which only occurs between a man and a woman

Now that this is currently being pointed out, I give the militant homosexuals less than a year to have all this redefined, by their own word magic, in less than the time it takes for next year's school books to be printed.

When you say, "oral sex," you are really speaking of, oral sodomy. ETA: One thing is true though, oral sodomy is not sex, it is sodomy, and this is true regardless of whether the oral sodomy occurs heterosexually or homosexually.

So now go back and review the article and formulate the standard that ALL Officers are accountable to. Did she lie? Most likely. Should she be able to lie and become a general by doing so? Nope.


Dude, by what you just posted, you've just accused 99% of this board of engaging in sodomy. Since Oral sex hetero or homo is sodomy by your definition.

I'd type more in regards to your post, but I can't. I really can't, when you've gone on the record as a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, and someone who truly believes in a book written thousands of years ago that has time and time again been proven as a big fish story, and parts just flat out false.

I really hope the best for you, and that you wake up one day and stop being a follower, and try being a thinker/leader for a change.

OctoberRust
08-15-2012, 06:46
My way of thinking? What would that be?

Why would I want to discuss my sex life with some stranger on the internet, particularly one who seems to support military officers lying to their selection boards?


Your way of thinking is she should be punished for lying. I quoted article 125 of the UCMJ, which clearly states oral sex hetero or homo is prohibited. Therefor 99% of the officers have lied then. Should they all be punished accordingly?

Why are you trying to run circles in this? Is it really that hard for you to admit you're wrong? Have some integrity.

You seem to be high as a kite.....Off your ego.

OctoberRust
08-15-2012, 06:46
Just like a "practicing heterosexual", eh?



:upeyes:


Well, you know, when I was 16 I finally became a practicing hetero sexual.... I would have tried sooner, I just couldn't find any girls that liked me. :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Peace Warrior
08-15-2012, 07:32
Dude, by what you just posted, you've just accused 99% of this board of engaging in sodomy. Since Oral sex hetero or homo is sodomy by your definition. ...
You must actually like being wrong. Go figure huh?
... I'd type more in regards to your post, but I can't. I really can't, when you've gone on the record as a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, and someone who truly believes in a book written thousands of years ago... that has time and time again been proven as a big fish story, and parts just flat out false. ...
Again, you must actually like being wrong. Go figure huh?

... I really hope the best for you, and that you wake up one day and stop being a follower, and try being a thinker/leader for a change.
Do you often adopt a person's stance, which you are in disagreement with, just to represent back to that person and others nearby as if it was your own?

Either you are out of your own ideas and simply borrowed mine, or, I landed one squarely upon your personal psyche and the only way you have to "defend" against it is to first represent it as your own thought, and then apply it back to me. Nice try there sparky. :wavey: