Is it a boy or a girl?

[1Timothy115]

Our proud representatives in the house have passed a department of defense appropriation bill. Included in the bill is legislation to dissolve “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” the current policy of the military concerning sodomy.

According to the pro-group, current DADT is discrimination and alienates a valuable asset to the military (Middle Eastern language interpreters). The alienation can result in the member voluntarily leaving the military under false pretenses to escape the stress of living in denial of their sexual preference. I’m wondering how many homosexual interpreters there are in the service?

What are the possible ramifications of dissolving DADT?

Military Law
One requirement would be the amending of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The articles and provisions which punish sodomy would have to be stricken or rewritten to exclude same sex couples.

http://www.ucmj.us/

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 47 of the United States Code) is the foundation of military law in the United States of America. The UCMJ is applicable to all members of the military, including the US Army, US Navy, US Air Force and US Marines worldwide.

Sub Chapter X. Punitive Articles
925. ARTICLE 125. SODOMY
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.
( Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
Keep in mind this doesn’t just effect the base down the street from your house. The UCMJ is applied to “all members of the military, including the US Army, US Navy, US Air Force and US Marines worldwide.”

Bases Around The World
According to the Defense Department's annual inventories from September 2006 for the 2007 report of real property it owns around the world, the Base Structure Report, there are 5,311 DOD sites in the U.S. and around the world. (All 50 states, 7 U.S. territories, and 39 foreign countries.)

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/BSR_2007_baseline.pdf

Department of Defense, Base Structure Report (BSR), FY 2007 Baseline, Data Sources and Definitions, IV. Portfolio Summary, DoD-6


How will the change effect chaplains, housing, base facilities, non-homosexual service members, readiness, force strength, others?

[John81]

According to OBama they don't have to be either a boy or a girl, they can be "transgendered". A male soldier could report to duty dressed in a female uniform one day and a male uniform another day and such would be their "right".

[DennisD]

This will have a major impact on all those things you list and others.

Chaplains are already starting a stand but Chaplains are very limited already, and to be quite honest I'm not a huge fan of many Chaplains. They already cannot pray in Jesus' name, they must prayer "generally" to all god's I guess. This will OBviously hurt and demonize them even more if they have to go along with not condemning a specific sin.

Housing - It won't effect housing as much as it will effect the barracks (where single military stay). The services I guess will have to figure out if a homosexual and heterosexual can bunk in the same room (or even share the same shower). Do you house homosexuals together and risk sexual orgy/deviancy getting out of hand? I don't know. Are you impeding on the rights of a heterosexual by forcing them to bunk with someone that could very possibly enjoy watching them undress? Are you infringing on the rights of either if you separate them? Do we have male and females bunk together? Nope. I don't see actual housing being effected because each family has their own house/apartment but having to explain to your children the perverted family above with two Dad's is not something I want to do but might be forced to do.

Base Facilities - Potentially have major impact especially if the Commandant of the Marine Corps has his way. He is of the mind to not allow heterosexuals share rooms with homosexuals so the Marine Corps will prOBably have to build more barracks to accommodate.

Non-homosexual service members - as stated above, it's going to effect us to no end. To the point where we better be ready to get out at a moments notice.

Readiness/Force-strength - I think it's funny how people keep talking about how we are losing out on so many people because we ban homosexuals. Really? How many potential recruits do you think we are going to lose out on once this repeal comes into affect? The population is what, about 1% homosexual? Are we really losing out? I doubt it. This will effect mostly people that are in harms way...there is a reason men and women aren't allowed in the same showers, berthing and ultimately sitting together in the same fighting hole.

What kind of image are we going to project once the perversion of sodomy is allowed to openly be a part of the strongest military on earth? Once it happens I'm sure nothing will happen because the queers will have found this to be one of their most hard fought battles and they'll keep quiet for a bit...but it's just where it starts. Eventually, we'll get to the point of no return and the perversion and deviancy and filthiness of sodomites will come out.

UCMJ - Wouldn't that be interesting if they repeal DADT but leave the sodomy charge in the UCMJ...

Where does it end though? Once the homosexuals get their foot in the door, do polygamist come next? How about people that want to marry animals? Or how about those that believe they are born as pedophiles? Don't scoff, if we are willing to lower our standards for a group of people who has CHOSEN to be perverts...who is to say we can't lower our standards more for other perverts? There is no scientific proof homosexuals are born that way. Although, I guess we can argue that we are all born sinners and that is just the particular sin they chose to follow or were susceptible to.

It disgusts me.

Edited June 6, 2010 by DennisDurty

[1Timothy115]

Dennis,
Thanks for the comments. I knew many of the sentiments you expressed. I hope to hear from other military on the board; Or, from family with comments from their active duty service members. I'm a retired Navy Chief myself.

[1Timothy115]

According to OBama they don't have to be either a boy or a girl, they can be "transgendered". A male soldier could report to duty dressed in a female uniform one day and a male uniform another day and such would be their "right".

John, thanks. I wasn't aware of that. If you still have the source link, please provide. I'm thinking about pulling together an ed. for the local paper.

[John81]

John, thanks. I wasn't aware of that. If you still have the source link, please provide. I'm thinking about pulling together an ed. for the local paper.

This was being commented on while I was listening to AFR so I'm not sure of the source.

