Obama to call for repeal of DADT in State of the Union

[bhsup]

You really want to know? Yeah, I think it's either a choice or an addiction of some sort like alcoholism. It can be and has been treated successfully, but those treated will probably always have those desires, just like an alcoholic might always want a drink, or if I quit smoking successfully someday I'll probably always want a cigarette.

Personally, I really don't care beyond a rather intense "eww" factor if two guys want to get it on. But for some reason God has some pretty harsh words about this, viewing it as an abomination (his words, not mine). Given that, I really don't think I'll ever be able to vote for allowing the sanctity of family being marred by allowing gay marriages or adoptions.

Don't really care if I get a gay couple as neighbors, in fact I am sure I would prefer them over some of my white trash neighbors. And I've said in this thread that I think the military should just go ahead and openly admit gay members of the armed forces. I support gay rights in the workplace of course, and am fine with allowing private insurance benefits for 'significant others' for gay couples and a whole host of other things, but marriage and adoption I just don't think you'll ever sway me on. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

If it is any consolation to you, I smoke a pack a day and probably won't make it past 60-65, so I've only a couple of decades left

 

[useless]

It is, and i shall draw strength from it.

 

[bhsup]

Well there ya go, then. We'll all be happy in the end!

 

[Camikaze]

Yeah, I think it's either a choice or an addiction of some sort like alcoholism. It can be and has been treated successfully

It's not up to opinion. It's a fact. It's not a choice.

I'll just address the one point; that it has been 'treated' successfully. Plastic surgery has successfully 'treated' being black for some people. So it must be a choice.

 

[useless]

Yes.

10charslol

 

[Lone Wolf]

Stop equating homosexuality with being black, it's tired. Better equate it with being left-handed - it's actually a better metaphor.

 

[JollyRoger]

If it is any consolation to you, I smoke a pack a day and probably won't make it past 60-65, so I've only a couple of decades left

You stick a phallic shaped object in your mouth that many times a day? Hopefully you don't inhale.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I had no need to misinterpret what you wrote.

Yet you continue to do so, as you just did above.

Actually, no. MPs are on the very edge that defines combat arms from combat support, and while they may not be combat arms, they are often engaged in direct combat itself due to the nature of asymetrical warfare. To ignore that fact is just silly.

I think ignoring that MPs aren't considered to be combat arms for good reasons while trying to claim they should be is the "just silly" part.

Stop equating homosexuality with being black, it's tired. Better equate it with being left-handed - it's actually a better metaphor.

Bigots discriminate against left-handed people?

 

[Lone Wolf]

Bigots discriminate against left-handed people?

That metaphor its physically better. Besides, linguistics say that there was quite a bias against left-handedness in distant past - who's the "sinister" one, after all? And not too long ago, it was common to discourage left-handed children to use their left hand (often with negative results for child development).

If you want, you can even use the Bible against the left-handers. Remember, "and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left", "the right hand of the lord doeth valiantly, the right hand of the lord is exalted ".

 

[useless]

Yes, because throughout history the punishment for being left-handed is either jail or the death penalty.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Yes, because the punishment for being left-handed is either jail or the death penalty.

No laws jail blacks for being black or sentence then to death penalty for it either.

Pity the Bible is only vaguely anti-leftie. If the Biblical bias against the left hand was slightly expanded, we could've had some fun debates on whether left-handedness is abomination or not...

 

[useless]

I'm arguing against your argument that the problems that left-handed people face are similar to those that homosexuals face.

 

[Lone Wolf]

I'm arguing against your argument that the problems that left-handed people face are similar to those that homosexuals face.

Where I was saying that? If anything, I was saying that predjuice against homosexuals is as stupid as predjuice against left-handers.

 

[MobBoss]

I think ignoring that MPs aren't considered to be combat arms for good reasons while trying to claim they should be is the "just silly" part.

Where did I ignore they arent considered comat arms? I did said they werent.... Several times even....

 

[Formaldehyde]

I guess I am just doomed to be misunderstood by you. Let me try again.

I think you are apparently ignoring the good reasons why they aren't considered to be combat arms while dwelling on the other aspects that do reinforce your own view. In other words, I am using an argument you frequently use yourself. I think the authorities on this particular subject know what they are doing.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Personally, I really don't care beyond a rather intense "eww" factor if two guys want to get it on. But for some reason God has some pretty harsh words about this, viewing it as an abomination (his words, not mine)

To be fair, he said that (or rather the people who wrote those chapters of the Bible said that) sleeping with a member of the same sex is an abomination. He (they) never said anything about marrying, loving, kissing, being attracted to, etc etc a member of the same sex. But then again, those verses are in Leviticus, and describe the original Covenant with God. As I'm sure you remember, Christians formed a new Covenant with God, which effectively voided the old one. Which is why I can't sell my daughter into slavery, and why I'm having a pork cutlet with sauteed shrimp for dinner tonight.

 

[MobBoss]

I guess I am just doomed to be misunderstood by you. Let me try again.

I think you are apparently ignoring the good reasons why they aren't considered to be combat arms while dwelling on the other aspects that do reinforce your own view. In other words, I am using an argument you frequently use yourself. I think the authorities on this particular subject know what they are doing.

I am not ignoring it at all....I think it simply goes without saying.

And no, your not using an argument I frequently use myself. I have better comprehension than that.

Btw, the authorities agree with me on this one, since I took examples of the MP mission directly from the Armys source on it.

Not sure what your doing here Form, aside from simply arguing things I never alleged to begin with. What I have put forth in this thread has been factual and indeed true. Not sure why you would argue against that....I mean the gist of the exchange so far has been:

Mobboss: MPs are not combat arms.

Form: Except that you are ignoring they are not combat arms.

Mobboss: Uh....no I said that.

Form: No, your ignoring the reasons why they arent combat arms.

Mobboss: uh....no, that kinda goes without saying since I already made it clear they arent combat arms.

Form: You misunderstand me.

Mobboss: uh....

 

[Cutlass]

If it is any consolation to you, I smoke a pack a day and probably won't make it past 60-65, so I've only a couple of decades left

Hard to say. My father smoked 4 packs a day for something like 60 years before cutting back to a single pack and lived to 86. And he was a fireman before they all carried air bottles, so who knows what he breathed in then. Plus he used asbestos for everything.

 

[Gustave5436]

Personally, I really don't care beyond a rather intense "eww" factor if two guys want to get it on. But for some reason God has some pretty harsh words about this, viewing it as an abomination (his words, not mine). Given that, I really don't think I'll ever be able to vote for allowing the sanctity of family being marred by allowing gay marriages or adoptions.

God, obviously, needs to read some contemporary psychology journals.

Incidentally, I can understand marriage if you engage in historical revisionism (and therefore insist that it is a purely Abrahamist phenomenon, which it obviously isn't), but adoption? The data shows that children of same-sex couples are comparable to those of opposite-sex couples, when controlled for socio-economic status, in their psychological adjustment, if not being slightly superior. Being gay, like being fat, might be an abomination according to the Bible, but that is no reason to forbid either group of people from adopting children, when children are better off in proper families than foster care.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Not sure what your doing here Form, aside from simply arguing things I never alleged to begin with...

Ah. You just think it is "odd" they are classified that way, and...

Despite the fact that a female MP actually was awarded the Silver Star for bravery in combat in the last few years.

You see, even I can musunderstand you at times. The diffferences seem to be that I am willing to admit it, and I don't make such a big deal out of it when you do so, even though it frequently happens as it just did yet again.