WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines Kerry to Gays: "Serve and be Proud"

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#1
What a fucking joke. I read a AP article today about Kerry not supporting Clinton's don't ask don't tell policy. He supports gays joining the military and being non-secretive about it.
Now, truth be told, I could care less if someone is gay, but in the US Military, it is in the best interests of the individual to keep it a secret. Kerry is dreaming if he thinks that soldiers, sailors, marines, or even airmen will tolerate a gay joining the service and flaunting his sexuality. That individual would be eaten alive.

More than likely, he is saying that to pull in more liberal votes (obviously the homosexual vote is liberal) for himself, and does'nt actually mean it. I have never supported gay marriage or gay rights, and all the other shit they parade around. Thats one of the areas where I actually supported Bush.
Many of you may not realize this, but what the gays want is to be a legal minority. Which would include them in the diversity laws set forth by affirmitive action. If that happens, it will open up a fucking pandora's box of trouble with legal discrimination law suits, sexual harrasment cases, and a host of other related issues in the public & private sector.
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,900
3,363
487
#2
I believe in equal rights for every American. But I can see how it does present a problem.
In the military there's always going to be an issue with it.
Unfortunately people in general (men and women) have problems, sharing quarters with/showering with, etc. someone who may potentially be sexually attracted to them.
Now, the open minded, 21st century thinker might say "Just because he's/she's gay doesn't mean he/she wants to bang you". But still the potential exists. That fact on the table brings up another rights issue. What about the rights of the heterosexual soldiers? Is it a breech of their rights to force them to share quarters with someone who could potentially be sexually attracted to them?
But then still it would be wrong to suggest separate quarters for gay and lesbian troops.
It is in fact a sticky issue.
Just some theoretical questions to add to the confusion. :feedback:
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#3
Just to add to that a little, there is still the issue with women holding combat arms MOS's in the army ... the issue being that they DON'T.

Women are considered a HUGE distraction in a combat situation for obvious reasons. Both sexual tension and a man's natrual tendency to protect women lead to lack of concentration on the mission at hand, and general disorder on the battlefield.

Now throw homosexuals in the mix. Do you give a homosexual man a combat arms MOS? Would'nt he be subject to the same distractions as other men would be in the presence of women?

I really hate answering a question with a question, but the "what if's" that swirl around this issue are mind numbing.
 

morelos

lexicon incognito
1,952
0
0
#4
so, you're all basically saying that not only are people stupid, the people who REALIZE people are stupid are doing nothing to alleviate the situation?

honestly, who the fuck cares? it will make gays as weirded out to hear straight guys bragging about the girls they bang and how as it makes straight guys weirded out about other guys potentially liking them.

~ dan ~
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#5
Here's a news flash:

THERE ARE GAYS IN THE MILITARY (RIGHT NOW)...

They work at the grocery store, bank and even the Post Office!

It's a moot point - gay people live in the world - Ghet over it...
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#6
morelos said:
so, you're all basically saying that not only are people stupid, the people who REALIZE people are stupid are doing nothing to alleviate the situation?
Actaully, thats not what anyone was basically saying.

morelos said:
honestly, who the fuck cares?
Gay voters? .... You asked ....
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#7
voiceofreason said:
Here's a news flash:

THERE ARE GAYS IN THE MILITARY (RIGHT NOW)...

They work at the grocery store, bank and even the Post Office!

It's a moot point - gay people live in the world - Ghet over it...
Uhhh, yea ... no one is denying the exsitence of gays, I think that has already been proven.

I think the question was more about the rights these individuals think their gayness entitles them to, and how granting them more rights treads on the freedoms of everyone else.
 

Icarus

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
6,775
251
118
#8
Look at a person. Does he deserve the same rights as you? Now make him gay. What changed?

Honestly, what is your problem with gay people, gay rights, and gay marriage? I'd like to know.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#9
NoSubstance said:
Look at a person. Does he deserve the same rights as you? Now make him gay. What changed?

Honestly, what is your problem with gay people, gay rights, and gay marriage? I'd like to know.
Why do you have such stout support for them?

