DanG 1 #76 December 3, 2010 QuoteOnly problem I see with "openly" gay military, is it goes against the whole, "Unit" mentality, all dressed the same, all haircuts identical...etc. Gays would be (and are) held to the same standard as straight soldiers. "Flamers" wouldn't cut it, just like PVT Benjamin (Goldie Hawn movie) wouldn't cut it. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #77 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuote>Only problem I see with "openly" gay military, is it goes against the >whole, "Unit" mentality, all dressed the same, all haircuts identical...etc. Uh, women in the military don't have to have identical haircuts. >A flamer in uniform...Ya gotta be kidding me? Again, women with big boobs are arguably a bigger problem - but we deal with them. Do you remember the late 60's when "Today's action ARMY wants to join you" was the recruiting campaign? The ARMY decided that haircut regulation length was determined by whether or not you could cover it with your cap. Black guys were looking for sizes 8 1/2 + so they could keep their Afros. Yes I do remember that , My cousin was in The Marines at the time, and he was PISSED about it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #78 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteOnly problem I see with "openly" gay military, is it goes against the whole, "Unit" mentality, all dressed the same, all haircuts identical...etc. Gays would be (and are) held to the same standard as straight soldiers. "Flamers" wouldn't cut it, just like PVT Benjamin (Goldie Hawn movie) wouldn't cut it. If you don't think the goal of "Openly Gay" is anything short of allowing flamers to serve,. your being blind to history! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 62 #79 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteHomosexuality has previously been defined as an abomination in Scripture. As have eating shrimp and lobster. That was my original point and you've just circled yourself right back to it. Tell us again, please, what JC would say about eating these tasty little shellfish? Bye. Wait, don't hang up. Shellfish is OT. Homosexuality is both OT and NT. I'm still on track.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #80 December 3, 2010 >I've always felt woemn in the military should have identical hair >styles, Or stop the rule for men. I'm good with that. >as for big boobs??? Your joking right? that is like judging a 5'8" >160 pound Marine against a 6'8"235 pound Marine...sayiing one has >more of a right to the uniform! You seem to be saying that a 5'8" Marine has more of a right to a uniform than a 6'8" "flamer." If you mean that both have the same right to the uniform - then I agree. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #81 December 3, 2010 Quote>I've always felt woemn in the military should have identical hair >styles, Or stop the rule for men. I'm good with that. >as for big boobs??? Your joking right? that is like judging a 5'8" >160 pound Marine against a 6'8"235 pound Marine...sayiing one has >more of a right to the uniform! You seem to be saying that a 5'8" Marine has more of a right to a uniform than a 6'8" "flamer." If you mean that both have the same right to the uniform - then I agree. WOW....that spin made me dizzy....I don't think ANY flamer shoudl wear the unifrom of our military... Gay? no ones fucking business... It is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 62 #82 December 3, 2010 Quote>Jesus clearly declared that He was the way to truth and eternal life. You >can't get a pass without accepted Him, His atoning death and resurrection. OK. He was quite clear that killing was wrong, and that a Christian should turn the other cheek when attacked. If you do that willingly and voluntarily, it would seem to indicate that you do not accept his word. If, on the other hand, it is possible to violate some of his expressed principles and still find your way to the truth and eternal life, then great. Soldiers, gays, police, even people who disobey their parents have a shot then. Everybody has the opportunity for eternal life. It is God's will that none should perish.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #83 December 3, 2010 >It is a matter of Conduct, not sex! I agree there. If either a "flamer" or a womanizer can conduct themselves appropriately while performing their duties, then fine. If either lets their sexuality get in the way of the job they are performing, then that's a problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #84 December 3, 2010 Quoteyour being blind to history! Huh? What history are you talking about? Allowing gays to serve openly has nothing to do with getting RuPaul into fatigues. It is about allowing equal opportunity for all citizens to serve their country. The same standards for fitness, intelligence, loyalty, performance, and appearance would still be applied to everyone. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #85 December 3, 2010 Quote>It is a matter of Conduct, not sex! I agree there. If either a "flamer" or a womanizer can conduct themselves appropriately while performing their duties, then fine. If either lets their sexuality get in the way of the job they are performing, then that's a problem. Saving this post for posterity, Me and Bill Agree! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #86 December 3, 2010 QuoteIt is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Ummm.... I assume that you use flamer to mean a man who's effeminate? WTF does that have to do with conduct in the military?Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #87 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteIt is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Ummm.... I assume that you use flamer to mean a man who's effeminate? WTF does that have to do with conduct in the military? Are you serious? What does snapping salutes have to do with it? What does creased pants have to do with it? What does polished shoes have to do with it? What do haircuts have to do with it? Oh Yeaaaah...Disaplin, and a "Code" of Conduct! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #88 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteIt is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Ummm.... I assume that you use flamer to mean a man who's effeminate? WTF does that have to do with conduct in the military? Are you serious? What does snapping salutes have to do with it? What does creased pants have to do with it? What does polished shoes have to do with it? What do haircuts have to do with it? Oh Yeaaaah...Disaplin, and a "Code" of Conduct! I'll guarantee you that you served with at least one gay man and never knew it. Dude...just drop it - you're wrong in this.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #89 December 3, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote It is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Ummm.... I assume that you use flamer to mean a man who's effeminate? WTF does that have to do with conduct in the military? Are you serious? What does snapping salutes have to do with it? What does creased pants have to do with it? What does polished shoes have to do with it? What do haircuts have to do with it? Oh Yeaaaah...Disaplin, and a "Code" of Conduct! I'll guarantee you that you served with at least one gay man and never knew it. Dude...just drop it - you're wrong in this. No, you just made my point exactly...Who needs to know it? Flammers make a "show" of it! Which has no place in Uniform.