Well, to be frank, I couldn't be bothered to read all 41 posts. I normally only participate in the WA debates and all... and that keeps me pretty busy >_< Uhm, but I'm familiar with this issue, and wanted to add/say a few things.
General Consensus of Morons (GCM) wrote:I have served in the military and I have served with several gay members and gay's do cause problems. They themselves don't cause problems but their sexuality does. It's one thing when you go to another guy in your unit and hang out just the two of you, drinking a beer, watching a game, playing a video game, but now make it where one of them is gay unless you know and trust the guy a lot you will always be more guarded around him then you are with the non gay men. You will trust the other men quicker than a man who you think might be trying to hit on you. You will not trust the gay man as much. And trust is the ONE thing that ANY unit going into combat needs.
Considering the Don't Ask/Don't Tell policy, don't you think it's highly probable that you served with gays and didn't even know it? That, in fact, until you are TOLD that a person is gay you really have no way of telling? Barring, naturally, certain people that are flamboyant with their homosexuality (who are VERY unlikely to join the Armed Services, don't you think?) THEREFORE, the quote above is idiotic. It explains perfectly why the problem is NOT gays, but is intolerance.
It is a silly idea that sexual preference in any way contributes to sexual appetite. If you don't run around worried that every woman you meet is going to jump your bones why would you worry about a gay man? Or, more likely, you don't worry about women because you HOPE they'll jump your bones. So again, you're just being prejudiced and silly.
It is the military's duty (and they do it quite well, I believe,) to MAKE soldiers. This requires bravery and discipline-- neither of which are inherently hetero qualities. 'nuff said.