Reppublican Crowd Boos U.S. Soldier

This was about gays in the military, if I remember right. I figure that if someone volunteers to stand in front of an enemies gun for me, I don't care who or what he/she has sex with as long as it's willing, legal age, and doesn't interfere with their job. Go for it, and THANK YOU!

I would remind the besmircher that according
to jesse jackson and al sharpton we minorities
(that would be me and not you) are incapable
of being prejudiced because our opinions
do not carry authority with the majority.

In fact it's racist for any crackerass whiteboy
to tell me jack shit about what I think.
Like I need some busy-body whitey
pointing out the flaws in my minority logic.
Oh where would my people be without
your well intentioned bullshit.

If I'm bigoted for lumping fags with
necros, zoophlies, pedos, and other
degenerates- oh well too bad then.
I call them as it is.

When you come out of CQB with explosives
having been used- you got pieces of human
all over you. The rinse water in the shower
is pink from the sheen of blood that covered
you from head to toe. Bits of fat, skin, bone,
odd hair- its all in your hair, under fingernails.
Hollywood hasn't captured the slaughterhouse
floor look/flavor of FEBA's just yet.
Communicable diseases are another hazard.
That's why the military vaccinates the bejeezus
out of deploying troops.
With fags in the mix it will complicate
medical treatment. Blood is often drawn
for immediate transfusion to wounded.
Yea! you get a purple heart and HIV/HEPC.
Or you just don't take their blood.
Making their presence even more of a waste.

I don't care what people think of me
or my beliefs. I much prefer being right
than being liked.

It is quite obvious, you support the men and women in our military as long as they conform to your narrowly focused, personal standards. If there is even the slightest deviation, than you cannot and will not support them! Originally Posted by bigtex

Bigtex, back in the day when you were sharing the shower with twenty other guys, what did you and your buddies do to the guy who “dropped” his soap one too many times at your feet? You and your buddies didn’t give him a “blanket party” did you? You know, like the one given to Pyle in “Full Metal Jacket”?

In effect, you are saying: If the soldier who fired the shot that killed OBL happened to be gay, than there is a "good reason" for "booing" him and you would be "surprised there wasn't more" people doing so! Originally Posted by bigtex

You are speaking “hypothetically” of course, because you do not know whether or not that individual was a homo or not. Being as that individual is among the elite of the elite, the probability that he is/was a homo is probably nil. However, it would be entertaining to watch what happens should you make that claim to the man’s face after two or three beers.

But since you are willing to engage in “hypotheticals”, imagine this. It is very possible that the individuals who booed at the policy are themselves service personnel who disagree with the policy. After all, service personnel – when out of uniform and on their own time – have as much a right under the First Amendment as you to express their opinions. Just another “hypothetical” for you to ponder in your free time.

This was about gays in the military, if I remember right. I figure that if someone volunteers to stand in front of an enemies gun for me, I don't care who or what he/she has sex with as long as it's willing, legal age, and doesn't interfere with their job. Go for it, and THANK YOU! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

And if one guy is getting butt fucked with a reach around by his battle buddy – who the hell is watching the perimeter?

+1 Anaximander

If I'm bigoted for lumping fags with
necros, zoophlies, pedos, and other
degenerates- oh well too bad then.
I call them as it is.

. Originally Posted by anaximander

+1 Anaximander Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I think this about sums up what these two think about people different bfrom themselves.

Hey while you two are at it, would you please explain just wtf a necro is?

Hey while you two are at it, would you please explain just wtf a necro is?



Originally Posted by WTF

Yes.....Knucks.....Knucks Necro. He used to pitch for the Astros.

I think this about sums up what these two think about people different bfrom themselves.

Hey while you two are at it, would you please explain just wtf a necro is?



Originally Posted by WTF

Hell, it was bad enough you were defending pedophiles, necrophiliacs, etc.; now you're admitting you don't know what you're supporting!

, necrophiliacs Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Fans of Joe Necro.

Isn't he dead?

Fans of Joe Necro.

