Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: blacken700 on October 07, 2009, 01:19:22 PM
-
-
What a waste of time...we're at war...do ur social engineering elsewhere.
-
WHY DO YOU REPLY FRANCIS
-
fact of the matter is they do have to live in close quarters with these ppl
I want to be able to go into a womens locker room but i cant why do gays get to check ppl out in locker rooms blacken ???
-
WHY DO YOU REPLY FRANCIS
Hey moron I'm gonna come to the burger jont where u work and tell u who u have to work with..then I'm gonna make em go home with u, shower with u..take a dump right next to u..sleep near u or in ur room...then ur have to help em dress and mess with their stuff as they mess with urs. They will know everything about u and u will spend almost every waking moment with them. This doesn't concern u in any way shape or form...u have no context with which to place this.
-
WHAT MAKES YOU THINK A GAY GUY WANTS TO CHECK YOU OUT
-
WHAT MAKES YOU THINK A GAY GUY WANTS TO CHECK YOU OUT
Im a decent looking dude i may not be everyones cup of tea but i surely satisfy some ppls desire.
let me put it to you this way since you side stepped the question
why do gay ppl get the opportunity to check ppl out in locker rooms but i dont get the opportunity to check ladies out in womens locker rooms?
whether they do or not isnt the point they have the opportunity to and I dont, why is that?
-
ITS A HOTDOG STAND I WORK AT ,AND I GUESS I'M NOT HOMOPHOBIC [I DON'T THINK THATS SPELLED RIGHT]
-
ITS A HOTDOG STAND I WORK AT ,AND I GUESS I'M NOT HOMOPHOBIC [I DON'T THINK THATS SPELLED RIGHT]
LOL what?
are you implying Im homophobic?
-
ARE YOU?
-
ARE YOU?
hahahhaa Ill take your deflection and pointless tangent as a sign that you have no response to why gays can check ppl out in locker rooms but i cant go into a womens locker room and check women out...
to answer your question no im not homophobic i really dont see how that has anything to do with what i asked
I do take offense to the gay movements idea that we should appease their behaviour though.
-
I want to be able to go into a womens locker room but i cant why do gays get to check ppl out in locker rooms blacken ???
ITS A HOTDOG STAND I WORK AT ,AND I GUESS I'M NOT HOMOPHOBIC [I DON'T THINK THATS SPELLED RIGHT]
LOL what?
are you implying Im homophobic?
Well, Tony…
When I read about how you’d like to walk into & check out the meat in the ladies’ locker room, the first impression I got is that you’re afraid of homosexuals.
;D
That is the most non-sequitur speculation I’ve read this week.
-
Blacken..I'd hope that I wouldn't get checked out...more to the point thats not the issue. If u allow these people top openly serve u will cause massive problems within both the nelisted and Officer Corps. I walked into plenty of odd conversations and other things between male and female..I don't want to walk into shit between two guys..look social engineer ur job..u have no idea what the hell ur talking about.
-
I have no problem serving with openly gay men or women.
I do, however, have a problem serving with bigots.
Times have changed and the Army should too.
-
Blacken..I'd hope that I wouldn't get checked out...more to the point thats not the issue. If u allow these people top openly serve u will cause massive problems within both the nelisted and Officer Corps. I walked into plenty of odd conversations and other things between male and female..I don't want to walk into shit between two guys..look social engineer ur job..u have no idea what the hell ur talking about.
oh i forgot your the only one here that understands the military. if you were in the military 50 years ago you would probably fell the same way about blacks
-
I have no problem serving with openly gay men or women.
I do, however, have a problem serving with bigots.
Times have changed and the Army should too.
how do you feel about my right to check out naked women in locker rooms?
-
Im a decent looking dude ...
Lol....and very modest... :D
-
Lol....and very modest... :D
lol was that an insult or a compliment?
-
how do you feel about my right to check out naked women in locker rooms?
I don't think that's a right.
It seems that you think gay men have no control at all over themselves.
Don't you think there are gay people at your gym? What about a high school locker room?
-
I don't think that's a right.
It seems that you think gay men have no control at all over themselves.
Don't you think there are gay people at your gym? What about a high school locker room?
serving in the military is not a right either as the women in the vid pointed out...
you like blacken seem to like going out on ignorant and irrelevant tangents.
whether or not gays have self control isnt an issue, i think they obviously do by the way.
Whether or not their are gay ppl at my gym isnt the question or point.
the point is gay ppl have the opportunity to look at ppl of the sex they find sexually attractive in a locker room while I dont and the question is do you think thats right?
-
I think it's irrelevant.
-
I think it's irrelevant.
hahahahhahah you would b/c it doesnt serve your idiotic thought process we should appease gays but nobody else huh?
sorry hoss you cant have your cake and eat it too...
-
hahahahhahah you would b/c it doesnt serve your idiotic thought process we should appease gays but nobody else huh?
sorry hoss you cant have your cake and eat it too...
Gays serving in the military is appeasement?
Did we appease blacks when ending the Jim Crowe south?
-
Gays serving in the military is appeasement?
Did we appease blacks when ending the Jim Crowe south?
no but then again we didnt infringe on others rights when we gave blacks rights as well jack ass
apparently to you its ok for a gay man to look at another man naked but not ok for a straight man to look at a women naked if the ppl being viewed naked dont want such attention.
Its appeasement brain child b/c by giving that right you infringe on the rights of others
-
fact of the matter is they do have to live in close quarters with these ppl
I want to be able to go into a womens locker room but i cant why do gays get to check ppl out in locker rooms blacken ???
Doesn't a gay man already have access to male genitalia if he wants to observe such? Couldn't he just peek down his own trousers?
You have a bad habit of spouting reactionary prejudices without ever thinking it through, tonymctones.
It doesn't help your credibility.
Besides, this whole gays in the military debate is thoroughly infantile and misinformed.... just answer this simple question:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
Answer that, if you dare...
The Luke
-
Doesn't a gay man already have access to male genitalia if he wants to observe such? Couldn't he just peek down his own trousers?
You have a bad habit of spouting reactionary prejudices without ever thinking it through, tonymctones.
by this ignorant logic there shouldnt be gays in the first place as they already have the equipment ::)
idiot its not their genitalia they find attractive its other males genitalia brain child
Besides, this whole gays in the military debate is thoroughly infantile and misinformed.... just answer this simple question:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
Answer that, if you dare...
are you suggesting that the US military mandates and enforces homosexuality in its forces?
please id like to hear a yes here b/c this would be about as funny as your idiotic the US never won a war idea... ;D
-
are you suggesting that the US military mandates and enforces homosexuality in its forces?
...epic reading comprehension.
It's a question. I'm challenging any of the anti-gays-in-the-military crowd to answer it. Why the hell did you assume it was a reference to the US military? Are you casting dispersions on America's beloved troops? You, sir, are one sick puppy.
There was one civilization in human history that encouraged female homosexuality, expected male homosexuality and enforced homosexuality among its soldiers.
Repeat:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
The Luke
-
...epic reading comprehension.
It's a question. I'm challenging any of the anti-gays-in-the-military crowd to answer it. Why the hell did you assume it was a reference to the US military? Are you casting dispersions on America's beloved troops? You, sir, are one sick puppy.
There was one civilization in human history that encouraged female homosexuality, expected male homosexuality and enforced homosexuality among its soldiers.
Repeat:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
HAHAHHAH first of all thats not the question you asked brain child you changed it up quite a bit
why ask that question if you dont think that the US is enforcing homosexuality in its forces?
first please tell me how that relevant to this issue at all?
-
HAHAHHAH first of all thats not the question you asked brain child you changed it up quite a bit
No I didn't. It's a word for word repeat of the question.
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
...and...
Repeat:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
...exact same sentence, exact same question: word for word.
If you don't believe me, why not compare the two different posts of mine WHICH YOU YOURSELF quoted. The question is bolded in each case.
Unless of course you think I went back and edited my posts, then hacked your account and edited yours too?
Is English your second language dude?
The Luke
-
Unless of course you think I went back and edited my posts, then hacked your account and edited yours too?
Is English your second language dude?
The Luke
you put a caveat into your second post as in this
There was one civilization in human history that encouraged female homosexuality, expected male homosexuality and enforced homosexuality among its soldiers.
at any rate please answer the question i posed you what does that have to do with this issue?
Id say many societies have encouraged female homosexuality, i dont know of any that EXPECTED homosexuality of any kind though and dont know any that have enforced it among its soldiers
-
Again, epic reading comprehension dude. The caveat doesn't place coditions on the question, nor change it, it merely gives a hint as to the answer.
Id say many societies have encouraged female homosexuality, i dont know of any that EXPECTED homosexuality of any kind though and dont know any that have enforced it among its soldiers
...some people have been writing down what's been going down, for quite a while now. It's called HISTORY. Check it out dude.
Seriously though... my brother had this same conversation in college with one of these weird Opus Dei activists protesting against gay rights. Once the conversation turned to gays in the military, my brother (not one to sffer fools gladly) wondered aloud if there had ever been a military that enforced homosexuality among its soldiers that could be used as an example.
Everyone within earshot (except the Opus Dei weirdo) buckled over with laughter.
I thought the same thing would happen here... but I phrased the question in such a way that the answer can't be Google-Fu-ed, and it seems GetBiggers aren't that smart.
Guess we'll find out just how smart the Politics Board is.
This is an end-of-thread question whenever the topic of gays in the military is raised:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
The Luke
-
This is an end-of-thread question whenever the topic of gays in the military is raised:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
notice how i keep deleting the majority of your posts thats b/c we dont need rhetoric and bull shit just points and facts.
no i cant and just like you im not willing to go research it so since i educated you on ayers you do the same here ;)
-
no i cant and just like you im not willing to go research it so since i educated you on ayers you do the same here ;)
Maybe if you knew enough to answer the question you might change your bigotted views on gays in the military?
Either way, dont worry about it... I'm sure one of the smarter posters will enlighten you when they explain the question.
The Luke
-
Maybe if you knew enough to answer the question you might change your bigotted views on gays in the military?
Either way, dont worry about it... I'm sure one of the smarter posters will enlighten you when they explain the question.
The Luke
lol ::) sure hoss sure
-
lol ::) sure hoss sure
...maybe ask the question of a friend? A smart friend.
