PDA

View Full Version : Chaplains seek protection for troops to share views on homosexuality



candycane3482
05-25-2011, 11:07 AM
http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/chaplains-seek-protection-for-troops-to-share-views-on-homosexuality-1.144399

Protection from what? People should only be talking about religion with the chaplain, at their religious observances or places of worship and that's it. There is no need to be discussing it at work. Do that on your off time. If you don't like homosexuals, fine. But that doesn't mean you get to spout off about it. Do racists get to spout off their hatred for blacks, etc? No. Respect people.

FixItWithAMod
05-28-2011, 01:51 AM
LOL, these people are idiots. Plain and simple. They care so much about their position as the moral majority, having a monopoly of what should be considered "right" and "wrong" that they've since spiraled into lunacy.

Get out of my military. If you take orders from your god rather than from your president, we'd be better off without you.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-02-2011, 04:37 PM
Personally I hope the Chaplain gets it so those who are morally right can speak out against the homosexuals who are ruining the military.

Quid
06-02-2011, 04:48 PM
They can speak out about the sins of homosexuality at service all they want. Outside of that they have to behave like everyone else. Not sure what else you would want.

Your_Name_Here
06-02-2011, 04:55 PM
Personally I hope Chaplains have better sense than to give bigoted homophobes undeserved ammunition, that they would use to commit true damage to good order and discipline. THAT, more than anything, would ruin the military.

imported_Seasons
06-02-2011, 04:56 PM
Personally I hope the Chaplain gets it so those who are morally right can speak out against the homosexuals who are ruining the military.

Still waiting on your backup, Drakey boy.

Pullinteeth
06-02-2011, 05:50 PM
Personally I hope the Chaplain gets it so those who are morally right can speak out against the homosexuals who are ruining the military.

Are you outprocessing yet?

spirit_eyes
06-02-2011, 05:55 PM
what am i missing? brain must be really slow today.
what do the chaplins need protection from? for hate speech?
and not one person has been able to tell me exactly where in the bible, it spells it out that god/jesus hates homosexuals. none of this "this is what meant", etc. chapter, verse, etc "and jesus said all the homos will burn for eternity". i don't believe it's there.

candycane3482
06-02-2011, 06:04 PM
what am i missing? brain must be really slow today.
what do the chaplins need protection from? for hate speech?
and not one person has been able to tell me exactly where in the bible, it spells it out that god/jesus hates homosexuals. none of this "this is what meant", etc. chapter, verse, etc "and jesus said all the homos will burn for eternity". i don't believe it's there.

Yes everything you say has been gone over multiple times...never ending cycle it seems with no answers.

candycane3482
06-02-2011, 06:05 PM
Personally I hope Chaplains have better sense than to give bigoted homophobes undeserved ammunition, that they would use to commit true damage to good order and discipline. THAT, more than anything, would ruin the military.

Ooh look who's back!

spirit_eyes
06-02-2011, 06:29 PM
same old whinny crap, different day. people too dang worried about someone's else's private life.

FixItWithAMod
06-02-2011, 08:32 PM
what am i missing? brain must be really slow today.
what do the chaplins need protection from? for hate speech?
and not one person has been able to tell me exactly where in the bible, it spells it out that god/jesus hates homosexuals. none of this "this is what meant", etc. chapter, verse, etc "and jesus said all the homos will burn for eternity". i don't believe it's there.

It doesn't say they will burn for all eternity, however:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.(Leviticus 20:13)

candycane3482
06-02-2011, 10:03 PM
It doesn't say they will burn for all eternity, however:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.(Leviticus 20:13)

Again, not Jesus' or god's words. Those are the words of man. That's what she was getting at. I want to read the book of Jesus where he writes in his own words his thoughts and views. It won't change my opinion of homosexuals but it would give the bible thumpers something for back up on why they don't like homosexuals or homosexuality.

Your_Name_Here
06-03-2011, 03:16 AM
Ooh look who's back!

Yeah, it's unbelievable, ain't it? :humble

Please try hard to contain your excitement...but not too hard! :peace

USAF-Controller
06-03-2011, 04:17 AM
That will never pass. They want to protect hate speech plain and simple. It's a shame that most of these people are acting out of fear and ignorance rather than actual hate...

AJBIGJ
06-03-2011, 07:01 PM
This request has me baffled to say the least. The article implied they want more than free speech in the chapel services. This begs to question what other venues would be considered appropriate to express these opinions. If it's a one-on-one discussion between the (homophobic) chaplain and the (homophobic) servicemember in a private setting, well seems to me that's already covered, unless I missed something when I went to the training. So what are they really asking for? The ability to spout off randomly at a wardroom table? The ability to stand next to WBC members in uniform? Things are so ridiculously unclear from this article it's hard to really even know what request was being made. I'd like to see what the churches' POV's are as to me a lot doesn't seem to add up here.

I'll be frank and admit, it may actually be that these churches are asking for free hate speech at any venue whatsoever, makes me wonder at the fanaticism of those involved if that is the case. I personally think the author of this article was using a little bit of extra "artistic license" to sway the readers. I tried the link for "more" and it just shot me over to another article about a DADT discharge.

DarkHeart
06-06-2011, 04:40 PM
Wait wait wait, the Christians (I doubt this is a Jewish Chaplain) want special rights now? GOSH DARN SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS!!!

FixItWithAMod
06-06-2011, 06:48 PM
Again, not Jesus' or god's words. Those are the words of man. That's what she was getting at. I want to read the book of Jesus where he writes in his own words his thoughts and views. It won't change my opinion of homosexuals but it would give the bible thumpers something for back up on why they don't like homosexuals or homosexuality.

There is no "book of Jesus", Jesus never wrote anything down, all of the gospels were written decades after the events they claim to describe, and we aren't even sure who all of the authors are.