Isn't he dead? Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

No doubt he still has some fanatical personal followers.

No doubt he still has some fanatical personal followers. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Isn't there a don't ask don't policy on that one?

Or do we really need one?

Note that Conservatives didn't make phony accusations that somehow those Democrats were being disrespectful of McCain's military service or the uniform!
Originally Posted by Whirlaway

You will never be able to accuse me of being disrespectful of Senator McCain's "military service or the uniiform!" I always liked the guy and have nothing but the utmost respect for him! We need more Americans like him!

While on the subject, Whirly could certainly learn a few lessons from Senator McCain! By the same token, he could learn a few lessons from 99.9999% of the people who live in this country, whether they are here legally or illegally!

Whirlaway and Budman....this guy knows he is a bigot. Originally Posted by WTF

Bingo!

Bigtex, back in the day when you were sharing the shower with twenty other guys, what did you and your buddies do to the guy who “dropped” his soap one too many times at your feet? You and your buddies didn’t give him a “blanket party” did you? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Nope, I was never on the giving or receiving or end of a "blanket party."

You are speaking “hypothetically” of course, because you do not know whether or not that individual was a homo or not. Being as that individual is among the elite of the elite, the probability that he is/was a homo is probably nil. However, it would be entertaining to watch what happens should you make that claim to the man’s face after two or three beers. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You are correct in saying that it was a "hypothetical" statement.

You were wrong in implying that I claimed the person who killed OBL was gay. The simple fact is that there is a 10%-15% chance that he was gay. It goes without saying that there was a 85% - 90% chance he was "straight" as a board. The same is true in all walks of life, not just the military! That is simple math, all you need to do is apply a little logic! To claim that the chances are "probably nil" as you implied indicates that you lead a sheltered life.

From a personal perspective, I do not care if he was or was not straight! All that mattered to me was that they were successful in the mission. If the one firing the shot was straight or gay is of no importance to me. Either way, he is a hero in my book.

That was my only point! Obviously my point sailed way over your head!

Hell, it was bad enough you were defending pedophiles, necrophiliacs, etc.; now you're admitting you don't know what you're supporting! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I was not for lumping gay people with them.

All that is aganist the law....being gay just like being black is not.

But hey if ya'll wanna say it is the same, more power to ya.

You are correct in saying that it was a "hypothetical" statement.

You were wrong in implying that I claimed the person who killed OBL was gay. Originally Posted by bigtex

Here you are “implying” he might be –

In effect, you are saying: If the soldier who fired the shot that killed OBL happened to be gay, Originally Posted by bigtex

Again, it would be very entertaining to see you pose your “hypothetical” to the man’s face.

The simple fact is that there is a 10%-15% chance that he was gay. It goes without saying that there was a 85% - 90% chance he was "straight" as a board. The same is true in all walks of life, not just the military! That is simple math, all you need to do is apply a little logic! To claim that the chances are "probably nil" as you implied indicates that you lead a sheltered life. Originally Posted by bigtex

You are the one having trouble with “simple math”! Where do you get your numbers from? You’re saying that one out of every ten – or more – of the men you served with in Vietnam was gay? You are merely pandering to and parroting the propaganda of gay and lesbian activists. Think for yourself! Use your own experience in the military and calculate how many homosexuals you actually served with. Can you remember any? The truth is, it was probably more like one out of one hundred or five out of a thousand.

Again, there are about 2.7 million wearing a uniform. In 2005 (the last year with reliable numbers), 742 were discharged under DADT; that equates to .03%. Even if you multiplied .03% by a factor of 100, it’s still no where near the 10 to 15% you are parroting.

A 1990 study concluded that homosexual and bisexuals comprised less than 1.5% of the population at large in the U.S. (Deborah Dawson for the National Center for Health Statistics).

In 2010, the Washington Post put the figure for those serving in the military near 2%.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...012603889.html

Yet a more recent study puts the number of "homosexuals" at or near 1.7% in the U.S. community at large – where, unlike in the military, such activity was not proscribed by regulation and tradition.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_846348.html

Again, these numbers are still no where near the 10 to 15% figure you are parroting.