Isn't 333386 some sort of military history buff?
The Luke
-
Again, epic reading comprehension dude. The caveat doesn't place coditions on the question, nor change it, it merely gives a hint as to the answer.
...some people have been writing down what's been going down, for quite a while now. It's called HISTORY. Check it out dude.
Seriously though... my brother had this same conversation in college with one of these weird Opus Dei activists protesting against gay rights. Once the conversation turned to gays in the military, my brother (not one to sffer fools gladly) wondered aloud if there had ever been a military that enforced homosexuality among its soldiers that could be used as an example.
Everyone within earshot (except the Opus Dei weirdo) buckled over with laughter.
I thought the same thing would happen here... but I phrased the question in such a way that the answer can't be Google-Fu-ed, and it seems GetBiggers aren't that smart.
Guess we'll find out just how smart the Politics Board is.
This is an end-of-thread question whenever the topic of gays in the military is raised:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
The Luke
The Greeks?
-
The Greeks?
Getting warmer.
The Luke
-
Getting warmer.
The Luke
Romans?
-
Romans?
Nope.
The Luke
-
Nope.
The Luke
I give up.
Who?
-
I give up.
Who?
Two tries?
Think.
Why would Luke ask such a question, unless the answer really did end the debate about gays in the military as he claimed it would. Luke knows things, and has a habit of making succinct simple arguments, so obvious and unchallengable that they reduce his detractors to name-calling and other such evasive tactics. (Also, he talks about himself in the third person).
The Luke
-
Sounds like the Spartans to me
-
The Amazons.
-
how about just making the point you want to make luke?
-
Sounds like the Spartans to me
We have a winner! (The Amazons are a mythical race)
Pretty hard to argue gays don't belong in the military when the one and ony time a civilization insisted upon and enforced male homosexuality among its soldiers it was the Spartans. Certainly didnt hurt their morale.
Remember Thermopylae... but don't ask, don't tell. End of thread.
The Luke
PS ...the standard of knowledge on this board is surprisingly poor, you guys rely on Google too much.
-
We have a winner! (The Amazons are a mythical race)
Pretty hard to argue gays don't belong in the military when the one and ony time a civilization insisted upon and enforced male homosexuality among its soldiers it was the Spartans. Certainly didnt hurt their morale.
Remember Thermopylae... but don't ask, don't tell. End of thread.
The Luke
PS ...the standard of knowledge on this board is surprisingly poor, you guys rely on Google too much.
LOL WOW YOURE A FUKING IDIOT
how does that justify letting homosexuals serve openly?
they also killed infants they deemed unworthy or weak should that justify infantcide?
they did a host of other shit that would be deemed wrong today does that justify doing those things today?
hahahaha youre truely are a fuking idiot
-
the dumbest and most backwards shit ever..They licking cock in ass has nothing to do with their ability to shoot arabs.The us military has a history of being wrong with these things "Blacks cant serve in the military because they dont the courage or mental capacity to be officers...Insert Chappie James, Colin Powell Etc...
Fuckin idiots
-
LOL WOW YOURE A FUKING IDIOT
how does that justify letting homosexuals serve openly?
they also killed infants they deemed unworthy or weak should that justify infantcide?
they did a host of other shit that would be deemed wrong today does that justify doing those things today?
hahahaha youre truely are a fuking idiot
Plus, the Spartans didn't sign documents stating that they are aware of their army's policy on homosexual behavior, that such is verboten, and that failure to comply will result in dismissal.
Wayne Besen, former head of HRC, was on "The O'Reilly Factor", complaining about Arab linguists getting axed because they're gay.
Well, if they took the training, regarding the DoD Homosexual Conduct Policy, initialed it, signed it, and agreed BEFORE BEING SWORN INTO SERVICE, to abide by it (or face expulsion), then they have no reason to complain when they come out and get thrown out.
-
LOL WOW YOURE A FUKING IDIOT
how does that justify letting homosexuals serve openly?
they also killed infants they deemed unworthy or weak should that justify infantcide?
they did a host of other shit that would be deemed wrong today does that justify doing those things today?
hahahaha youre truely are a fuking idiot
...are you arging that gay soldiers are too savage and aggressive?
Doesn't that make MY point?
The Luke
-
the dumbest and most backwards shit ever..They licking cock in ass has nothing to do with their ability to shoot arabs.The us military has a history of being wrong with these things "Blacks cant serve in the military because they dont the courage or mental capacity to be officers...Insert Chappie James, Colin Powell Etc...
Fuckin idiots
LOL allowing blacks to serve didnt take away from the rights of others mal...allowing gays to openly serve does
do you support my right to walk into any womens locker room and check out the women mal? ;D
-
...are you arging that gay soldiers are too savage and aggressive?
Doesn't that make MY point?
The Luke
not at all pointing out that the spartans did alot of shit that we dont do should that justify us doing them?
apparently to you infantcide is ok b/c the spartans did it ::)
now back to the real problem why can gays check out ppl they find sexually attractive in locker rooms but i cant? ;D
-
LOL allowing blacks to serve didnt take away from the rights of others mal...allowing gays to openly serve does
do you support my right to walk into any womens locker room and check out the women mal? ;D
if it killed arabs...YES
-
This is bullshit and yet more evidence of how full of shit Luke is and how smart he thinks he is....
First off the Spartans were against anything that didn't produce troops for the war machine...so they did not field "gay" formations nor felt that it enhanced the fighting spirit of its troops. Further...any mention of Spartan homosexuality was done or written about by Athenians...so consider the source. Luke do u think ur version of history is the only one. U really ought to try harder..for every article u produce that say they were gay as hell..I can produce one thats says, at the very least nobody knows. They were a heavily militaristic society..children...male s served, surrounded by men, from the age of 9. Was there Pederasty, I would assume but history shows no proof. We do know that the Alexander fielded homosexual formations...not the Spartans. U can try as hard as u want to smart guy but ur an idiot.
-
if it killed arabs...YES
whoa whoa whoa were talking in the context of fairness not killing arabs i think its perfectly clear we are doing fine in the killing arabs department you think letting gays serve openly will automatically win the war?
this whole issue is about fairness
is it fair that gays can look at ppl they find sexually attractive in locker rooms legally even if the ppl being viewed dont want such attention but that I a heterosexual male cannot go into a womens locker room and check out the women in there?
I think the answer is obviously no, so the next question is when do i get my free pass to go into womens locker rooms and park a lazy boy in there? ;D
-
This is bullshit and yet more evidence of how full of shit Luke is and how smart he thinks he is....
First off the Spartans were against anything that didn't produce troops for the war machine...so they did not field "gay" formations nor felt that it enhanced the fighting spirit of its troops. Further...any mention of Spartan homosexuality was done or written about by Athenians...so consider the source. Luke do u think ur version of history is the only one. U really ought to try harder..for every article u produce that say they were gay as hell..I can produce one thats says, at the very least nobody knows. They were a heavily militaristic society..children...male s served, surrounded by men, from the age of 9. Was there Pederasty, I would assume but history shows no proof. We do know that the Alexander fielded homosexual formations...not the Spartans. U can try as hard as u want to smart guy but ur an idiot.
hahhaha aint the truth
-
First off....most people don't like gays...they don't bother em...but they don't want em camped out next to em. The average gay dude doesn't bother me and I'm not worried he's gonna want to jump on top of me...but I don't want to see him jumping on his "friend" either. I don't want to know a damm thing about his social or private life. Its very hard in the military not to know things like that about people. Plus u have a very religious Officer Corps that will not find this very good....gays can serve all they want, but under don't ask don't tell. Its funny having to listen to people who don't serve or never will serve tell us we have to accept this shit. Libs are very good about pushing minorities, aliens and other groups on everybody but them. Black intergration and gays are two different arguments.
-
First off....most people don't like gays...they don't bother em...but they don't want em camped out next to em. The average gay dude doesn't bother me and I'm not worried he's gonna want to jump on top of me...but I don't want to see him jumping on his "friend" either. I don't want to know a damm thing about his social or private life. Its very hard in the military not to know things like that about people. Plus u have a very religious Officer Corps that will not find this very good....gays can serve all they want, but under don't ask don't tell. Its funny having to listen to people who don't serve or never will serve tell us we have to accept this shit. Libs are very good about pushing minorities, aliens and other groups on everybody but them. Black intergration and gays are two different arguments.
And, most African-Americans don't appreciate when homosexuals try to hijack the civil rights movements to advance their cause. One black preacher put it this way, Don't confuse my skin with your sin!.
With that said, they agreed to play by the DoD rules, before they're sworn into service. So, contrary to Besen's complaints (and notwithstanding the whole selective enforcement factor), it doesn't matter if they're Arab linguists of cranking in the mess hall, if they "come out" or get outed, they're gone.
-
The Spartans practiced mandatory homosexuality.
So what's the problem with gays in the military? Seems this experiment has been run in its most extreme form and it produced the most legendary fighting force the world has ever known.
I think this anti-gay hysteria has a decidedly Judeo-Christian taint to it.
If the gays wanna fight, let them fight... why should the US Military be the first exclusively heterosexual army the world has ever scene?
The Luke
-
The Spartans practiced mandatory homosexuality.
So what's the problem with gays in the military? Seems this experiment has been run in its most extreme form and it produced the most legendary fighting force the world has ever known.
I think this anti-gay hysteria has a decidedly Judeo-Christian taint to it.
If the gays wanna fight, let them fight... why should the US Military be the first exclusively heterosexual army the world has ever scene?
they practiced infantcide you numb nut fuck are you advocating that as well?
TRY ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS POSED TO YOU instead of going off on some bull shit rhetoric tangent ok?
why shouldnt they be luke? again you seem to not understand that by allowing them to serve you infringe on other ppls rights...
so you are in favor of my right to be able to go into a womens locker room and stare at women then I take it?
-
The Spartans practiced mandatory homosexuality.
So what's the problem with gays in the military? Seems this experiment has been run in its most extreme form and it produced the most legendary fighting force the world has ever known.
I think this anti-gay hysteria has a decidedly Judeo-Christian taint to it.
If the gays wanna fight, let them fight... why should the US Military be the first exclusively heterosexual army the world has ever scene?