Romans 1:26 also gives fodder to the woefully religious:

For this reason [idolatry] God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for even their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature, and likewise also the males, having left the natural use of the female, were inflamed by their lust for one another, males with males, committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was fitting for their error.

DarkHeart
06-06-2011, 07:28 PM
Romans 1:26 also gives fodder to the woefully religious:

For this reason God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for even their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature, and likewise also the males, having left the natural use of the female, were inflamed by their lust for one another, males with males, committing what is shameful, [I]and receiving in themselves the recompense which was fitting for their error.

A sore bottom?

Drake_vampiel_d
06-09-2011, 09:14 AM
I would like for them to speak the truth about the disgusting immoral lifestyle of homosexuals and help the decent soldiers remember that they are supported and lead us to hope that this disgusting attrocity may be fixed and amybe we can repeal this repeal and get us back to right.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-09-2011, 09:16 AM
The Military has already started to get rid of good order and discipline by allowing homosexuals in and now allowing them to be open so at least they could allow Chaplains the opportunity to restore good order and discipline.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-09-2011, 09:18 AM
Still waiting on your backup, Drakey boy.

I have given all kinds of back up, I've given facts and shown reality ignorant hateful scum just ignore it and ask for more, but that is what I should expect from ignorant [athetic uneducated sub-human garbage.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-09-2011, 09:24 AM
Are you outprocessing yet?

Nope I am staying in and putting out homosexuals out even when they get rid of DADT because they are substandard which all knowing which ones are homosexuals will only give me a heads up on who I will be getting rid of. Don't expect to see me "outprocessing" until I retire and prove that good people will not be put down by worthless sub-human garbage.

DarkHeart
06-09-2011, 12:47 PM
Nope I am staying in and putting out homosexuals out even when they get rid of DADT because they are substandard which all knowing which ones are homosexuals will only give me a heads up on who I will be getting rid of. Don't expect to see me "outprocessing" until I retire and prove that good people will not be put down by worthless sub-human garbage.

Can we get your real name so when you get kicked out we can all know?

candycane3482
06-09-2011, 12:50 PM
Nope I am staying in and putting out homosexuals out even when they get rid of DADT because they are substandard which all knowing which ones are homosexuals will only give me a heads up on who I will be getting rid of. Don't expect to see me "outprocessing" until I retire and prove that good people will not be put down by worthless sub-human garbage.

How exactly are you going to "put out" homosexuals? Are you going to make up offenses to try to chapter them? You know you have to have proof they are actually a sub-standard soldier and if you get found out that you're targeting them solely on their sexual orientation, YOU are going to get "put out."

Again how are homosexuals "sub-standard?" You have NO EVIDENCE to prove this!!! The only "worthless sub-human garbage" is you Drake.

candycane3482
06-09-2011, 12:51 PM
I have given all kinds of back up, I've given facts and shown reality ignorant hateful scum just ignore it and ask for more, but that is what I should expect from ignorant [athetic uneducated sub-human garbage.

Says the kettle to the pot...

You actually have shown NO proof, NO evidence and the only "ignorant hateful scum" on this thread is YOU.

imported_Seasons
06-09-2011, 12:55 PM
I have given all kinds of back up, I've given facts and shown reality ignorant hateful scum just ignore it and ask for more, but that is what I should expect from ignorant [athetic uneducated sub-human garbage.

The funniest part about this is that this is all you have left.

DarkHeart
06-09-2011, 12:57 PM
The funniest part about this is that this is all you have left.

Getting kicked out will be the best thing for him, he'll finally be able to go protest with his brothers at the WBC.

FixItWithAMod
06-09-2011, 03:23 PM
This place needs to be moderated much harder. On any respectable forum, his crap wouldn't last a day.

Quid
06-09-2011, 09:12 PM
Yeah. It's annoying.

FixItWithAMod
06-09-2011, 09:18 PM
Even ranging from VW's usual shenanigans (XD) to garbage like this, someone with power to keep things in check would be well-received.

Your_Name_Here
06-09-2011, 09:29 PM
Can we get your real name so when you get kicked out we can all know?

I think it might be "Duck." That's my educated guess. And apparently Duck has actually gotten something RIGHT, albeit backwards: "good people will not be put down by worthless sub-human garbage." Anyone he thinks/dreams of wrongfully targeting/discriminating against will definitely NOT be put down by Duck or his ilk.

Scruples
06-13-2011, 02:48 PM
The right to say your religious beliefs about homosexuality in general [not in a personal attack] is protected under the Constitution, just as homosexuals have the right to disagree with another service member's faith.

Bringing up the subject about "protection" seems downright ridiculous. It is already protected.

Shrike
06-14-2011, 08:35 AM
The right to say your religious beliefs about homosexuality in general [not in a personal attack] is protected under the Constitution, just as homosexuals have the right to disagree with another service member's faith.

Bringing up the subject about "protection" seems downright ridiculous. It is already protected.

The right to proclaim that black people are inferior to whites mentally, or whites are inferior to blacks athletically, or Irish are pugnacious alcoholics, or Jews are greedy, or etc., etc. is also protected. It doesn't mean there aren't repercussions for stating such stupid things publically. The same should apply for chaplains and their superstitiuos beliefs.

DarkHeart
06-14-2011, 10:33 AM
The right to say your religious beliefs about homosexuality in general [not in a personal attack] is protected under the Constitution, just as homosexuals have the right to disagree with another service member's faith.

Bringing up the subject about "protection" seems downright ridiculous. It is already protected.

Bumped you up, thats about the most thoughtful thing I've heard from you, ever. Good on ya!

FixItWithAMod
06-14-2011, 11:14 PM
The right to say your religious beliefs about homosexuality in general [not in a personal attack] is protected under the Constitution, just as homosexuals have the right to disagree with another service member's faith.