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 62 #90 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuote>I've always felt woemn in the military should have identical hair >styles, Or stop the rule for men. I'm good with that. >as for big boobs??? Your joking right? that is like judging a 5'8" >160 pound Marine against a 6'8"235 pound Marine...sayiing one has >more of a right to the uniform! You seem to be saying that a 5'8" Marine has more of a right to a uniform than a 6'8" "flamer." If you mean that both have the same right to the uniform - then I agree. WOW....that spin made me dizzy....I don't think ANY flamer shoudl wear the unifrom of our military... Gay? no ones fucking business... It is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Hey, I'm just sayin', let the bad ass fags man the tip of the spear. See attached unit emblem. The flammers can be an unending source of amusement. Somehow, I just don't think the situation will continue for very long. The one's that aren't flamming will be clerks and dispensary personnel, or they can opt for a spot in the TSA.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #91 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote>I've always felt woemn in the military should have identical hair >styles, Or stop the rule for men. I'm good with that. >as for big boobs??? Your joking right? that is like judging a 5'8" >160 pound Marine against a 6'8"235 pound Marine...sayiing one has >more of a right to the uniform! You seem to be saying that a 5'8" Marine has more of a right to a uniform than a 6'8" "flamer." If you mean that both have the same right to the uniform - then I agree. WOW....that spin made me dizzy....I don't think ANY flamer shoudl wear the unifrom of our military... Gay? no ones fucking business... It is a matter of Conduct, not sex! Hey, I'm just sayin', let the bad ass fags man the tip of the spear. See attached unit emblem. The flammers can be an unending source of amusement. Somehow, I just don't think the situation will continue for very long. The one's that aren't flamming will be clerks and dispensary personnel, or they can opt for a spot in the TSA. ROFL... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #92 December 3, 2010 QuoteAre you serious? I most certainly am. You're taking something subjective like masculinity and comparing it to something that has definite rules or expectations like conduct. Relative masculinity has jack shit to do with the ability to snap a salute, iron pants, polish shoes, or keep a haircut within regulations.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #93 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteAre you serious? I most certainly am. You're taking something subjective like masculinity and comparing it to something that has definite rules or expectations like conduct. Relative masculinity has jack shit to do with the ability to snap a salute, iron pants, polish shoes, or keep a haircut within regulations. No man fitting the code of miltary conduct could ever be mistaken for "openly" gay! Seems either your lieing to yourself, Or Don't understand what "openly" gay means! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #94 December 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteAre you serious? I most certainly am. You're taking something subjective like masculinity and comparing it to something that has definite rules or expectations like conduct. Relative masculinity has jack shit to do with the ability to snap a salute, iron pants, polish shoes, or keep a haircut within regulations. No man fitting the code of miltary conduct could ever be mistaken for "openly" gay! Seems either your lieing to yourself, Or Don't understand what "openly" gay means! Put down the shovel and step away from the hole...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #95 December 3, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Are you serious? I most certainly am. You're taking something subjective like masculinity and comparing it to something that has definite rules or expectations like conduct. Relative masculinity has jack shit to do with the ability to snap a salute, iron pants, polish shoes, or keep a haircut within regulations. No man fitting the code of miltary conduct could ever be mistaken for "openly" gay! Seems either your lieing to yourself, Or Don't understand what "openly" gay means! Put down the shovel and step away from the hole... Drop the clesheys,(sp?) and make a Point.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #96 December 3, 2010 How do you figure that? There would appear, in a 10 second google search, to be numerous openly gay men and women who can serve just fine. If your talking some one flamboyant and flashy, I would venture a guess they would not be interested in serving in the Military. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #97 December 3, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Are you serious? I most certainly am. You're taking something subjective like masculinity and comparing it to something that has definite rules or expectations like conduct. Relative masculinity has jack shit to do with the ability to snap a salute, iron pants, polish shoes, or keep a haircut within regulations. No man fitting the code of miltary conduct could ever be mistaken for "openly" gay! Seems either your lieing to yourself, Or Don't understand what "openly" gay means! Put down the shovel and step away from the hole... Drop the clesheys,(sp?) and make a Point.... Already did, several times - you're dead wrong, but you keep digging that hole deeper and deeper. Time to stop.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #98 December 3, 2010 QuoteSeems either your lieing to yourself, Or Don't understand what "openly" gay means! Yes, I'm busted. I have no idea what "openly" gay means. Please explain it to me.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #99 December 3, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Are you serious? I most certainly am. You're taking something subjective like masculinity and comparing it to something that has definite rules or expectations like conduct. Relative masculinity has jack shit to do with the ability to snap a salute, iron pants, polish shoes, or keep a haircut within regulations. No man fitting the code of miltary conduct could ever be mistaken for "openly" gay! Seems either your lieing to yourself, Or Don't understand what "openly" gay means! Put down the shovel and step away from the hole... Drop the clesheys,(sp?) and make a Point.... Already did, several times - you're dead wrong, but you keep digging that hole deeper and deeper. Time to stop. Mike he already put the shovel down quite a few posts ago on this issue and opted for the backhoe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyrider 0 #100 December 3, 2010 QuoteHow do you figure that? There would appear, in a 10 second google search, to be numerous openly gay men and women who can serve just fine. If your talking some one flamboyant and flashy, I would venture a guess they would not be interested in serving in the Military. Matt How many times to I have to type "Flammer" ? I said "Flammer"...which is what "Openly Gay" will mean! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