Ah..no they didn't. Mandatory homosexuality was against their way of fighting and not practical for continuing Sparta. Luke while u may enjoy sucking cock...u leave that to urself. The US military doesn't want openly gay soldiers...u don't have a say in it, it doesn't affect u...screw off.
The Luke
-
Ah..no they didn't. Mandatory homosexuality was against their way of fighting and not practical for continuing Sparta. Luke while u may enjoy sucking cock...u leave that to urself. The US military doesn't want openly gay soldiers...u don't have a say in it, it doesn't affect u...screw off.
...history disagrees.
I accept that I don't have a say in it, but in case you are confused, I'm posting on a message board... not setting US Government policy.
By the way, this little gem:
Mandatory homosexuality was against their way of fighting and not practical for continuing Sparta.
...is emblematic of your level of understanding. You conflate homosexuality with exclusively homosexual behaviour. You seem to think in rigid generalised absolutes.
Let's stick to facts... only one civilization in human history has ever enforced mandatory homosexuality in its soldiers; and that civilization was Sparta. So obviously, openly gay soldiers can hardly be considered detrimental to an armed forces.
Calling me gay won't change history to suit your argument... only Jesus can do that.
The Luke
-
...history disagrees.
I accept that I don't have a say in it, but in case you are confused, I'm posting on a message board... not setting US Government policy.
By the way, this little gem:
...is emblematic of your level of understanding. You conflate homosexuality with exclusively homosexual behaviour. You seem to think in rigid generalised absolutes.
Let's stick to facts... only one civilization in human history has ever enforced mandatory homosexuality in its soldiers; and that civilization was Sparta. So obviously, openly gay soldiers can hardly be considered detrimental to an armed forces.
Calling me gay won't change history to suit your argument... only Jesus can do that.
The Luke
hey luke cover up bro your idiocy is showing
first off that was centuries ago and its hard to compare but modern day standards our military is the best around and we dont let gays openly serve so why change things?
second of all they also practiced infantcide to produce the strongest best soldiers, should we do the same? you like to point to one detail and try and string together this idiotic arguement all the while turning a blind eye to other shit your idiotic logic would allow.
Now again since you cant seem to answer any questions posed to you Ill ask you again
are you in favor of my right to go into womens locker rooms and stare at them naked?
-
A former Naval officer told me that the reason gays were first excluded from the military in the early forties is because of J. Edgar Hoover and the alleged photos of him with other guys. Allegedly the pictures were circulated among many powerful people in what was then called the War Department.
-
A former Naval officer told me that the reason gays were first excluded from the military in the early forties is because of J. Edgar Hoover and the alleged photos of him with other guys. Allegedly the pictures were circulated among many powerful people in what was then called the War Department.
I would guess the infringement on privacy rights of individuals also has a lot to do with it...
apparently ppl dont understand that here.
-
...history disagrees.
I accept that I don't have a say in it, but in case you are confused, I'm posting on a message board... not setting US Government policy.
By the way, this little gem:
...is emblematic of your level of understanding. You conflate homosexuality with exclusively homosexual behaviour. You seem to think in rigid generalised absolutes.
Let's stick to facts... only one civilization in human history has ever enforced mandatory homosexuality in its soldiers; and that civilization was Sparta. So obviously, openly gay soldiers can hardly be considered detrimental to an armed forces.
The Spartans saw no practical value in all homosexual units..therefore they didn't use them, nor did they force homosexuality. Maybe u want that to be the case but its not. I don't care if Spartans were gaying it up...it doesn't matter to the US military in any way shape or form..it matters because ur wrong...AGAIN.
-
The Spartans saw no practical value in all homosexual units..therefore they didn't use them, nor did they force homosexuality. Maybe u want that to be the case but its not. I don't care if Spartans were gaying it up...it doesn't matter to the US military in any way shape or form..it matters because ur wrong...AGAIN.
Well, lots of historians specialising in the Spartans disagree.
Where did you get this? I'm not arguing that they enforced EXCLUSIVELY homosexual behaviour, there is a difference... and I'm not arguing this point, you are erroneously inferring your own misconstrued interpretations of what you think I'm claiming.
This thread is rife with projection... my point is being dismissed soley on the grounds of the illogical extrapolations you guys have concocted.
Simple fact... there once was a civilisation that enforced homosexuality among its soldiers... that civilisation was the Spartans... in light of this (something you all should have known) all these silly objections to gays in the military are put in perspective.
That is the limit of my point.
If that point is lost on you guys... then I guess that explains your adherence to the propoganda you hold as beliefs.
The Luke
-
Well, lots of historians specialising in the Spartans disagree.
Where did you get this? I'm not arguing that they enforced EXCLUSIVELY homosexual behaviour, there is a difference... and I'm not arguing this point, you are erroneously inferring your own misconstrued interpretations of what you think I'm claiming.
This thread is rife with projection... my point is being dismissed soley on the grounds of the illogical extrapolations you guys have concocted.
Simple fact... there once was a civilisation that enforced homosexuality among its soldiers... that civilisation was the Spartans... in light of this (something you all should have known) all these silly objections to gays in the military are put in perspective.
That is the limit of my point.
If that point is lost on you guys... then I guess that explains your adherence to the propoganda you hold as beliefs.
The Luke
Do you have any friends IRL?
-
Yeah Ok Luke...for every Greek historian saying one thing u'll find two saying something else..my guess is u have no idea about this beyond wiki and now ur caught in some stupid historical reference corner that u once again can't back out of. Again..the Spartans did not find any value in purely homosexual formations, unlike the Athenians. Nobody here cares about Sparta...Luke giet it through ur head..u get crushed every time u do this. Stop!!!!
-
Well, lots of historians specialising in the Spartans disagree.
Where did you get this? I'm not arguing that they enforced EXCLUSIVELY homosexual behaviour, there is a difference... and I'm not arguing this point, you are erroneously inferring your own misconstrued interpretations of what you think I'm claiming.
This thread is rife with projection... my point is being dismissed soley on the grounds of the illogical extrapolations you guys have concocted.
Simple fact... there once was a civilisation that enforced homosexuality among its soldiers... that civilisation was the Spartans... in light of this (something you all should have known) all these silly objections to gays in the military are put in perspective.
That is the limit of my point.
If that point is lost on you guys... then I guess that explains your adherence to the propoganda you hold as beliefs.
The Luke
Luke - you contradict yourself sometimes within the same damned sentence! Do you even re-read your posts before posting this nonsense?
Just give it up. You are embarrassing yourself again and its not pretty to watch you get so completely humiliated day after day like this.
-
Do you have any friends IRL?
No, I have disciples.
The flow is a little different on a message board, but in real life my charm tends to win people over... they usually politely disagree with my views; go away and think about it; then seek me out to discuss it further before finally coming over to my way of thinking. Once that happens a few times they tend to start thiking of me as some sort of oracle and ask my opinion on every possibe subject. It's very funny.
That's why I try not to attack people... just their stupidity.
It works better in real life... I'm just too likeable to be misconstrued as aggressive or obnoxious. But many here (those who tend to scan instead of reading) do misconstrue me as arrogant.
People are surprisingly open to shedding/re-thinking their stupidity in a friendly, open, non-judgemental environment.
Just look at this thread... the ideologues attack anyone who thinks differently from how they have been programmed to think: I'm told I hate America... no one ever asks me if I do, for example.
I use revelatory questions all the time... why not ask me a question, if you disagree.
The Luke
-
Luke - you contradict yourself sometimes within the same damned sentence!
...example?
The Luke
-
Well, lots of historians specialising in the Spartans disagree.
Where did you get this? I'm not arguing that they enforced EXCLUSIVELY homosexual behaviour, there is a difference... and I'm not arguing this point, you are erroneously inferring your own misconstrued interpretations of what you think I'm claiming.
This thread is rife with projection... my point is being dismissed soley on the grounds of the illogical extrapolations you guys have concocted.
Simple fact... there once was a civilisation that enforced homosexuality among its soldiers... that civilisation was the Spartans... in light of this (something you all should have known) all these silly objections to gays in the military are put in perspective.
That is the limit of my point.
If that point is lost on you guys... then I guess that explains your adherence to the propoganda you hold as beliefs.
The Luke
OK, I figured you didn't have any friends.
-
OK, I figured you didn't have any friends.
Does that invalidate my point?
The Luke
-
Does that invalidate my point?
The Luke
It validated mine.
-
It validated mine.
...you didn't have a point.
The Luke
-
I use revelatory questions all the time... why not ask me a question, if you disagree.
b/c you dont answer the questions that show you for a jack ass dip shit, ive posed multiple questions to you in this very thread guess how many have been answered?
GOOSE EGG
-
...you didn't have a point.
The Luke
Yes, I did. My point was that you don't have any friends because you have a superiority complex.
This is also why you sign everyone of your posts at the end and enjoy talking of yourself in the third person.
Get it fixed or be crushed.
-
I think its too late for either...
Luke as usual u miss the point of the thread. Gare and I both serve..he says he doesn't care and or it won't bother him....I say, while I don't care about gays, we don;t need to be social engineered in a time of war when this will cause massive problems. The current policy works, leave it alone. I've had gay soldiers....they did their jobs and then they got out at the first available point. If they'd been flamboyant or obviouse to those outside the organization..I would have exercised the rules under "don't ask" and they would have been gone..except it can take up to 18 months and if a person serves in combat, does his job etc...I don't think they should loose benefits. He did his job and was not overtly gay. This is the case with the over whleming majority who serve. If u come out of the closet to some gay group or media gathering..ur getting bounced.
-
I think its too late for either...
Luke as usual u miss the point of the thread. Gare and I both serve..he says he doesn't care and or it won't bother him....I say, while I don't care about gays, we don;t need to be social engineered in a time of war when this will cause massive problems. The current policy works, leave it alone. I've had gay soldiers....they did their jobs and then they got out at the first available point. If they'd been flamboyant or obviouse to those outside the organization..I would have exercised the rules under "don't ask" and they would have been gone..except it can take up to 18 months and if a person serves in combat, does his job etc...I don't think they should loose benefits. He did his job and was not overtly gay. This is the case with the over whleming majority who serve. If u come out of the closet to some gay group or media gathering..ur getting bounced.
thats just your opinion it doesn't mean you right
-
thats just your opinion it doesn't mean you right
no but the privacy rights of the soldiers does
why dont any of you supporters speak on that?