Bringing up the subject about "protection" seems downright ridiculous. It is already protected.

I do wish that "the faith you place in your religion is baseless", "when God talks to you every night, you're likely experiencing a delusion", and "I don't give a damn what your holy book says" were just as well-received as "homosexuals are an abomination", "marriage is between one man and one woman and not to be corrupted by gays", and "I don't want my children learning about gay people" are now.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:03 AM
Can we get your real name so when you get kicked out we can all know?

Well since I will no tbe kicked out you don't need to worry but I will let you know when the first homosexual comes out of his closet to me, and when I fix that problem.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:11 AM
How exactly are you going to "put out" homosexuals? Are you going to make up offenses to try to chapter them? You know you have to have proof they are actually a sub-standard soldier and if you get found out that you're targeting them solely on their sexual orientation, YOU are going to get "put out."

Again how are homosexuals "sub-standard?" You have NO EVIDENCE to prove this!!! The only "worthless sub-human garbage" is you Drake.

I will not have to make things up I will get rid of them because they are incapable of meeting the standards and will not be capable of earning the privilage of staying in. The fact is that they are sub-standard human beings as well as sub-standard service members. I will not target them solely I will merely hold the standards and beign that they are inferior and pathetic garbage they will not meet the standard and be easily removed. I will not be the one put out since unlike homosexuals I meet the standards. They are sub-standard in every way they are immoral, hateful, disgusting unclean trash. Homosexuals are the evidence that proves this. I have plenty of evidence to prove what I say. Unlike you I am a good honest decent person not worthless sub-human garbage.

Your_Name_Here
06-15-2011, 04:22 AM
I will not have to make things up I will get rid of them because they are incapable of meeting the standards and will not be capable of earning the privilage of staying in. The fact is that they are sub-standard human beings as well as sub-standard service members. I will not target them solely I will merely hold the standards and beign that they are inferior and pathetic garbage they will not meet the standard and be easily removed. I will not be the one put out since unlike homosexuals I meet the standards. They are sub-standard in every way they are immoral, hateful, disgusting unclean trash. Homosexuals are the evidence that proves this. I have plenty of evidence to prove what I say. Unlike you I am a good honest decent person not worthless sub-human garbage.

But they LOVE you so much!
Oh, and WTF is your "evidence?" Yeah, that's what I thought.
You have no proof of what you say in your last sentence, either.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:54 AM
But they LOVE you so much!
Oh, and WTF is your "evidence?" Yeah, that's what I thought.
You have no proof of what you say in your last sentence, either.

HOmosexuals are incapable of love.

Reality is evidence along with plenty of other things. Of course you didn't think you are incapable of such a thing. I have all kinds of proof of how homosexuals harm society. I have plenty of proof you sad pathetic liar

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:57 AM
I think it might be "Duck." That's my educated guess. And apparently Duck has actually gotten something RIGHT, albeit backwards: "good people will not be put down by worthless sub-human garbage." Anyone he thinks/dreams of wrongfully targeting/discriminating against will definitely NOT be put down by Duck or his ilk.

Yeah that is right you moronic my name is "duck" except that unlike your parents mine didn't hate me. You can't give an educated guess because you are an uneducated ignoramus. Everything I have ever said is right. worthless homos will be stopped by good honest decent people like me.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:57 AM
This place needs to be moderated much harder. On any respectable forum, his crap wouldn't last a day.'


Actually my intelligent honest facts would last just fine against the ignorant hateful drivel from hateful morons like you.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:58 AM
Getting kicked out will be the best thing for him, he'll finally be able to go protest with his brothers at the WBC.

except that I will not be the one being kicked out because I am a stellar performer and unlike ignorant hateful scum like you I would never support a group like WBC because they support the death of service members.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:58 AM
The funniest part about this is that this is all you have left.

Actually you are right all I have left is the truth and the facts. Some things that ignorant pathetic garbage like you hates.

Drake_vampiel_d
06-15-2011, 04:58 AM
Says the kettle to the pot...

You actually have shown NO proof, NO evidence and the only "ignorant hateful scum" on this thread is YOU.

You lying ignorant turd, I have shown proof, evidence, and beaten you with the truth. It must be sad to be so pathetic that all you can do is try to use my words against me and fail.

Your_Name_Here
06-15-2011, 05:14 AM
HOmosexuals are incapable of love.

Reality is evidence along with plenty of other things. Of course you didn't think you are incapable of such a thing. I have all kinds of proof of how homosexuals harm society. I have plenty of proof you sad pathetic liar

Takes one to know one, doesn't it?

Reality is:
- DADT is going away--you can't handle that.
- There is no opt-out just because of the above--you can't handle that either.
- Calling me names only makes me look better than you (not that THAT takes very much),
- All your posts pointing to just one thing: the fact that you're a self-loathing closeted lying sack of sh!t--and again, you evidently can't handle that.

Really, where were you touched as a child? You can tell me. It's OK.

FixItWithAMod
06-15-2011, 05:31 AM
'
Actually my intelligent honest facts would last just fine against the ignorant hateful drivel from hateful morons like you.

No, no they wouldn't. You're a garbage poster, so your anti-gay rhetoric doesn't even pass the "so bad it is funny" test.

Your_Name_Here
06-15-2011, 08:33 AM
Yeah that is right you moronic my name is "duck" except that unlike your parents mine didn't hate me. You can't give an educated guess because you are an uneducated ignoramus. Everything I have ever said is right. worthless homos will be stopped by good honest decent people like me.

If you say so. After all, you did say, in a different thread: "like the homsexual I am." Duck, I actually AGREE with your stupid a$$ on something for once, and this is the thanks I get!? smfh

Your_Name_Here
06-15-2011, 08:35 AM
You lying ignorant turd, I have shown proof, evidence, and beaten you with the truth. It must be sad to be so pathetic that all you can do is try to use my words against me and fail.