I don't like to quote myself, but the answers were in my 1st post.
in response to the 1st part of your question:
breakology said:
I could care less if someone is gay
and the response to the 2nd and 3rd part:
breakology said:
the gays want is to be a legal minority. Which would include them in the diversity laws set forth by affirmitive action. If that happens, it will open up a fucking pandora's box of trouble with legal discrimination law suits, sexual harrasment cases, and a host of other related issues in the public & private sector
So, as you can see, my problem is not with the gays, it is with affirmitive action and public lawsuits which are a drain on taxpayers.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#10
NoSubstance said:
Look at a person. Does he deserve the same rights as you? Now make him gay. What changed?
oops, I forgot about that part .... His sexual orientation, that is what changed.
Should that change matter? No ... but it does depending on what kind of special treatment the individual expects for being gay. Now how does that special treatment interfere with the rights of the heterosexual?
As you can see, a lot has changed.
 

Icarus

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
6,775
251
118
#11
I stoutly support gay people because I beleive that they deserve the same rights as all other human beings, because they are guaranteed that by the Constitution of The United States of America.

This is just like the civil rights movement that made all races equal. The only difference is that gay people can hide their sexuality.

So, your problem is with the legal side of gay rights. Bull shit. They deserve the exact same legal opportunities (and swindlings) as you and I, simply because "All men are created equal". You think that because they're gay they shouldn't be able to come forward with sexual harrassment pertaining to their sexuality? Then, you, my friend, are a "Sexualitist".

Oh, and think of all the revenue that would be made off of Gay marriage liscenses, Gay divorces. That alone should make the economy bounce back a fair amount.

P.S.: My oldest sister is gay... but I was already strongly for gay rights before I found out.

Edit:// (in response to your edit): Right, because Black people don't ever get sickle-cell anemia. The gay community is espescially susceptible to AIDS and HIV. And yes, they ARE a minority, and deserve to be treated as one.

Do you not beleive in human rights, in democracy?

DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS ARE NOT CASE-BY-CASE PHILOSOPHIES.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#12
NoSubstance said:
I stoutly support gay people because I beleive that they deserve the same rights as all other human beings, because they are guaranteed that by the Constitution of The United States of America.
They are all ready afforded those rights, and they are not in question.

NoSubstance said:
This is just like the civil rights movement that made all races equal. The only difference is that gay people can hide their sexuality.
This is nothing like the civil rights movement, that was about race. This is about sexuality

NoSubstance said:
So, your problem is with the legal side of gay rights. Bull shit. They deserve the exact same legal opportunities (and swindlings) as you and I, simply because "All men are created equal". You think that because they're gay they shouldn't be able to come forward with sexual harrassment pertaining to their sexuality? Then, you, my friend, are a "Sexualitist".
OK, when I made the statemant about sexual harrassment, I actually meant it in regards to them harrassing straight people. You just took the defensive position because you assumed I meant it the other way.

NoSubstance said:
Oh, and think of all the revenue that would be made off of Gay marriage liscenses, Gay divorces. That alone should make the economy bounce back a fair amount.
That was a joke, right? You really don't think that marriage lisence revenue has an impact on the economy do you?

NoSubstance said:
Edit:// (in response to your edit): Right, because Black people don't ever get sickle-cell anemia. The gay community is espescially susceptible to AIDS and HIV. And yes, they ARE a minority, and deserve to be treated as one.
Nosubstance said:
DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS ARE NOT CASE-BY-CASE PHILOSOPHIES.
How the hell did black people get involved in this? I never denied that gays are a minority, but they are not a racial minority, and not a legal minority. Technically, I can call left-handed people a minority, do they deserve special protection under the law because of that?
You just said gays deserve to be treated as a minority, how exactly do you treat a minority? You said above that democracy and human rights are not case-by-case, and yet based on your own statements you still advocate treating a minority differently from the majority. Can you please make a decision on where you stand in that matter.

NoSubstance said:
Do you not beleive in human rights, in democracy?
Very much so, that is why I hate to see it polluted by special interest groups who think that democracy and human rights should be tailor made to fit their needs.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#13
NoSubstance said:
Edit:// (in response to your edit): Right, because Black people don't ever get sickle-cell anemia. The gay community is espescially susceptible to AIDS and HIV. And yes, they ARE a minority, and deserve to be treated as one.