-
Maybe, instead of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" we should just replace that with either:
"Just No Sissies!"
...or...
"None of Your Fucken Business"
...could we all agree on that?
The Luke
-
Maybe, instead of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" we should just replace that with either:
"Just No Sissies!"
...or...
"None of Your Fucken Business"
...could we all agree on that?
The Luke
can you agree that allowing gays to openly serve violates others privacy rights?
how about allowing gays into locker rooms?
i guess its ok to infringe on ppls rights if your gay huh?
-
how about allowing gays into locker rooms?
...there are gays in every locker room.
The Luke
-
...there are gays in every locker room.
The Luke
probably so and they infringe on my privacy rights wouldnt you agree?
-
probably so and they infringe on my privacy rights wouldnt you agree?
...as much as you do on theirs?
The Luke
-
...as much as you do on theirs?
The Luke
not at all if that was the case i would be allowed in the female locker room dip shit
fact of the matter is gay males find other males sexually attractive as I find females sexually attractive
so how is me going into a female locker room violating their privacy rights but gay men being in a male locker room not violating mine?
-
not at all if that was the case i would be allowed in the female locker room dip shit
fact of the matter is gay males find other males sexually attractive as I find females sexually attractive
so how is me going into a female locker room violating their privacy rights but gay men being in a male locker room not violating mine?
...I get your point.
You want separate:
-straight male
-straight female
-gay male
-gay female
-intersex
-hemaphrodite
-asexual
...changing rooms. Practical.
But the fatal flaw in your logic is this: each and every bisexual has to have an individual locker room for themselves, as they find both males and females attractive.
The Luke
-
...I get your point.
You want separate:
-straight male
-straight female
-gay male
-gay female
-intersex
-hemaphrodite
-asexual
...changing rooms. Practical.
But the fatal flaw in your logic is this: each and every bisexual has to have an individual locker room for themselves, as they find both males and females attractive.
The Luke
or we can just leave the current system in place and "dont ask, dont tell"
-
or we can just leave the current system in place and "dont ask, dont tell"
...realising your logic demands a separate locker room for every bisexual?
Realising you've been arguing a retards argument for four pages?
The Luke
-
...realising your logic demands a separate locker room for every bisexual?
Realising you've been arguing a retards argument for four pages?
The Luke
hahahah you agreed i have valid point didnt you
you never addressed the idiocy of your spartan analogy and how they used infantcide
realiZing youre an idiot?
my point is that the system we have isnt perfect but to give someone else rights you take away rights of others...apparently to you thats ok if you gay but not if youre straight right?
-
hahahah you agreed i have valid point didnt you
you never addressed the idiocy of your spartan analogy and how they used infantcide
...it's not a valid point.
I pointed out that the most feared military force in history practiced enforced homosexuality... that just shows that gay soldiers don't hinder an army. That's all.
It doesn't mean I'm advocating every single thing that could possibly be attributed to the Spartans. Not infanticide; not speaking Greek; not monarchy; not pantheism; not bronze-age technology... I'm merely giving an example from history relevant to the topic being discussed.
Only a retard would argue something so stupid...
That's like someone pointing out that the French have a great universal healthcare system during a debate about healthcare, and some tard (such as yourself) thinking it's an advocation for Americans speaking French.
You can't be that dumb, can you?
The Luke
-
...it's not a valid point.
I pointed out that the most feared military force in history practiced enforced homosexuality... that just shows that gay soldiers don't hinder an army. That's all.
It doesn't mean I'm advocating every single thing that could possibly be attributed to the Spartans. Not infanticide; not speaking Greek; not monarchy; not pantheism; not bronze-age technology... I'm merely giving an example from history relevant to the topic being discussed.
Only a retard would argue something so stupid...
That's like someone pointing out that the French have a great universal healthcare system during a debate about healthcare, and some tard (such as yourself) thinking it's an advocation for Americans speaking French.
You can't be that dumb, can you?
only a retard wouldnt see the fuking connection you numb nut fuck
they did this and you say that it contributed to their military prowess well they also commited infantcide to help produce the best citizens and soldiers they could so whats the difference?
the problem with your logic is you dont apply it in all situations which is the basis of logic. you want to cite homosexuality in the spartan military as reason for us to institute it here well they also used infantcide to help their military so by your logic instituting infantcide would be just as justifiable...
-
The most feared military force in human history huh..I'd say thats a pretty bold statement...first off its untrue..second I'd say a Roman Cohort or an SS Panzer Division...how about the Foreign legion...Gurkhas....u speak of historical absolutes to make a point that is ridiculous....much like ur poor debating skills, ur historical skills also lack. U couldn't argue that the sky was blue in complete coherent sentances if I put a gun to ur head.
-
they did this and you say that it contributed to their military prowess well they also commited infantcide to help produce the best citizens and soldiers they could so whats the difference?
...I did nothing of the kind.
Again, criticise me for what I write... not what you misread.
The Luke
-
as a side note the efficiency of our military is not the point I think its easy to see that the US military is head and shoulder above any other military in the world right now.
The issue is privacy rights
so please address those luke instead of your idiotic illogical spartan analogy...
-
The most feared military force in human history huh..I'd say thats a pretty bold statement...first off its untrue..second I'd say a Roman Cohort or an SS Panzer Division...how about the Foreign legion...Gurkhas....u speak of historical absolutes to make a point that is ridiculous....much like ur poor debating skills, ur historical skills also lack. U couldn't argue that the sky was blue in complete coherent sentances if I put a gun to ur head.
One word: Thermopylae.
The Luke
-
...I did nothing of the kind.
Again, criticise me for what I write... not what you misread.
The Luke
hahahaha i knew youd resort to this
more of the well what i meant was....
what was the point of bringing up the spartan example then luke?
-
One word: Thermopylae.
The Luke
what does that have to do with anything i thought this wasnt about military prowess?
-
hahahaha i knew youd resort to this
more of the well what i meant was....
what was the point of bringing up the spartan example then luke?
...quote my post where I claimed homosexuality "contributed" to Spartan military prowess, then. You can't, as no such post exists... you just think it does.
You are inferring something that was not implied... you need better reading comprehension.
The Luke
-
what does that have to do with anything i thought this wasnt about military prowess?
...read the quote to which it is a response, it's just above my comment.
Again, I'm getting tired of saying it, you have to read more carefully... that was a response to headhuntersix, that's why I quoted him. To avoid this confusion.
Learn to read.
The Luke
-
...quote my post where I claimed homosexuality "contributed" to Spartan military prowess, then. You can't, as no such post exists... you just think it does.
You are inferring something that was not implied... you need better reading comprehension.
The Luke
then please explain why you cite them and thermoplyae? ;D this is gonna be a good one i can tell...
-
then please explain why you cite them and thermoplyae? ;D this is gonna be a good one i can tell...
...getting tired of correcting your misconstrued misreadings of simple points.
I'm making the point that the most feared, legendary fighting force in history practiced enforced, universal male homosexuality.
So, being homosexual doesn't preclude being a good soldier... based on the most extreme example in history. I haven't advocated anything.
Again: You inferred something that was not implied.
For the second time: my reference to Thermopylae was in response to headhuntersix questioning whether the Spartans could justifiably be deemed the most feared fighting force in history.
He wrote:
The most feared military force in human history huh..I'd say thats a pretty bold statement...first off its untrue..second I'd say a Roman Cohort or an SS Panzer Division...how about the Foreign legion...Gurkhas....u speak of historical absolutes to make a point that is ridiculous....much like ur poor debating skills, ur historical skills also lack. U couldn't argue that the sky was blue in complete coherent sentances if I put a gun to ur head.
I quoted his silly argument and answered, succinctly:
One word: Thermopylae.
...none of that was directed at you. No one is talking to you.
Learn to read.
Your arguments are spurious and childish, yet you insist upon attacking points that haven't been made; claiming I've made claims I never have and taking personal umbrage at points OBVIOUSLY not directed at you.
Look at the foolishness you have polluted this thread with:
-I argued that the Spartans are the only example from history of a fighting force who had mandatory homosexuality... you countered this by foolishly claiming that I was advocating homosexuality and by extension every single aspect of Spartan culture; including slaver and infanticide.
That's just plain retarded... it's embarrassingly poor logic and exemplifies very poor reasoning and reading skills.
-You argue gays shouldn't be allowed in locker rooms with straight men as it impinges upon their privacy
I pointed out that there are gays in every locker room, and if you want separate locker rooms for gays and straights then by that logic you'd need an individual locker room for every bisexual. You fail to comprehend this fatal flaw in your argument.
-Now you are arguing that my terse one word answer to HH6 "Thermopylae" doesn't have any relevance to "military prowess"?! That's just plain embarrassing.
You sir, are a damning indictment of the American educational system.
The Luke
-
...getting tired of correcting your misconstrued misreadings of simple points.
I'm making the point that the most feared, legendary fighting force in history practiced enforced, universal male homosexuality.
So, being homosexual doesn't preclude being a good soldier... based on the most extreme example in history. I haven't advocated anything.
first off you said this wasnt about the military prowess of the spartans obviously it is you keep saying its not but you refer to them as the "most feard, legendary fighting force in history" so it is about their military prowess in repsect to homosexuality in its ranks dip shit
you cant even understand your own arguement ;)
Second off and more importantly no body is saying that gays make crappy soldiers
so again address the issue at hand instead of ignorant tangets
privacy rights are the issue at hand so address those
-
so again address the issue at hand instead of ignorant tangets
privacy rights are the issue at hand so address those
But those "ignorant tangents" are YOUR entire contribution to this thread?
The "privacy rights" argument is beyond ridiculous... you want to legislate for thought crimes.
Straight men showering together is okay, straight men and closeted gays showering together is okay, but openly gay men showering with straight men is a breach of privacy rights? WTF? What about closeted bisexuals? Shoud they only be allowed to shower alone?
What do you want? Polygraph tests of every serviceman asking if he thought about his service buddy's body in the showers? What were the nature of those thoughts? How long a look is gay? 10 seconds? 5 seconds? Maybe everyone should shower in the dark?
What if you shower beside a gay guy, and he DOESN'T think about your body... but then thinks about it in the mess hall?