Awwww, what'sa matter, duckling? All butt-hurt because someone gave you a tast of your own medicine? And actually, she succeeded.

imported_Seasons
06-15-2011, 11:35 AM
HOmosexuals are incapable of love.

Reality is evidence along with plenty of other things. Of course you didn't think you are incapable of such a thing. I have all kinds of proof of how homosexuals harm society. I have plenty of proof you sad pathetic liar


Yeah that is right you moronic my name is "duck" except that unlike your parents mine didn't hate me. You can't give an educated guess because you are an uneducated ignoramus. Everything I have ever said is right. worthless homos will be stopped by good honest decent people like me.


Actually my intelligent honest facts would last just fine against the ignorant hateful drivel from hateful morons like you.


except that I will not be the one being kicked out because I am a stellar performer and unlike ignorant hateful scum like you I would never support a group like WBC because they support the death of service members.


Actually you are right all I have left is the truth and the facts. Some things that ignorant pathetic garbage like you hates.


You lying ignorant turd, I have shown proof, evidence, and beaten you with the truth. It must be sad to be so pathetic that all you can do is try to use my words against me and fail.

The amount of self-hate evident here is almost sad to watch. Is name-calling and "I know you are but what am I" all you are capable of?

candycane3482
06-15-2011, 09:45 PM
Finally he got banned...hopefully he can find peace with his hatred of himself because it was exhausting the amount of hate emanating from his posts.

DarkHeart
06-15-2011, 09:51 PM
Good riddance to bad rubbish (fuck that makes me feel old, I'm not even 30 yet).

That's why I'm glad scruples is back, at lest you can get some decent back and forth with him that is at lest coherent.

Drake, or ducky, i guess, was just a hate filled little man.

DarkHeart
06-22-2011, 01:21 AM
Sgt Maj. Barrett, Sargent Major of the Marine Corps., to his Marines,


“Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution is pretty simple,” he told a group of Marines at a base in South Korea. “It says, ‘Raise an army.’ It says absolutely nothing about race, color, creed, sexual orientation.

“You all joined for a reason: to serve,” he continued. “To protect our nation, right?”

“Yes, sergeant major,” Marines replied.

“How dare we, then, exclude a group of people who want to do the same thing you do right now, something that is honorable and noble?” Sgt. Maj. Barrett continued, raising his voice just a notch. “Right?”

Sgt. Maj. Barrett then described conversations with U.K. troops, who saw a similar ban lifted a decade ago, with little disruption. And to drive the point home, he produced a pocket copy of the Constitution.

“Get over it,” he said. “We’re magnificent, we’re going to continue to be. … Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.”

candycane3482
06-22-2011, 01:32 AM
Sgt Maj. Barrett, Sargent Major of the Marine Corps., to his Marines,

That is what all leaders need to be like during this. It shouldn't matter who or what someone is and he's right - nowhere does the Constitution state anything about race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc. What oath do we take? To protect the Constitution.

LogDog
06-22-2011, 02:14 AM
Sgt Maj. Barrett, Sargent Major of the Marine Corps., to his Marines,
I don't know him and I've never heard about him but that statement “Get over it,” he said. “We’re magnificent, we’re going to continue to be. … Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.” is what I call leadership.

E4RUMOR
06-22-2011, 02:24 AM
It gets to a point where arguing about the whole issue is done simply for the fact of causing irritation... because inevitably... you know you're going to push the buttons of someone you don't like. So it's not always about making a point... it's just about pissing someone off.. and it works.

:rockon

Your_Name_Here
06-22-2011, 03:46 AM
I don't know him and I've never heard about him but that statement “Get over it,” he said. “We’re magnificent, we’re going to continue to be. … Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.” is what I call leadership.

Those are great "words to the wise," for all of us. Especially certain members of this forum who evidently remain butt-hurt over the direction in which we are inevitably heading.

E4RUMOR
06-26-2011, 04:48 AM
Those are great "words to the wise," for all of us. Especially certain members of this forum who evidently remain butt-hurt over the direction in which we are inevitably heading.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Yeah, that goes BOTH ways.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:13 PM
What you are all leaving? because getting rid of you all would be Good riddance to bad rubbish. I'm niether hate filled nor am I little but I guess for the pathetic worthless cowardly trolls that you are you wish that I were a little man.


Good riddance to bad rubbish (fuck that makes me feel old, I'm not even 30 yet).

That's why I'm glad scruples is back, at lest you can get some decent back and forth with him that is at lest coherent.

Drake, or ducky, i guess, was just a hate filled little man.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:13 PM
who got banned? you pathetic troll?


Finally he got banned...hopefully he can find peace with his hatred of himself because it was exhausting the amount of hate emanating from his posts.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:14 PM
There is no self-hate in anything I've said since I love who I am since I'm a good, honest decent America loving heterosexual man. Your cowardly pathetic name calling started all of this so stop crying about name calling. Unlike you pathetic worthless Bitches I don't need the "I know you are" BS because I'm not a cowardly pathetic troll.


The amount of self-hate evident here is almost sad to watch. Is name-calling and "I know you are but what am I" all you are capable of?

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:14 PM
Wish you were me, nothing is the matter, also obviously you have no clue what Drake means but that is obvious from your pathetic ignorance. Unlike you and your homosexual BF I'm never butt hurt. No one here has given me a taste of my own medicine since none of you have said the truth, or honesty.


Awwww, what'sa matter, duckling? All butt-hurt because someone gave you a tast of your own medicine? And actually, she succeeded.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:14 PM
Of course I say so because it is the truth. I have never claimed to be a homosexual you liar. Way to go but I know you wish you were me. So you finally agree that homosexuals are worthless lying America hating scum. Way to go.