Back to this part, sickle-cell is a genetic disorder. How can that be compared in any way to HIV? You said that the gay comminity is especially susceptible to AIDS and HIV? How exactly is that? I thought anyone who has sex was susceptible to HIV and AIDS, regardless of sexual orientation, now you want to make it an exclusivly gay epidemic?
 

Icarus

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
6,775
251
118
#14
Are you stupid?

Black people are susceptible to sickle-cell anemia. Black people therefore get tested for sickle-cell anemia. White people do not get tested for sickle-cell anemia, because they pretty much don't get it.

Gay people deserve (and need) free (or at least cheaper) testing for HIV/AIDS/Other STD's because the Gay community is riddled with them. The general public isn't aware enough about these diseases as it is, but the chances are much higher for a gay person to get HIV/AIDS/Other STD's.

Edit:// Missed your second post...

No, you're the only one who said anything about it being an exclusively gay disease. Although sickle-cell anemia is not an STD and HIV/AIDS is, there is still the alarmingly high percentage of infected Gay people as compared to straight people.

As to "That was a joke, right?"

Money spent is money changing hands, and money changing hands influences the economy. Have you ever taken an economy class?

"Do left-handed people deserve special protection under the law?"

I'm left-handed (well, ambidextrous, really), and I can tell you that left-handed people do not face any adversity as a result of being left-handed.

"Gay people harrassing straight people"

What's the difference between a gay person harrassing a straight person and a straight person harrassing a gay person? Don't both deserve equal attention and legal action?

"That was about race, this is about sexuality"

Hah. Tell me, please. Morally, not genetically, what is the difference between somebody who is gay and somebody who is of a difference race? You can't change either. You might as well not allow Asian people to marry as not allow Gays.

And, last of all... "They are all ready afforded these rights"

Please show to me how straight people being allowed to marry in all 50 states is the exact same as gay people.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#15
NoSubstance said:
Are you stupid?
Still waiting for the test results
NoSubstance said:
Black people are susceptible to sickle-cell anemia. Black people therefore get tested for sickle-cell anemia. White people do not get tested for sickle-cell anemia, because they pretty much don't get it.

Gay people deserve (and need) free (or at least cheaper) testing for HIV/AIDS/Other STD's because the Gay community is riddled with them. The general public isn't aware enough about these diseases as it is, but the chances are much higher for a gay person to get HIV/AIDS/Other STD's.
So, you want the the healthcare industry to pick up the tab for a poor lifestyle choice? No black person was ever able to choose his/her genetic disposition for sickle-cell. Gays make the concious choice to have unprotected sex which is what spreads AIDS and HIV, not their homosexuality. Stop identifying AIDS and HIV with gays, anyone can get it at anytime if they have unprotected sex. From that statement, would'nt it be better to say that ALL people deserve free or cheaper testing for HIV? Not just the gays?

Nosubstance said:
No, you're the only one who said anything about it being an exclusively gay disease. Although sickle-cell anemia is not an STD and HIV/AIDS is, there is still the alarmingly high percentage of infected Gay people as compared to straight people.
Outright lie, misquote, whatever you want to call it. Show me where I said "only gay people get AIDS" You implied it when you compared it to blacks and sickle-cell, you implied it again when you said Gays deserve free/cheaper HIV testing & treatment. There may be a high percentage of infected gays, again, they all know the dangers of unprotected sex. The same as any heterosexual individual. AIDS is not new, it has been around since the late 70's and the public has been educated since at least the late 80's.

Nosubstance said:
Money spent is money changing hands, and money changing hands influences the economy. Have you ever taken an economy class?
yea, I have, have you? If you answer yes then you already know that our economy is profit driven. Marriage lisence revenue is not profit. It is a administrative fee/Tax that covers the cost of the system that keeps the records.

NoSubtance said:
"Do left-handed people deserve special protection under the law?"

I'm left-handed (well, ambidextrous, really), and I can tell you that left-handed people do not face any adversity as a result of being left-handed.
The same could be said for gay people. Gay people do not have to disclose their sexuality, neither do straight people. Do march around the street anouncing to the world you are straight? Now pretend you are gay, what has changed?