What if a gay soldier has impure thoughts about another soldier who is fully dressed?
What if a closeted gay soldier gets a boner in the showers, is dishonourably discharged as a result... but then it turns out the particular soldier that aroused him is also a closeted homosexual? Should he be re-enlisted? Should they both be discharged?
Maybe the gay male soldiers can shower with the straight women, and the gay female soldiers can shower with the straight men... and then the heterosexuals would be the ones breaching the "privacy rights" of the gays?
How can any adult argue such nonsense?
Get real. Get a real argument.
The Luke
-
But those "ignorant tangents" are YOUR entire contribution to this thread?
The "privacy rights" argument is beyond ridiculous... you want to legislate for thought crimes.
Straight men showering together is okay, straight men and closeted gays showering together is okay, but openly gay men showering with straight men is a breach of privacy rights? WTF? What about closeted bisexuals? Shoud they only be allowed to shower alone?
Maybe the gay male soldiers can shower with the straight women, and the gay female soldiers can shower with the straight men... and then the heterosexuals would be the ones breaching the "privacy rights" of the gays?
How can any adult argue such nonsense?
I didnt bring up the spartans your dumb ass did, i didnt say they were the fiercest fighting force known to man and enforced homosexuality your dumb ass did...but you still maintain that it wasnt in the context of military prowess huh? LOL again you dont even understand your own arguement ;)
all men in the army are presumed straight thats why it works, when you introduce gay men you infringe upon privacy rights. I dont know if you know this or not but straight is the default sexual orientation nature has for humans ;). So dont ask dont tell would presume you were which? come on now you can do it
your idiotic attempt to find fault doesnt get passed the fact that a male in a female shower is going to be arrested but not a gay male in a male shower...see the double standard there?
-
I didnt bring up the spartans your dumb ass did, i didnt say they were the fiercest fighting force known to man and enforced homosexuality your dumb ass did...but you still maintain that it wasnt in the context of military prowess huh? LOL again you dont even understand your own arguement ;)
all men in the army are presumed straight thats why it works, when you introduce gay men you infringe upon privacy rights. I dont know if you know this or not but straight is the default sexual orientation nature has for humans ;). So dont ask dont tell would presume you were which? come on now you can do it
your idiotic attempt to find fault doesnt get passed the fact that a male in a female shower is going to be arrested but not a gay male in a male shower...see the double standard there?
...the bolded sections highlight the thoughts that have kept you out of all the best schools.
The Luke
-
...the bolded sections highlight the thoughts that have kept you out of all the best schools.
The Luke
So lets get this straight again another the luke moment
heterosexuality isnt the default sexual orientation of humans?
LOL where did you go to school?
-
heterosexuality isnt the default sexual orientation of humans?
...no it's not.
Humans don't have a DEFAULT sexual orientation. It's a genetic trait.
Your comment is as misguided as saying humans have a default eye colour; default hair colour; default skin pigmentation; default height; default gender; default ear shape etc etc
You are doing what you always do... making comments that demonstrate you don't understand the subject.
The Luke
-
Don't ask don't tell seems like a brilliant plan to me...
Keep your fucking mouth shut, no one's interested in your attraction to the cock. :-X
-
...no it's not.
Humans don't have a DEFAULT sexual orientation. It's a genetic trait.
Your comment is as misguided as saying humans have a default eye colour; default hair colour; default skin pigmentation; default height; default gender; default ear shape etc etc
You are doing what you always do... making comments that demonstrate you don't understand the subject.
hahahah wow i didnt think i had to spell it out to you the default genetic trait is heterosexuality luke
you disagree?
not at all to your misguided comment none of those or anything for that matter has a direct relation to the propagation of our species which is the main point of life. Now i dont know if you know this or not but homosexuality actually is in slight opposition to the propagation of our species ;)
again what school did you go to luke?
-
hahahah wow i didnt think i had to spell it out to you the default genetic trait is heterosexuality luke
...there is no such thing as a genetic default.
The Luke
-
...there is no such thing as a genetic default.
The Luke
oh but there is luke, you see we all have a certain number of chromosomes with the exception of a few individuals
we are generally born with 10 fingers, 10 toes, 1 heart, 2 lungs and an pleathora of other parts and we are generally born heterosexual luke sorry to burst your bottom twink bubble ;)
-
oh but there is luke, you see we all have a certain number of chromosomes with the exception of a few individuals
we are generally born with 10 fingers, 10 toes, 1 heart, 2 lungs and an pleathora of other parts and we are generally born heterosexual luke sorry to burst your bottom twink bubble ;)
Retard.
How do I explain this... you have a Chrysler, everyone on your block has a Chysler, but I have a Toyota.
Does that mean a Chrysler is the default car? Is there even a default car? Get it?
Please, tonymctones, please take a moment to consider your level of intelligence; your level of schooling; your level of education... please, at the very least, cast a thought back to how difficult you found your maths homework...
Ask yourself, do you really want to argue about genetics with me?
The Luke
-
Retard.
How do I explain this... you have a Chrysler, everyone on your block has a Chysler, but I have a Toyota.
Does that mean a Chrysler is the default car? Is there even a default car? Get it?
Please, tonymctones, please take a moment to consider your level of intelligence; your level of schooling; your level of education... please, at the very least, cast a thought back to how difficult you found your maths homework...
Ask yourself, do you really want to argue about genetics with me?
LOL whats your level of schooling and education?
you had a choice as to what car to buy genetics doesnt give that choice brain child
i really cant believe that you think that heterosexuality is the default sexual orientation of the human race...how do you think weve propagated so well? LOL
I would love to argue genetics with you luke...
-
homosexuality is an abonormal occurance as in not baseline for the human species
you disagree that the majority of humans are heterosexual?
-
There are no genetic defaults.
There are genes, or there are other genes... there are no default genes.
In regard to homosexuality, the best evidence so far would seem to indicate that the gene (most probably) involved in male homosexuality is actually a gene for hyper-fertility in females. It is a substitutional arrangement, you get one gene or the other, you don't get a default gene which is then somehow modified by the actions of another gene.
You just don't know you don't know.
The Luke
-
There are no genetic defaults.
There are genes, or there are other genes... there are no default genes.
In regard to homosexuality, the best evidence so far would seem to indicate that the gene (most probably) involved in male homosexuality is actually a gene for hyper-fertility in females. It is a substitutional arrangement, you get one gene or the other, you don't get a default gene which is then somehow modified by the actions of another gene.
You just don't know you don't know.
The Luke
which gene do you get the majority of the time? what is the outcome sexual orientation wise of that gene?
I never said you did but everyone gets a set of genes there are multiple mutiple combinations no doubt but there are many that occur time and time again and there are a few that are abonormalities...
perhaps default was a bad term to use lets go with baseline
whats the baseline for sexual orientation in humans
homosexual or heterosexual?
-
One word: Thermopylae.
The Luke
Yeah...I guess because u've seen 300 thats all there is. The Legion at Camerone, any of the battles fought by the SS formations, the US Marines in both WW2 or Korea...the Gurkhas in Malaya.....another moron who gets his history from Hollywood.
-
Yeah...I guess because u've seen 300 thats all there is. The Legion at Camerone, any of the battles fought by the SS formations, the US Marines in both WW2 or Korea...the Gurkhas in Malaya.....another moron who gets his history from Hollywood.
What are you arguing, that the Spartans were a bunch of sissies?
Any way you cut it, the testimony of history disagrees with your hysterical homophobia regarding gays in the military. I think I made that point quite conclusively.
I'll stop getting my "history from Hollywood", if you guys stop getting your entire worldview from Rupert Murdoch's propaganda machine.
The Luke
-
Luke..u really can't end a debate u lost...u have never served in the military..u've never had to do the things required of military service that would make life with homosexuals hard to take for both sides. U have yet to provide any real proof of ur Spartan claims....and I never said the Spartans weren't an able military force...but the most feared? U never make ur points even remotely conclusive.
-
Luke..u really can't end a debate u lost...u have never served in the military..u've never had to do the things required of military service that would make life with homosexuals hard to take for both sides. U have yet to provide any real proof of ur Spartan claims....and I never said the Spartans weren't an able military force...but the most feared? U never make ur points even remotely conclusive.
In my short time in the british army, i have to be honest gays never really bothered me at all, we knew there were some, to be honest it was never really an issue. Women on the other hand made it very difficult, as professional as soldiers are, I always felt that unit cohesion was always affected if we had a woman in the group, many of the women soldiers who i worked with were extremely talented and capable, but there was always some dude who got affected by the fact a woman was around, made him act tough, or play up a bit. I never really enjoyed the crap that the sexual dynamics brought with it. Im sure that in my barracks there may have been a couple of gay guys, i would have never known and for some reason it was never brought up, since its unlike a male female dynamic which is two way in terms of the way it works. A gay dude can like a straight man all he wants, it aint gonna change a thing if that soldier is straight.
-
And thats as good an endorsement of don't ask as anything...u said u didn't know and the odds are that u served with some. They did their job and kept it to themselves. That will change if they serve openly.
-
which gene do you get the majority of the time? what is the outcome sexual orientation wise of that gene?
I never said you did but everyone gets a set of genes there are multiple mutiple combinations no doubt but there are many that occur time and time again and there are a few that are abonormalities...
perhaps default was a bad term to use lets go with baseline
whats the baseline for sexual orientation in humans
homosexual or heterosexual?
hey numb nut dont act like you didnt see this...
What are you arguing, that the Spartans were a bunch of sissies?
Any way you cut it, the testimony of history disagrees with your hysterical homophobia regarding gays in the military. I think I made that point quite conclusively.
I'll stop getting my "history from Hollywood", if you guys stop getting your entire worldview from Rupert Murdoch's propaganda machine.
LOL i really dont know what youre talking about b/c as youve stated you didnt bring up the spartans to use them in a military prowess context... ;) try understanding your own arguement before typing luke
at any rate again our army is the best this world has ever seen, you disagree with that?
well by your logic thats reason enough to not let gays serve openly after all by not doing so weve become the best military this world has ever seen ;)
-
U have yet to provide any real proof of ur Spartan claims....and I never said the Spartans weren't an able military force...but the most feared? U never make ur points even remotely conclusive.