If you say so. After all, you did say, in a different thread: "like the homsexual I am." Duck, I actually AGREE with your stupid a$$ on something for once, and this is the thanks I get!? smfh

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:15 PM
No I'm not I'm a decent person, something you obviously know nothing about. My posts have nothing to do with the ""so bad it is funny" test" because they are right unlike your ignorant moronic trolling.


No, no they wouldn't. You're a garbage poster, so your anti-gay rhetoric doesn't even pass the "so bad it is funny" test.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 05:15 PM
Takes one to know one? WTH?

-Reality is DADT was the thing protecting homosexuals and getting rid of it will help good leaders like me know who I will be getting rid of.

-There is no Opt out because Morons don't want to let people do what they told people to do and vote on this by getting out.

- I'm not calling you names, I'm only speaking the truth about you. There is NOTHING that makes you look better being that you are failing.

- All my posts point to the fact that I am a good honest decent heterosexual person somethings that you OBVIOUSLY aren't.

No unlike you and your Homosexual buddies, I wasn't touched as a child.

Takes one to know one, doesn't it?

Reality is:
- DADT is going away--you can't handle that.
- There is no opt-out just because of the above--you can't handle that either.
- Calling me names only makes me look better than you (not that THAT takes very much),
- All your posts pointing to just one thing: the fact that you're a self-loathing closeted lying sack of sh!t--and again, you evidently can't handle that.

Really, where were you touched as a child? You can tell me. It's OK.

Pullinteeth
07-11-2011, 05:41 PM
Takes one to know one? WTH?

-Reality is DADT was the thing protecting homosexuals and getting rid of it will help good leaders like me know who I will be getting rid of.

-There is no Opt out because Morons don't want to let people do what they told people to do and vote on this by getting out.- I'm not calling you names, I'm only speaking the truth about you. There is NOTHING that makes you look better being that you are failing.

- All my posts point to the fact that I am a good honest decent heterosexual person somethings that you OBVIOUSLY aren't.

No unlike you and your Homosexual buddies, I wasn't touched as a child.

There are plenty of ways to get out. You can request early separation, you can NOT re-enlist, decline orders... Hell an Officer can simply resign their commission. Yet I don't see the mass exodus that was predicted. What gives?

candycane3482
07-11-2011, 08:16 PM
Takes one to know one? WTH?

-Reality is DADT was the thing protecting homosexuals and getting rid of it will help good leaders like me know who I will be getting rid of.

-There is no Opt out because Morons don't want to let people do what they told people to do and vote on this by getting out.

- I'm not calling you names, I'm only speaking the truth about you. There is NOTHING that makes you look better being that you are failing.

- All my posts point to the fact that I am a good honest decent heterosexual person somethings that you OBVIOUSLY aren't.

No unlike you and your Homosexual buddies, I wasn't touched as a child.

Ah they let you back on here? Surprising - and I see your hate hasn't rescinded at all. Sad though that you have so much hate in your heart toward people who you don't know.

DADT ultimately has been repealed - the military has stopped enforcing it since the court's decision and guess what? We're all still here.

DarkHeart
07-11-2011, 09:02 PM
http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/picture/587708/901225.gif

Right, keep feeding the troll.

Your_Name_Here
07-11-2011, 09:58 PM
So you're opting out, Duck? GREAT news!!!

I'm pretty sure whatever you just posted is the same lame, tired-ass crap you continually try to convince yourself of; here,why don't you have some cake?
2669

FixItWithAMod
07-11-2011, 10:15 PM
Really though, aren't there moderators on these forums?

Your_Name_Here
07-11-2011, 10:31 PM
Really though, aren't there moderators on these forums?

There are, and believe it or not, our current Community Ed. is harder than the previous. No one, since I joined this forum, had been perma-banned--up until recently, when smarg and HLOOMIS have apparently been shown the door for the last time.

That said, trolls give me a great excuse to start showing off my other pics! I have more where that one up there came from.

LogDog
07-11-2011, 10:41 PM
There is no self-hate in anything I've said since I love who I am since I'm a good, honest decent America loving heterosexual man. Your cowardly pathetic name calling started all of this so stop crying about name calling. Unlike you pathetic worthless Bitches I don't need the "I know you are" BS because I'm not a cowardly pathetic troll.
You chide others for "cowardly pathetic name calling" in one sentence and yet in the next sentence you start with "Unlike you pathetic worthless Bitches..." which would mean that according to your standards you did the same exact thing you criticized others for doing. So that makes you...? http://bestsmileys.com/thinking/6.gif

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 11:05 PM
Log,

I do this in retort to their childish pathetic name calling. It is like when you tell a child not to hit but then you spank them. These sad children wish to start something and I am very capable of sinking to their level and beating them at their own game, because they are completely incapable of reaching the level of playing my games.

As for your final question of what it makes me, the answer to that is simple it makes me superior to them.
You chide others for "cowardly pathetic name calling" in one sentence and yet in the next sentence you start with "Unlike you pathetic worthless Bitches..." which would mean that according to your standards you did the same exact thing you criticized others for doing. So that makes you...? http://bestsmileys.com/thinking/6.gif

candycane3482
07-11-2011, 11:07 PM
Really though, aren't there moderators on these forums?

He did get banned already and they must have just let him back on today because he's been banned awhile. Guess the time-out didn't work.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 11:09 PM
He did get banned already and they must have just let him back on today because he's been banned awhile. Guess the time-out didn't work.

Actually I've been back for a while I just have more important things than trolls to do with my time which is why you are the bottom of my to do list but thanks for thinking that you are special because you aren't now PTFO troll.

candycane3482
07-11-2011, 11:11 PM
Actually I've been back for a while I just have more important things than trolls to do with my time which is why you are the bottom of my to do list but thanks for thinking that you are special because you aren't now PTFO troll.

You sure are the pot calling the kettle black. You deride others for "name calling" but you do it.