[1Timothy115]

Where does it end though? Once the homosexuals get their foot in the door, do polygamist come next? How about people that want to marry animals? Or how about those that believe they are born as pedophiles? Don't scoff, if we are willing to lower our standards for a group of people who has CHOSEN to be perverts...who is to say we can't lower our standards more for other perverts? There is no scientific proof homosexuals are born that way. Although, I guess we can argue that we are all born sinners and that is just the particular sin they chose to follow or were susceptible to.

Most people that I know view pedophilia as the ultimate in evil perversion. That's why it is so surprising that there is a growing faction among psychiatrists advocating that we at least tolerate the practice of adult/child sexual relations.

At least two pro-pedophilia books made it into psychiatric and even mainstream public distribution channels last year; at this writing, both are available on Amazon.com. One is "Harmful to Minors: the Perils of Protecting Children from Sex", by Judith Levine and Jocelyn Elders (the Clinton administration's controversial Surgeon General). Their book argues that sexual abstinence for children and minors is an American "right-wing" idea that can do more harm than good.

"Understanding Loved Boys and Boy Lovers," by David L. Riegel, tries to sell the viewpoint of the North American Man Boy Love Association. NAMBLA is best known for the motto, "sex before eight or it's too late."

To Pedophile-Tolerating Psychiatrists: Make Our Day
Copyright 2003 by David W. Neuendorf

The U.S. is rotten from the center out. Sickening isn't it.

[1Timothy115]

I hope to get more comments from many folks on the subject of homosexuals in the military and what repeal of DADT means to them.

[1Timothy115]

Is It Time to Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'?
YOU DECIDE
Thank you for voting!
Yes There's no better time than now to right a wrong. 76.8% (136,905 votes)

No It's irresponsible to take up this issue while our men and women are in
harm's way. 18.7% (33,268 votes)

Undecided But with all the prOBlems that need solving, I'm curious about why
the Democrats are in a rush on this one. 2.8% (4,966 votes)

I don't care 1.2% (2,114 votes)

Other (post a comment) 0.5% (921 votes)

Total Votes: 178,174

[Crushmaster]

Naturally, repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and having homosexuals in the military, is wrong. But I don't see what the big deal is considering so many people for Don't Ask, Don't Tell don't see a prOBlem with having women in the military. They're equally just as wrong, really.
God bless,
Joel ><>.
2 Chronicles 7:14.

[HappyChristian]

Naturally, repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and having homosexuals in the military, is wrong. But I don't see what the big deal is considering so many people for Don't Ask, Don't Tell don't see a prOBlem with having women in the military. They're equally just as wrong, really.
God bless,
Joel ><>.
2 Chronicles 7:14.

Well, it's OBvious you aren't in the military.
Males and females don't bunk together; homosexuals bunk with their gender. THAT is the big deal: and one which no soldier I know wants.

And there are jOBs a woman could do in the military. I don't believe a woman should be in the fighting at all. But I wouldn'd be averse to women doing the paper work, to free the men up to fight. Of course, best case scenario is that no woman would join - but that's not going to happen. Hoever, repealing the Don't Ask Don't Tell will create major prOBlems.

[Crushmaster]

Well, it's OBvious you aren't in the military.
Males and females don't bunk together; homosexuals bunk with their gender. THAT is the big deal: and one which no soldier I know wants.

And there are jOBs a woman could do in the military. I don't believe a woman should be in the fighting at all. But I wouldn'd be averse to women doing the paper work, to free the men up to fight. Of course, best case scenario is that no woman would join - but that's not going to happen. Hoever, repealing the Don't Ask Don't Tell will create major prOBlems.

Why not?

Yes ma'am, it would. But so has allowing women in the military; it's just storing up wrath.
God bless,
Joel.

[HappyChristian]

Why not?

Yes ma'am, it would. But so has allowing women in the military; it's just storing up wrath.
God bless,
Joel.

Why not? Because the way society has gone, it is ultra accepted for women to be in the military - and "going backwards" wouldn't be allowed by the fems and libs. As I said, if they stuck to paper work and behind the scenes stuff, there wouldn't be such a prOBlem, but...

I'm sorry, but there is nothing in scripture that outright forbids women in military. But there is about homosexuality! The one is an abomination...so that's worse.

[John81]

Why not? Because the way society has gone, it is ultra accepted for women to be in the military - and "going backwards" wouldn't be allowed by the fems and libs. As I said, if they stuck to paper work and behind the scenes stuff, there wouldn't be such a prOBlem, but...

I'm sorry, but there is nothing in scripture that outright forbids women in military. But there is about homosexuality! The one is an abomination...so that's worse.

There are plenty of principles in Scripture which could forbid women in the military.

Just as you say they won't go backwards in removing women from the military, so the pro-homosexuals and their allies won't go backward from where they are but will continue to press for full acceptance of open homosexuals.

Since neither our government nor the military care a wit about Scripture, it really doesn't matter what Scripture says. They don't care and even the majority of professing Christians either don't care, actually support women and homosexuals in the military, or wouldn't want to offend anyone by upholding the Word or speaking it publicly.

[HappyChristian]

Yes, I know there are plenty of principles that could forbid women in the military. And, as I said, I wish women weren't there...unless it was behind the scenes (if that). BUT! My point was that the Bible very clearly spells out that homosexuality is an abomination to God - so, of the two, that would be worse. SWIM?