...Jesus dude, read a book. You are embarrassing yourself (and all Americans).
hey numb nut dont act like you didnt see this...
Okay, tonymctones, you are right... I recommend you write up your insights as a formal scientific paper and submit them for peer review and publication. You are a genius, and the field of genetic research needs your unique perspective.
The Luke
-
Okay, tonymctones, you are right... I recommend you write up your insights as a formal scientific paper and submit them for peer review and publication. You are a genius, and the field of genetic research needs your unique perspective.
The Luke
again what is your formal education? where did you attend school?
I like how you avoid all the points that make you look retarded ;) and dont answer questions ;)
hahahah so youre saying homosexuality is the norm/baseline for humans? ;)
also by your idiotic spartan logic in regards to homosexuality and military prowess I think the US is doing just fine seeing as we are the best military this world has seen and we dont allow gays to openly serve ;) just thought id point that out...
-
I like how you avoid all the points that make you look retarded ;) and dont answer questions ;)
...Yes. I'm the one who seems retarded here. All your talk of "default" and "baseline" sexual orientations, and claims that homosexuality is "obnormal" (sic) just go to show what an excellent grasp of genetics you have.
You should publish a paper.
hahahah so youre saying homosexuality is the norm/baseline for humans? ;)
...If you misquote someone, and then attack your own inaccurate paraphrasing: you are then effectively arguing with yourself. Go ahead.
The Luke
-
...Jesus dude, read a book. You are embarrassing yourself (and all Americans).
Okay, tonymctones, you are right... I recommend you write up your insights as a formal scientific paper and submit them for peer review and publication. You are a genius, and the field of genetic research needs your unique perspective.
The Luke
Ah bud..I read more in a week that u do all year...show me who says that the Spartans were all forced gays. U have zero crediablity here...
-
Ah bud..I read more in a week that u do all year...show me who says that the Spartans were all forced gays. U have zero crediablity here...
Type: "Spartans Recommended Reading" into Google.
Read those books.
Maybe talk to someone who had a proper (classical) education.
The Luke
-
Well as I was both an English and History major with a Poli-Sci minor I think I qualify. Sparta and whether they gayed it up doesn't matter. The Spartans did not field all homosexual units because they say no military benefit...further homosexual behaivor or rather exclusive homosexual behaivor as u suggest did not feed the war machine.
-
Well as I was both an English and History major with a Poli-Sci minor I think I qualify. Sparta and whether they gayed it up doesn't matter. The Spartans did not field all homosexual units because they say no military benefit...further homosexual behaivor or rather exclusive homosexual behaivor as u suggest did not feed the war machine.
I've said this before and I'll say it again...
Misquoting someone, then attacking your own shoddy paraphrasing means you are effectively arguing with yourself.
"The Spartans did not field all homosexual units..."
"homosexual behaivor or rather exclusive homosexual behaivor as u suggest"
I never made either of these points (if I did, quote my post and I'll apologise).
So who are you arguing with?
The Luke
-
Yeah u did.....u said they used forced homosexuality...meaning they fielded homosexual units..they didn't.
-
Yeah u did.....u said they used forced homosexuality...meaning they fielded homosexual units..they didn't.
Epic reading comprehension.
Does that mean someone "forced" into a homosexual act remains a homosexual for their whole life...?
Seriously dude, how do you function with such poor grasp of written text?
The Luke
-
OK Luke u got stomped the last time u tried to wiggle out of it. I said they didn't field homosexual units..u said they were the most feared military force ever that forced homosexuality on their troops. No....ur an idiot.
-
...Yes. I'm the one who seems retarded here. All your talk of "default" and "baseline" sexual orientations, and claims that homosexuality is "obnormal" (sic) just go to show what an excellent grasp of genetics you have.
You should publish a paper.
...If you misquote someone, and then attack your own inaccurate paraphrasing: you are then effectively arguing with yourself. Go ahead.
LOL again where did you go to school? and what was youre area of study luke?
homosexuality is abnormal simply b/c something occurs in nature doesnt mean thats what nature intended to happen.
How did I misquote you brain child?
why not address this point luke or answer any of my questions?again what is your formal education? where did you attend school?
I like how you avoid all the points that make you look retarded ;) and dont answer questions ;)
also by your idiotic spartan logic in regards to homosexuality and military prowess I think the US is doing just fine seeing as we are the best military this world has seen and we dont allow gays to openly serve ;) just thought id point that out...
-
OK Luke u got stomped the last time u tried to wiggle out of it. I said they didn't field homosexual units..u said they were the most feared military force ever that forced homosexuality on their troops. No....ur an idiot.
...again, epic reading comprehension.
You don't understand what I said: you've scanned my posts and only gleaned the gist of my argument. You are misquoting me and insinuating from the syntax of your own shoddy paraphrasing an improperly extrapolated argument. You can't attribute that to me.
Again, if you can quote where I claimed any of the following:
"The Spartans did not field all homosexual units..."
"homosexual behaivor or rather exclusive homosexual behaivor as u suggest"
...I'll happily apologise.
Surely, if you are accusing me of making a certain statement, then you can surely quote such statements? This is a message board after all... or are you just flat out lying?
Re-read my posts. I wrote what I wrote, and will defend what I wrote... I won't argue your hysterical feverished imaginings of what you think I wrote.
The Luke
-
That would suggest u matter...and u don't. Further..having watched u squirm ur way out of a debate a few weeks ago that u got frog stomped over, I have no desire to search through ur endless drivel. U know what u said...u know ur wrong as usual.
-
Its funny u always debate these bizarre points...Spartans...econ omics and the war of 1812..points u feel u can defend because we stupid Americans couldn't possibly know anything about them. I guess ur watching to much anti-American bullshit.
-
That would suggest u matter...and u don't. Further..having watched u squirm ur way out of a debate a few weeks ago that u got frog stomped over, I have no desire to search through ur endless drivel. U know what u said...u know ur wrong as usual.
Funny, I seem to remember that I once I started to explain my reasoning you guys all just disappeared?
Funny here that you can't seem to find these supposed statements of mine... guess you are a liar after all.
Its funny u always debate these bizarre points...Spartans...econ omics and the war of 1812..points u feel u can defend because we stupid Americans couldn't possibly know anything about them. I guess ur watching to much anti-American bullshit.
I think it's funny that you guys who love to pontificate with such certitude know so very little, about so very much.
If the answer can't be Googled, you guys don't seem to know it.
The Luke
-
Luke...I don't have to..u lost. U can read the thead....u didn't post proof...u told me to google something. I did that when this stupid thread began and u posted that crap about the Spartans. If u were smart u'd know that in history especially ancient Greek history is murky. The Athenians wrote most of Greek history and not a whole lot about Sparta taht be can be verified. Nobody's here because we're all watching football. I just love watching u flap around.
-
Luke...I don't have to..u lost. U can read the thead....u didn't post proof...u told me to google something. I did that when this stupid thread began and u posted that crap about the Spartans. If u were smart u'd know that in history especially ancient Greek history is murky. The Athenians wrote most of Greek history and not a whole lot about Sparta taht be can be verified. Nobody's here because we're all watching football. I just love watching u flap around.
...I have to prove what should be common knowledge because you don't know anything?
Don't you think, maybe just maybe, you should educate yourself about the subject BEFORE making blanket statements of fact regarding a subject that actually has been researched by archaeologists. Lots of other stuff happened prior to 1776 you know.
History Channel is your friend.
The Luke
-
Dude..when u learn to debate u get back to us.
-
haha the War of 1812
another glorious chapter in Canadian history
we're friendly but push us and we'll mess you up
-
Dude..when u learn to debate u get back to us.
I think I've won here... there's no counter argument.
You, yourself, have just admitted that you had to Google the Spartans... yet you still don't know the most basic facts about them. Epic research skills. Brutal educational standard.
That's so laughable... that's technically a self-owning.
Guess we've finally reached the point where I've made my argument... you guys have misunderstood it... I've had to explain my thinking as I might to a child... you guys realise you are wrong but can't admit that... the name calling begins... I ask for a counter argument... none is proffered... so, finally, the name calling turns to feigned frustrated resignation.
Sad really... nice sparring with you.
The Luke
-
Oh Luke..I didn't google the Spartans...I was googling the facts surrounding their supposed "gayness". But since u failed to provide a scrap of evidence as usual, I think u have failed. We didn't spar son, that would be a fight. I stepped on ur head and drove my boot through ur skull. Ur kung Fu is weak.
-
Besides I'd much rather ask BPJ if he's Canadian and then if so..his maroon Beret thing on his avatar refers to the Canadian Airborne REGT. Ur an idiot without and skills.
-
Oh Luke..I didn't google the Spartans...I was googling the facts surrounding their supposed "gayness". But since u failed to provide a scrap of evidence as usual, I think u have failed. We didn't spar son, that would be a fight. I stepped on ur head and drove my boot through ur skull. Ur kung Fu is weak.
You couldn't find information on Spartan homosexual practices? Epic fail.
The very fact that you used the phrase "supposed gayness" regarding the Spartans is retarded on a Glen Beck level.
If I gave you a link to a book on the subject, would you need me to read it to you too?
The Luke
-
Are u still here... I thought u had tried to find a little greek boy to molest.
-
Are u still here... I thought u had tried to find a little greek boy to molest.
Now it's back to the name calling... guess I just made another point you can't counter.
The Luke
-
Luke..I made my point....ur arguments are greasing the wheels of our tanks.....keep trying.
-
Luke..I made my point....ur arguments are greasing the wheels of our tanks.....keep trying.
What was that?
That you don't know much and can't educate yourself?
The Luke
-
I can't I'm too busy pulling parts of ur ridiculous argument out of my treads..its kinda messy.
-
I can't I'm too busy pulling parts of ur ridiculous argument out of my treads..its kinda messy.
Yes... I was owned by your chronic ignorance and inability to research.
The Luke
-
I don't have to prove anything..u point was ridiculous and waaaay off topic and again u lost.
-
I don't have to prove anything..u point was ridiculous and waaaay off topic and again u lost.
So you're admitting you can't prove your counter argument?
I agree, your entire counter argument was predicated on your own ignorance and inability to research anything. Probably best to admit defeat, and slink away.