How am I a troll? YOU are the definition of an Internet troll. Again why are you so angry?

candycane3482
07-11-2011, 11:15 PM
Log,

I do this in retort to their childish pathetic name calling. It is like when you tell a child not to hit but then you spank them. These sad children wish to start something and I am very capable of sinking to their level and beating them at their own game, because they are completely incapable of reaching the level of playing my games.

As for your final question of what it makes me, the answer to that is simple it makes me superior to them.

LMAO! You have yet to beat anyone at their game. Show some real facts to support your opinion, do it without all the blustery anger and hate, minus the name calling and maybe people will give you respect.

I can't believe you are in charge of other people and poisoning young servicemembers' minds.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 11:22 PM
No wish you were me, I’m not getting out but I feel that it should be an option. But I will be retiring from the military and making sure that homosexuals don’t make it the whole time until I retire. Since you have nothing worth reading since you are unoriginal and droll, I will leave you on that.


So you're opting out, Duck? GREAT news!!!

I'm pretty sure whatever you just posted is the same lame, tired-ass crap you continually try to convince yourself of; here,why don't you have some cake?
2669

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 11:22 PM
Of course since I did nothing wrong. I don’t hate anyone unlike you who hate those of us with good morals. I have no hate towards those I don’t know but thanks for continuing to prove that you are a liar.
DADT ultimately has not been repealed they have the ability to repeal that repeal and keep DADT where it is when they find that this training is not going to work, because those of us with morals will continue to get rid of the garbage bringing down the military. The Military still does enforce it and we are still getting rid of them and IF they finally enact the repeal then it will only make my job easier in knowing who will be getting booted out

Ah they let you back on here? Surprising - and I see your hate hasn't rescinded at all. Sad though that you have so much hate in your heart toward people who you don't know.

DADT ultimately has been repealed - the military has stopped enforcing it since the court's decision and guess what? We're all still here.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 11:22 PM
Yes and I will be getting out with a retirement and I will be removing homosexuals until the day I retire because they don’t deserve the privilege of serving. The reason you don’t see the Mass exodus is because of the fact they are not allowing people to get out because of this, they are making people wait till retirement, or not reenlist because then they will see the people getting out because of this as minor because if they allowed people to vote with their feet like they told people to then there would be a mass exodus.

There are plenty of ways to get out. You can request early separation, you can NOT re-enlist, decline orders... Hell an Officer can simply resign their commission. Yet I don't see the mass exodus that was predicted. What gives?

candycane3482
07-11-2011, 11:29 PM
Of course since I did nothing wrong. I don’t hate anyone unlike you who hate those of us with good morals. I have no hate towards those I don’t know but thanks for continuing to prove that you are a liar.
DADT ultimately has not been repealed they have the ability to repeal that repeal and keep DADT where it is when they find that this training is not going to work, because those of us with morals will continue to get rid of the garbage bringing down the military. The Military still does enforce it and we are still getting rid of them and IF they finally enact the repeal then it will only make my job easier in knowing who will be getting booted out

Broken record. How did I "prove I am a liar?" I haven't lied about anything. DADT is going to be fully repealed by the military. Deal with it. And direction from ALL our senior leadership is that everyone will go along with it and if you don't like it, there's the door.

You have no morals, you have a lot of anger. Have anyone read your posts and they will see it.

Actually no the military is not enforcing it. I think you need to get caught up.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5haitvvhqgJ3exMV419YipnMmIEAw?docId=708a750c8 f54454e8534911e47bfc1a5

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2015529664_dontask07.html

Although the stay is lifted, the 9th Circuit scheduled an Aug. 29 hearing to consider whether the government's appeal of the lower court's decision is valid. But it's unclear whether the Pentagon will pursue the appeal, since defense officials have said they'll stop enforcing the ban.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2011/07/military-dont-ask-dont-tell-court-ruling-071111w/

A federal appeals court in California said Monday that the Obama administration must decide within 10 days whether it will appeal a ruling last week that declared the military’s ban on gays serving openly in the military to be unconstitutional.

The Defense Department is currently planning to “certify” a formal repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law later this year, but the court ruling — if left to stand without appeal — could legally end the ban without the Pentagon’s formal process.

Such an appeal would put the Obama administration in an unusual position of defending a law that Congress voted in December to take off the books.

Ultimately they may as well just not appeal it because Congress already voted to take it out of law. Since the administration is already not defending DOMA, I don't see how it would make sense to appeal it. The military has said they will accept homosexual applicants and are stopping any discharges already in place.

When they enact the repeal, you can't kick someone out for being homosexual. And YOU can't kick anyone out likely. I think the only one who might get kicked out is you once you get caught discriminating against homosexual soldiers...or when one of them kicks your ass.

LogDog
07-11-2011, 11:32 PM
Log,

I do this in retort to their childish pathetic name calling. It is like when you tell a child not to hit but then you spank them. These sad children wish to start something and I am very capable of sinking to their level and beating them at their own game, because they are completely incapable of reaching the level of playing my games.

As for your final question of what it makes me, the answer to that is simple it makes me superior to them.
You are no different from those you criticize so please don't even bother to try and pretend you are superior to anyone. If anything, you are inferior to most people and that includes gays.

Drake_vampiel_d
07-11-2011, 11:37 PM
I've not called anyone black you sad little liar. As I stated (if you could read) I do so like a parent who spanks a child for slapping when told not to, but I guess for someone as feckless as yourself would have problems comprehending such things.

You are a troll in that you are constantly posting in the attempt to start arguments and fights. I on the other hand am not a troll in that what I say is true and informative unlike your argumentative posts. Again you are a liar because I am not angry.


You sure are the pot calling the kettle black. You deride others for "name calling" but you do it.

How am I a troll? YOU are the definition of an Internet troll. Again why are you so angry?