I was not for lumping gay people with them.

All that is aganist the law....being gay just like being black is not.
Originally Posted by WTF

As recently as 2003 sodomy was still against the law in many states: including Texas. It’s still a violation of Article 125 of the UCMJ. Plus, a half dozen or so states still have what's called “crime against nature” statutes.

Furthermore, race and sexuality are very different aspects of a person's identity. In 1992, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Colin Powell said: “Skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument.” Even though Powell has since change his mind about DADT (now that he has retired) his original statement is no less valid; fundamentally, the “comparison is an invalid argument.”

IB, we will never know how many who served in Vietnam were gay. Just like we will never know the numbers who served in Desert Storm, Korea, WW II, WW I, The Civil War or The Revolutionary War were gay! When I served, did I ever ask another soldier if he was gay? No, because it was a non-issue to me then and it is a non-issue to me now!

We would be naive to believe that gays did not serve in the military during those eras, but for obvious reasons a soldier did not publicize their sexual preferences! Indeed, those were different times and different eras! You seem content to compare apples to oranges!

Rather than being outraged by my claim that gays in the military is a non-issue, I would have thought you would be offended by Whirly's assertion that it is acceptable to publicly boo a United States serviceman, especially one who put his life on the line for this country, for being gay!

Now that is what I call a twisted set of priorities! Do you actually believe that a person who is gay is incapable of being patriotic and/or brave? If so, you live in a sheltered environment! Hmmm, I wonder if any Medal of Honor members were gay! Odds are, there have been several! Get my drift?

As for me saying it to his face. I would have to believe that a modern day soldier would be smart enough to understand that by creating the "hypothetical" I was not calling him gay.

Apparently, your comfort level is in trying to draw a comparison between apples and oranges!

IB, we will never know how many who served in Vietnam were gay. Just like we will never know the numbers who served in Korea or WW II! Originally Posted by bigtex

You’re equivocating. Korea and WWII were approximately two to four generations back; whereas, thirty years gets you from the end of Vietnam to the beginning of the war in Afghanistan. That’s a career span for a lifer, e.g., Command Sgt. Maj. Jeff Mellinger and others who retired earlier. Plus, it seems Af-Freakin had no trouble “noticing” them per his post:

. . . if a couple of dudes are fucking in the shower or fucking on the bunk above u, u get use to that stuff. Hell, when I was in all that shit was going on and it was no big deal. Originally Posted by Af-Freakin

Be honest bigtex, you wouldn’t have any qualms if the Army required your 18-year-old, hetero-son to share quarters with two or three homos for two or so years? Would you have tolerated it when you were 18?

We would be naive to believe they were not there, but for obvious reasons they didn't publicize their sexual preferences! Originally Posted by bigtex

Sounds like it might have been a non-issue for you because there were no militant, gay-rights activists in the ranks – in effect, a functioning DADT policy (even before there was a DADT policy). Not only that, but there were never as many in the ranks as you and your allies in the gay and lesbian community are presently now asserting.

That was a different time and a different era! You're trying to compare apples to oranges! Originally Posted by bigtex

Again, it’s the career span of a lifer. Some of the men you served with in Vietnam were still in the service when the war in Afghanistan started.

As for me saying it to his face. I would have to believe that he would be smart enough to understand that by creating the "hypothetical" I was not calling him gay. Originally Posted by bigtex

Now you are being disingenuous. Fact is, if you were twenty years younger, he’d probably bust your ass for just insinuating that he – or any one on his team – might be gay, and you know it.

Apparently, you're not that smart! Originally Posted by bigtex

That’s some claim coming from someone not smart enough to realize he is making bogus assertions with bogus statistics espoused by liberals and activists from the gay and lesbian community.

NOTE: Bigtex, you did a substantial re-edit to your original post.

I B do you think women shbould be allowed in the military?