The Luke
-
-
First off...the topic was gays in the military....the second part of which u know nothing about, I have no first hand knowledge of the gay part or ur preference for it. My counter argument was made several days ago and solid. U provided nothing to make ur case..no articles...not even a cut and paste job. U were defeated as u were before and u insist on dragging this on. As Kazan or Skip called u...a psuedo-intellectual douchbag..u have no leg to stand on.
-
;D
-
Associated Press / July 8, 2008
WASHINGTON - Congress should repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law because the presence of gays in the military is unlikely to undermine the ability to fight and win, according to a new study released by a California-based research center.
The study was conducted by four retired military officers, including the three-star Air Force lieutenant general who in early 1993 was tasked with implementing President Clinton's policy that the military stop questioning recruits on their sexual orientation.
"Evidence shows that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline, or cohesion," the officers stated.
To support its contention, the panel points to the British and Israeli militaries, where it says gay people serve openly without hurting the effectiveness of combat operations.
Undermining unit cohesion was a determining factor when Congress passed the 1993 law, intended to keep the military from asking recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members can't say they are gay or bisexual, engage in homosexual activity, or marry a member of the same sex.
Supporters of the ban contend there is still no empirical evidence that allowing gays to serve openly won't hurt combat effectiveness.
"The issue is trust and confidence" among members of a unit, said Lieutenant Colonel Robert Maginnis, who retired in 1993 after working on the issue for the Army. When some people with a different sexual orientation are "in a close combat environment, it results in a lack of trust," he said.
The study was sponsored by the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara, which said it picked the panel members to portray a bipartisan representation of the different service branches. According to its website, the Palm Center "is committed to keeping researchers, journalists and the general public informed of the latest developments in the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy debate."
Two of the officers on the panel have endorsed Democratic candidates since leaving the military - Army Lieutenant General Robert Gard, who supports Barack Obama, and Marine Corps General Hugh Aitken, who backed Clinton in 1996.
Air Force Lieutenant General Robert Minter Alexander, a Republican, was assigned in 1993 to a high-level panel established by the Defense Department to examine the issue of gays in the military. At one point, he signed an order that prohibited the military from asking a recruit's sexual orientation.
Alexander said at the time he was simply trying to carry out the president's orders and not take a position. But he now believes the law should be repealed because it assumes the existence of gays in the military is disruptive to units even though cultural attitudes are changing.
©
-
Blacken,
You seem to be pretty level-headed, is it common for a discussion on this board to degenerate into entrenched ignorance?
I can't believe the basis of HH6's argument is that he doesn't know anything about the Spartans and isn't able to research them? How can someone think this is a "winning" viewpoint?
Have you seen this before?
The Luke
-
Ah Luke...thats wasn't my argument..an argument u lost by the way. Don't ever put words in my mouth ok. Blacken is a lib so u guys can go jerk each other off after this. We can go round and round on military history and u will get smoked like u did on ur last military thread. U had no idea what the Spartan view was on homosexuality and combat formations..in fact u still have no idea what the hell I'm talking about.
-
ITS GOING TO GET OVERTURED SO GET OVER IT
-
Dude..we have'nt even started yet. barry will fail at that just like he fails every day.
-
U had no idea what the Spartan view was on homosexuality and combat formations..in fact u still have no idea what the hell I'm talking about.
"Sparta" and "agoge"... Google that shit.
If you want the low-down on the sexual/homosexual side of things try to avoid highly censored encyclopedias such as wikipedia and do some more in-depth reading by authors writing for the adult/college audience.
Remember, when you are researching the information you had to admit you didn't have any knowledge of, and learning about the hyper-militarised Spartans and their weird attitudes towards homosexuality... remember to keep reminding yourself that you know so much more than me about everything. That seems to be the way you convince yourself of your all that delusional bullshit.
The Luke
-
"Sparta" and "agoge"... Google that shit.
If you want the low-down on the sexual/homosexual side of things try to avoid highly censored encyclopedias such as wikipedia and do some more in-depth reading by authors writing for the adult/college audience.
Remember, when you are researching the information you had to admit you didn't have any knowledge of, and learning about the hyper-militarised Spartans and their weird attitudes towards homosexuality... remember to keep reminding yourself that you know so much more than me about everything. That seems to be the way you convince yourself of your all that delusional bullshit.
The Luke
what was the point of bringing up sparta again? ;)
-
He likes the cock.....thats his point.
-
what was the point of bringing up sparta again? ;)
...just answering HH6, read the thread.
Again and again I have to explain to you that when I quote another persons post in my response that means I'm responding to what they wrote.
The Luke
-
...just answering HH6, read the thread.
Again and again I have to explain to you that when I quote another persons post in my response that means I'm responding to what they wrote.
The Luke
actually fucktard your referencing sparta was in response to my post as in you quoted my post at the beginning of this exercise in idiocy...
so again why exactly did you bring up sparta?
try and keep up brainchild
while youre at it where did you study and what was the field you studied in?
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
Answer that, if you dare...
The Luke
just in case you want to try and wiggle out of it again...this is the first post you made in this thread click on it and see who you quoted in that post
try understanding your own arguement first....
-
tonymctones,
Imagine a discussion regarding gays in the military, prompted by news that America's longstanding "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy may be coming to an end. Someone, hoping to enlighten the atmosphere of hysterical homophobia, asks the following question:
Question:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
Answer: The Spartans
For most readers, the point is obvious, being as the Spartans were a legendary fighting force and undoubtedly the most militarised society in human history, their name is synonymous with bravery and an almost quasi-religious soldiering zealotry.
So obviously, this simple question (which I assumed would be rhetoric) and answer (which I assumed everyone would know), makes blatantly ridiculous any argument that gay soldiers in any way hinder an armys morale.
Simple. Direct. Yet educational. That's how you make a point: a succinct observation that completely invalidates a stupid argument.
If you didn't know this... didn't get the reference... and still don't understand the point... then I'm very sorry, but I can't fix stoopid.
The Luke
-
tonymctones,
Imagine a discussion regarding gays in the military, prompted by news that America's longstanding "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy may be coming to an end. Someone, hoping to enlighten the atmosphere of hysterical homophobia, asks the following question:
Question:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
Answer: The Spartans
For most readers, the point is obvious, being as the Spartans were a legendary fighting force and undoubtedly the most militarised society in human history, their name is synonymous with bravery and an almost quasi-religious soldiering zealotry.
So obviously, this simple question (which I assumed would be rhetoric) and answer (which I assumed everyone would know), makes blatantly ridiculous any argument that gay soldiers in any way hinder an armys morale.
Simple. Direct. Yet educational. That's how you make a point: a succinct observation that completely invalidates a stupid argument.
If you didn't know this... didn't get the reference... and still don't understand the point... then I'm very sorry, but I can't fix stoopid.
The Luke
Wasn't homosexuality a common and accepted practice in ancient Greece? If that's the case then open gays in Sparta's military wouldn't any big deal and therefore the logic of your argument may be empty. In America's present military homosexuality is NOT accepted and, highlighted by the gay marriage law failures, it's not exactly accepted country wide. So "open gays in the military" will cause some moral issues, but they will be temporary as they will have to get over it because it will happen one way or another.
-
tonymctones,
Imagine a discussion regarding gays in the military, prompted by news that America's longstanding "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy may be coming to an end. Someone, hoping to enlighten the atmosphere of hysterical homophobia, asks the following question:
Question:
Can you name the one civilization in human history that had mandatory, universal, enforced homosexuality among its soldiers?
Answer: The Spartans
For most readers, the point is obvious, being as the Spartans were a legendary fighting force and undoubtedly the most militarised society in human history, their name is synonymous with bravery and an almost quasi-religious soldiering zealotry.
So obviously, this simple question (which I assumed would be rhetoric) and answer (which I assumed everyone would know), makes blatantly ridiculous any argument that gay soldiers in any way hinder an armys morale.
Simple. Direct. Yet educational. That's how you make a point: a succinct observation that completely invalidates a stupid argument.
If you didn't know this... didn't get the reference... and still don't understand the point... then I'm very sorry, but I can't fix stoopid.
The Luke
wow youre off your meds arent you?
you spent 2 pages saying that your point about sparta was not about their military prowess ??? but now you say it is and that b/c they were such a great military and allowed homosexuality within their ranks we shouldnt have a problem with it?
again by that logic the US military shouldnt allow gays to openly serve as i think its quite obvious we have the greatest military to have ever walked this earth...and we dont allow gays to openly serve
let me break down your arguement for you luke you are using sparta in the context of military prowess and them allowing homosexuality to bolster your ignorant arguement. That well "hey it didnt hurt the spartans, so why would it hurt the US"
fact of the matter is the US is the best military that has ever been so by your logic the fact we dont allow gays in the military carries more weight then your idiotic arguement.
-
Wasn't homosexuality a common and accepted practice in ancient Greece? If that's the case then open gays in Sparta's military wouldn't any big deal and therefore the logic of your argument may be empty. In America's present military homosexuality is NOT accepted and, highlighted by the gay marriage law failures, it's not exactly accepted country wide. So "open gays in the military" will cause some moral issues, but they will be temporary as they will have to get over it because it will happen one way or another.
I was going to bring that up later
but apparently luke doesnt understand his own arguement
-
Wasn't homosexuality a common and accepted practice in ancient Greece? If that's the case then open gays in Sparta's military wouldn't any big deal and therefore the logic of your argument may be empty. In America's present military homosexuality is NOT accepted and, highlighted by the gay marriage law failures, it's not exactly accepted country wide. So "open gays in the military" will cause some moral issues, but they will be temporary as they will have to get over it because it will happen one way or another.
Good point.
But my main point was that Sparta is the only example we have in human history of a society that actualy enforced mandatory homosexuality among its soldiers. The most extreme possible case of gays in the military and we have the history of it... it actually happened.
They also happen to be the most militarised society in human history and historians rank the Spartans as the most feared fighting force the world has ever known. No other nation can boast of such military prestige... the batte of Thermopylae is still regarded as the greatest demonstration of military prowess ever seen.
So if the gayest soldiers in history, were also the bravest and best soldiers ever known... worrying about gays in the military or their effect on morale seems pretty misguided.