There you go lying still, I constantly beat all of you at your own childish game, I've beaten you with intelligence, and I've beaten you with insults and I can beat you on every and all levels of everything there is because of what you stand for which is the ruination of the US Military and the downfall of America.

I've shown real facts and all of you just cried because you didn't like them and they proved you wrong and then you proceeded to act like children and get beaten at that game as well.

You "people" would not give respect to anyone who doesn't share your opinion which is why an elderly woman was attacked in California after the original prop 8 vote for voting for prop 8. There is no anger or hate in anything I have said, and the name calling only came after you all started it so again you fail.

I'm not poisoning anyone's mind I'm making sure that the future of our military is protected from the likes of you.


LMAO! You have yet to beat anyone at their game. Show some real facts to support your opinion, do it without all the blustery anger and hate, minus the name calling and maybe people will give you respect.

I can't believe you are in charge of other people and poisoning young servicemembers' minds.

Your_Name_Here
07-12-2011, 12:08 AM
I've not called anyone black you sad little liar. As I stated (if you could read) I do so like a parent who spanks a child for slapping when told not to, but I guess for someone as feckless as yourself would have problems comprehending such things.

You are a troll in that you are constantly posting in the attempt to start arguments and fights. I on the other hand am not a troll in that what I say is true and informative unlike your argumentative posts. Again you are a liar because I am not angry.

There you go lying still, I constantly beat all of you at your own childish game, I've beaten you with intelligence, and I've beaten you with insults and I can beat you on every and all levels of everything there is because of what you stand for which is the ruination of the US Military and the downfall of America.

I've shown real facts and all of you just cried because you didn't like them and they proved you wrong and then you proceeded to act like children and get beaten at that game as well.
[SNIP]



Duck,

You've shown and proven but two distinct things:

JACK...and SH!T.

Oh, and thanks for calling me droll earlier. Let me guess: you're trying to get your friend (that you probably have to pay money to just for hanging out) to read you new fancy words out of the dictionary. Don't fucking flatter yourself about your little "games." You suck at anything/EVERYTHING you've EVER tried to post here. You can't defeat anyone with things you don't have--you know, like facts, intelligence, nor insults (that are nothing but pathetic attempts to flip the script that everyone sees through, including my three-year-old).

Oh, one more thing:

2671

candycane3482
07-12-2011, 12:12 AM
I've not called anyone black you sad little liar. As I stated (if you could read) I do so like a parent who spanks a child for slapping when told not to, but I guess for someone as feckless as yourself would have problems comprehending such things.

You are a troll in that you are constantly posting in the attempt to start arguments and fights. I on the other hand am not a troll in that what I say is true and informative unlike your argumentative posts. Again you are a liar because I am not angry.



There you go lying still, I constantly beat all of you at your own childish game, I've beaten you with intelligence, and I've beaten you with insults and I can beat you on every and all levels of everything there is because of what you stand for which is the ruination of the US Military and the downfall of America.

I've shown real facts and all of you just cried because you didn't like them and they proved you wrong and then you proceeded to act like children and get beaten at that game as well.

You "people" would not give respect to anyone who doesn't share your opinion which is why an elderly woman was attacked in California after the original prop 8 vote for voting for prop 8. There is no anger or hate in anything I have said, and the name calling only came after you all started it so again you fail.

I'm not poisoning anyone's mind I'm making sure that the future of our military is protected from the likes of you.

*Sigh* You obviously are - I don't even know where to start. The expression: " pot calling the kettle black" is used to accuse a person of being guilty of the very thing they are pointing out. Wow - never had to explain that to someone before.

You are a troll in that you are constantly posting in the attempt to start arguments and fights. I on the other hand am not a troll in that what I say is true and informative unlike your argumentative posts. Again you are a liar because I am not angry.

Um no I don't post to start arguments. See you start arguments because YOU don't agree with what WE say to you. So you resort to name-calling of the worst kind. But that doesn't bolster your side of the argument. There are plenty of people who disagree with me on the issue of homosexuals in the military; however, they can have civilized conversations with me. They don't call me "immoral" or other names. Also I'm not lying about you being angry. Anyone with half a brain can read your violent, hate filled posts. You talk about wanting to "get rid" of homosexuals. You call people vile names. How is that not angry? You need some serious help and that's all there is to it.

You haven’t beaten anyone at anything. You just make yourself look even angrier, violent and sad. You have provided absolutely no facts but your own opinions. I love the US Army and I don’t want to see it ruined. The only people who will ruin it is leaders like you.

What do you mean “you people?” I wasn’t in the mob of Prop 8. I don’t even live in California. Do I think homosexuals should be able to get married and have it recognized by the federal government? Yeah. Marriage isn’t taken seriously by heterosexuals anyway. We trample on it every day. There should be the legal side and religious side of that.

So you’re gonna lump everyone in with a group of misguided people in a mob mentality? So that means, by your line of thinking, that all Christians are just like Westboro Baptist Church right? According to you as we’ve seen before, the minority of a group represents the majority. So because a few people in a mob mentality attacked an elderly woman (although the only side I’ve seen of it in the news was seemingly anti-homosexual sites so I’m not sure what the whole story was) that means all homosexuals are people who support homosexuals must attack elderly women. Get real. If I saw someone attacking a seemingly innocent elderly woman or any person, I would help them regardless of their views. But you, if she were pro-homosexual rights you would probably trample her.

You started the name calling. You could also stop it if you are so “above” all of us. But you don’t because you aren’t. In all seriousness you seem like a very sad, disgruntled person who needs serious psychiatric help before you hurt someone.
You are poisoning minds if you are in fact a leader (or actually in the military). I only hope we can protect the military’s future from the likes of people like you. What did homosexuals do to you that makes you hate them ALL so much?