NoSubstance said:
What's the difference between a gay person harrassing a straight person and a straight person harrassing a gay person? Don't both deserve equal attention and legal action?
Yes, the point was you made the gay person out to be the victim. They have the same capicity for wrong as a straight person

Nosubstance said:
Hah. Tell me, please. Morally, not genetically, what is the difference between somebody who is gay and somebody who is of a difference race? You can't change either. You might as well not allow Asian people to marry as not allow Gays.
Ok, prove to me the difference between a gay person and a straight person. If you can't figure it out, I will give you the answer, sexual preference. Science has found no genetic difference between gay and straight. They make a choice to be gay. You yourself could decide at any moment you prefer the same sex. That would make you gay. Can you decide to be black, can you choose to be Asian?

NoSubstance said:
And, last of all... "They are all ready afforded these rights"

Please show to me how straight people being allowed to marry in all 50 states is the exact same as gay people.
Is the right to marriage in the constitution? why don't you look that up. you may be suprised by what the constitution actually says.
 

Icarus

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
6,775
251
118
#16
The general consensus is that being gay is not a choice.

"Is the right to marriage in the constitution?"

Who said it was? If straight people have it, then "All men are created equal" certainly should guarantee that Gay people have it as well.

"The point was that you made the gay person out to be the victim."

Well duh. My entire post was about gays being victims. Why break character?

"The same could be said for gay people"

Right. Because every day there are hate crimes against those "lefties", and because all gay people announce it to the world.

"Our economy is profit-driven"

But once again, it's money changing hands. It changes the economy.

"Outright lie, misquote"

breakology said:
now you want to make it an exclusivly gay epidemic?
If I recall correctly, you were the first person who said anything about HIV/AIDS being a Gay-only disease. I never said that you stated it as truth, I said that you were reading too deep in to what I was saying. I stated fact: A higher proportion of Gay people get HIV/AIDS than straight people.

"They all know the dangers of unprotected sex"

Of course. In a public education system that teaches abstinence rather than contraception, who can not know?

I've got to go... I'll pick up where I left off.
 

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#17
breakology said:
Uhhh, yea ... no one is denying the exsitence of gays, I think that has already been proven.

I think the question was more about the rights these individuals think their gayness entitles them to, and how granting them more rights treads on the freedoms of everyone else.
You miss the point, gays have been in the military for ever, it is dealt with everyday, why is this even an issue?
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#18
NoSubstance said:
The general consensus is that being gay is not a choice.
The general consensus? The only group I know that make this claim is gays and gay sympathizers. Don't make false claims to reinforce your failing argument.
NoSubstance said:
Who said it was? If straight people have it, then "All men are created equal" certainly should guarantee that Gay people have it as well.
Gay people have those rights. A gay man can still marry a woman, the same as a straight man



NoSubstance said:
But once again, it's money changing hands. It changes the economy.
No it does'nt. Show me one peice of information that shows the economic impact of marriage lisence revenue on the american economy.

NoSubstance said:
If I recall correctly, you were the first person who said anything about HIV/AIDS being a Gay-only disease. I never said that you stated it as truth, I said that you were reading too deep in to what I was saying. I stated fact: A higher proportion of Gay people get HIV/AIDS than straight people.
You recall incorrectly. Go back and read your posts

NoSubstance said:
Of course. In a public education system that teaches abstinence rather than contraception, who can not know?
When I was attending public school the argument was the oppisite. Because the school provided free condoms, they were condoning sex. When, according to the parents and everyone else, they should have been preaching abstinence.

Nosubstance said:
I've got to go... I'll pick up where I left off.
Don't bother, this thread has gone way off topic. You somehow shifted the topic of the original post into the right or wrong aspect off being gay. Like I said in the first post, I don't care who is, or is not gay.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
4
102
#19
voiceofreason said:
You miss the point, gays have been in the military for ever, it is dealt with everyday, why is this even an issue?
Honestly? The issue is about their safety and fair treatment in the military. Right now, at the point we as a people are at as a society, it is more benefical to a homosexual to keep it a secret in the military.

Is that fair? ... no it's not ... such is life.
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#20
nice pissing contest we have here. I wonder what the difference is between a gay person being "openly" gay in the military and some dipshit dragging about all the girls he has banged while in the military? Which one is "flaunting" their sexuality? I do not support gays in the fact that i am not gay and therefor cannot say wether it is a choice or whatever. But i do believe that they deserve every other right anybody else does...