By comparison, there has never been a wholly heterosexal army... maybe it's the heteros like us who can't fight worth a damn? (No homo)
Thats the only point I was making... I never intended enaging with the jingoists or the third-grade-reading comprehension crowd, but if they want to embarrass themselves I won't let them bully me off this topic. Shouting people down has been passing for debate for too long on his board.
Hope the inane arguments haven't ruined your enjoyment of reading this thread Ozmo?
The Luke
-
but again luke by that same logic the US doesnt and they are by and large the best military to have ever been formed so that in itself by your logic would say that no army should allow gays to serve...
you see luke logic is applied across all situations thats what makes it logical
you cite their culture and society but fail to acknowledge that infantcide was practiced and they accomplished the same things so should we institute infantcide as well?
after all it doesnt seem to have hurt their morale right?
-
Good point.
But my main point was that Sparta is the only example we have in human history of a society that actualy enforced mandatory homosexuality among its soldiers. The most extreme possible case of gays in the military and we have the history of it... it actually happened.
They also happen to be the most militarised society in human history and historians rank the Spartans as the most feared fighting force the world has ever known. No other nation can boast of such military prestige... the batte of Thermopylae is still regarded as the greatest demonstration of military prowess ever seen.
So if the gayest soldiers in history, were also the bravest and best soldiers ever known... worrying about gays in the military or their effect on morale seems pretty misguided.
By comparison, there has never been a wholly heterosexal army... maybe it's the heteros like us who can't fight worth a damn? (No homo)
Thats the only point I was making... I never intended enaging with the jingoists or the third-grade-reading comprehension crowd, but if they want to embarrass themselves I won't let them bully me off this topic. Shouting people down has been passing for debate for too long on his board.
Hope the inane arguments haven't ruined your enjoyment of reading this thread Ozmo?
The Luke
I've only read a few bits, but what i've read is enjoyable. People get so mad at you. lol.
To me, this argument might be very similar to what the arguments where regarding integration in the military in the 50's. That issue was also affected by social and cultural norms. And, in time, everyone got over themselves.
I think bringing up Sparta is better for the "gay men can fight as well as straight men" argument. Which would be no argument.
Phalanx formations must have been very arousing for them.
-
I've only read a few bits, but what i've read is enjoyable. People get so mad at you. lol.
To me, this argument might be very similar to what the arguments where regarding integration in the military in the 50's. That issue was also affected by social and cultural norms. And, in time, everyone got over themselves.
I think bringing up Sparta is better for the "gay men can fight as well as straight men" argument. Which would be no argument.
Phalanx formations must have been very arousing for them.
LOL the point was that luke seemed to miss is that this isnt about whether gays can fight as good as straights. We all just went with his idiotic spartan analogy so we could ridicule his idiot ass.
The problem with gays in the military is privacy rights oz
-
as a matter of fact oz i dont think anyone in this thread said that gays cant make good soldiers...
-
I've only read a few bits, but what i've read is enjoyable. People get so mad at you. lol.
...it's a gift.
What I really enjoy are the Jerry-Springer-Audience type poster... they make a moral decision instantaeously.
"Yeah, I left her at the altar Jerry" loud boos... "But dat bitch a hoe, Jerry" huge applause.
But my favourite has to be the ones who can't articuate their own argument, because they've never thought it through... it's just a learned reflex, not a proper opinion. Tonymctones just cracks me up. No comprehension, no logic, no reasoning and he refuses to read other peoples posts properly.
The Luke
-
Good point.
But my main point was that Sparta is the only example we have in human history of a society that actualy enforced mandatory homosexuality among its soldiers. The most extreme possible case of gays in the military and we have the history of it... it actually happened.
They also happen to be the most militarised society in human history and historians rank the Spartans as the most feared fighting force the world has ever known. No other nation can boast of such military prestige... the batte of Thermopylae is still regarded as the greatest demonstration of military prowess ever seen.
So if the gayest soldiers in history, were also the bravest and best soldiers ever known... worrying about gays in the military or their effect on morale seems pretty misguided.
By comparison, there has never been a wholly heterosexal army... maybe it's the heteros like us who can't fight worth a damn? (No homo)
Thats the only point I was making... I never intended enaging with the jingoists or the third-grade-reading comprehension crowd, but if they want to embarrass themselves I won't let them bully me off this topic. Shouting people down has been passing for debate for too long on his board.
Hope the inane arguments haven't ruined your enjoyment of reading this thread Ozmo?
The Luke
I don't know Luke..I've sat through maybe a million times more military history classes and I've never heard that. They were great for their time but beyond that the rest is bullshit.
-
And speak for urself..I've fought just fine. Don'[t try and pretend ur now cool because we're not hammering u. Ur point was stupid. This thread derailment has nothing to do with the original point. Oh and quote ur sources.
-
I don't know Luke..I've sat through maybe a million times more military history classes and I've never heard that. They were great for their time but beyond that the rest is bullshit.
...you don't know enough about them. You've already admitted you had to Google them... just how much do can you know about history if you've never even heard of one of the most extreme civilizations ever known.
Get a proper classical education.
The more you read, the more you'll agree with me.
The Luke
-
Luke....u have no idea what the hell ur talking about in any of these threads do u. I didn't say I had not heard of the Spartans...I have the quote from Marine Infantry school on my wall. I studied classical warfare extensively in school. Unless u went to a military academy..i'll bet u haven't. U derail because u can't argue the main points.
Go tell the Spartans, thou who passest by,
That here, obedient to their laws, we lie
Dude u really have a high opinion or urself. But if u care to debate military history, really debate..not say ur gonna debate it and then decide to discuss the weather in 1812..we're all happy to do it.
-
Fuck metheres a lot of bullsh1t been written on here. Since my first degree was in classics we should straighten this out...
THE SPARTANS WERE NOT REQUIRED TO BE GAY...THEY WERE NOT GAY, AND SPARTAN SOCIETY ONLY VERY RARELY ACCEPTED THE IDEA OF HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS.
right said it. Luke the people you are thinking of is the Sacred band of Thebes, the idea being that one would fight harder for their lover than their friend, which for the most part was proved correct since the sacred band was actually an excellent fighting unit. The Spartans whilst aware of some homosexuality between older men and boys, (though it considered more of a mentoring role than a sexual role) generally did not encourage it, and it was certainly not to be talked about in public...unlike say Athens.
-
Fuck metheres a lot of bullsh1t been written on here. Since my first degree was in classics we should straighten this out...
THE SPARTANS WERE NOT REQUIRED TO BE GAY...THEY WERE NOT GAY, AND SPARTAN SOCIETY ONLY VERY RARELY ACCEPTED THE IDEA OF HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS.
right said it. Luke the people you are thinking of is the Sacred band of Thebes, the idea being that one would fight harder for their lover than their friend, which for the most part was proved correct since the sacred band was actually an excellent fighting unit. The Spartans whilst aware of some homosexuality between older men and boys, (though it considered more of a mentoring role than a sexual role) generally did not encourage it, and it was certainly not to be talked about in public...unlike say Athens.
Thank you for that info. I hope this puts a rest to the nonsense that has been eminating mostly from one poster on this thread.
-
I think I posted the same info but since stevo is from the UK...dipshit might listen to him.
-
What I don't get is all the arguing about all the alleged Arab translators being lost, because they're homos.
As I said earlier, I don't care if your peeling potatoes or translating Muhammad El-Kaboom's tongue in to English, if you signed the dotted line (agreeing to abide by the DoD Homosexual Conduct policy) and breach it, you're done.
Every service member has to review that policy, before he get sworn into service. And, if I'm not mistaken, HH6, of all the disciplinary cases in the military, gay folks getting the boot is among the LOWEST in the Armed Forces.
We lose FAR more troops to drug and alcohol abuse.
-
I don't know the rates but it's not number one or even close. I had a gay soldier. He was stop losted. When he came out we did what we had to do by the regs. The Jag lawyer who worked us through the process was a Reservist who worked in the Penatagon as a DOD lawyer. She had delt with alot of these cases. Basically this guy would end up staying in the Army almost 6 months longer if he went through the "Don't ask" discharge investigation. If one of the gay groups got wind of it, they would drag it out up to 18 months. Or he could retract his statement and say he was confused, do his job and maintain all his benefits and get out within 30 days of redeployment. Once we layed it all out for him he recanted. It was no surprise that he was gay. I told him to do his job, it was my call to bring charges or not. He did his job and got out. If u join u know the rules, if u don't want to abide by them, don't join.
-
LOL the point was that luke seemed to miss is that this isnt about whether gays can fight as good as straights. We all just went with his idiotic spartan analogy so we could ridicule his idiot ass.
The problem with gays in the military is privacy rights oz
I remember having a discussion about this hear a year or so ago. It was brought up that other standing armies have a open policy. How do they deal with privacy issues?
-
I remember having a discussion about this hear a year or so ago. It was brought up that other standing armies have a open policy. How do they deal with privacy issues?
id be interested in hearing about how they handle it as well
you also have to take into account social and cultural norms and laws
alot of countries are alot more open about nudity than we are shit i remember when i was in japan they had brief nudity on regular tv not like porn but just everyday nudity.
Under our law system that would infringe upon the privacy rights of soldiers just like me going into a female locker room and changing in there.
-
How about just keeping your sexual orientation to yourself and doing your fucking job? ???
-
How about just keeping your sexual orientation to yourself and doing your fucking job? ???
I heard that the number of gay soldiers took a huge spike, when deployments to Iraq went up.
-
I heard that the number of gay soldiers took a huge spike, when deployments to Iraq went up.
Why? I don't get it? ???
-
Why? I don't get it? ???
HH6 does!!
-
HH6 does!!
Probably to get out of deployment.
-
Probably to get out of deployment.
He said took a huge spike? Doesn't that mean an increase? ???
-
But my main point was that Sparta is the only example we have in human history of a society that actualy enforced mandatory homosexuality among its soldiers. The most extreme possible case of gays in the military and we have the history of it... it actually happened.
They also happen to be the most militarised society in human history and historians rank the Spartans as the most feared fighting force the world has ever known. No other nation can boast of such military prestige... the batte of Thermopylae is still regarded as the greatest demonstration of military prowess ever seen.
The Luke
No wonder the world has been in shambles since their arrival! With this being the case, there is no HOPE for peace. I can see why we as a world society have such detrimental issues.
GC/DEA_AGENT