LogDog
07-12-2011, 02:55 AM
Log,

I do this in retort to their childish pathetic name calling. It is like when you tell a child not to hit but then you spank them. These sad children wish to start something and I am very capable of sinking to their level and beating them at their own game, because they are completely incapable of reaching the level of playing my games.
"Do as I say, not as I do" is what you're engaging in. It's also called hypocrisy.


As for your final question of what it makes me, the answer to that is simple it makes me superior to them.
The only person you've convinced of that is yourself and unfortunately that person is delusional.

imported_SWOUSA
07-12-2011, 07:18 AM
Everyone, most servicemembers have received the DADT repeal training. Bottom line, we are told to act like professionals. So that means do not display anger, bigotry or hypocrisy in your views if you were against the change.

On the other hand, advocates for the repeal should show some class and restraint for their cause being passed. Your words and over-zealous reaction (which is understandable) can be seen as insensitive, unnecessary, and purposely instigating a reaction from the other end.

If you are leaders; then start acting like it; even on a forum that does not supposedly present your actual character. Professionalism on both sides. That is what we need to be.

Pullinteeth
02-20-2012, 10:05 AM
seems kinda pointless...we do have free speech after all...

Right Wing
02-22-2012, 06:23 AM
LOL, these people are idiots. Plain and simple. They care so much about their position as the moral majority, having a monopoly of what should be considered "right" and "wrong" that they've since spiraled into lunacy.

Get out of my military. If you take orders from your god rather than from your president, we'd be better off without you.

You sound like a member of the Hitler Youth. This is more godless, Marixst secularism of our military by the God haters. It's okay to be out of the closet, but not to mention God?! Is there some type of don't ask don't tell policy regarding faith I am not aware of? Maybe one day this policy will also be repealed and Christians will have as much freedom as sodomites.

Right Wing
02-22-2012, 06:28 AM
http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/chaplains-seek-protection-for-troops-to-share-views-on-homosexuality-1.144399

Protection from what? People should only be talking about religion with the chaplain, at their religious observances or places of worship and that's it. There is no need to be discussing it at work. Do that on your off time. If you don't like homosexuals, fine. But that doesn't mean you get to spout off about it. Do racists get to spout off their hatred for blacks, etc? No. Respect people.

So chaplains shouldn't be visiting the troops during field excercises and in combat? What about the role of the chaplain in combat theaters? In your opinion he should not be present and only reserved to the chapel and chaplain's office?

Maybe soldiers should only be talking about their sex lives in the privacy of their homes. They can do THAT on THEIR own time and don't need to be discussing it at work.

Right Wing
02-23-2012, 08:21 AM
seems kinda pointless...we do have free speech after all...

And you also took an oath to adhere to a code of conduct and military policy. Not that it matters anymore to many amongst the newer generation.

imported_Seasons
02-23-2012, 12:12 PM
And you also took an oath to adhere to a code of conduct and military policy. Not that it matters anymore to many amongst the newer generation.

I'd love to see how any of this goes against that oath.

Right Wing
02-23-2012, 02:35 PM
I'd love to see how any of this goes against that oath.

I wasn't talking to you, but I'll respond. A point was brought up about receiving the training, acting like leaders, and acting professionally. Pullinteeth responded with this seeming kind of pointless and raised the freedom of speech issue. Now, yes, in a forum with aliases, some lame and some cool (his is lame and mine is cool) with nobody knowing the real names and rank it would be hard to pursue any type of insubordination unless it could be proven two guys knew each other in real life and one was disrespectful to the outranking one.

However, even with this being a forum, the fact Pullinteeth would reject the point of leadership, acting professionally in reflection of the training and claim it is free speech is a reflection of character. I could see him standing in formation or sitting in an office telling his superior, "Look, dude, I have free speech."

Pullinteeth
02-23-2012, 03:34 PM
I wasn't talking to you, but I'll respond. A point was brought up about receiving the training, acting like leaders, and acting professionally. Pullinteeth responded with this seeming kind of pointless and raised the freedom of speech issue. Now, yes, in a forum with aliases, some lame and some cool (his is lame and mine is cool) with nobody knowing the real names and rank it would be hard to pursue any type of insubordination unless it could be proven two guys knew each other in real life and one was disrespectful to the outranking one.
However, even with this being a forum, the fact Pullinteeth would reject the point of leadership, acting professionally in reflection of the training and claim it is free speech is a reflection of character. I could see him standing in formation or sitting in an office telling his superior, "Look, dude, I have free speech."

And therein lies your problem. You consider disagreement to be insubordination. There is no need for additional protection. You are entitled to your beliefs and you can express them as long as you do it professionally. If you must act like a homophobic child, then you may have problems. Like any other policy, you can disagree all you like but you still have to follow it. That isn't what this thread is about though-it is about the ability to freely express one's views. I didn't respond to any post...I responded to the THREAD...apparently that fact escaped your attention.

imported_Seasons
02-23-2012, 05:51 PM
I wasn't talking to you, but I'll respond. A point was brought up about receiving the training, acting like leaders, and acting professionally. Pullinteeth responded with this seeming kind of pointless and raised the freedom of speech issue. Now, yes, in a forum with aliases, some lame and some cool (his is lame and mine is cool) with nobody knowing the real names and rank it would be hard to pursue any type of insubordination unless it could be proven two guys knew each other in real life and one was disrespectful to the outranking one.

However, even with this being a forum, the fact Pullinteeth would reject the point of leadership, acting professionally in reflection of the training and claim it is free speech is a reflection of character. I could see him standing in formation or sitting in an office telling his superior, "Look, dude, I have free speech."

Are you completely $#&^ing clueless as to the real military? And do you ever know what you're arguing about?

What you've said equates to "chaplains can't say anything against homosexuality due to code of conduct". Pullin said "they should be able to say something as part of free speech".

You're fighting against your own point.

Educating clueless people really is like pullin' teeth...

Right Wing
02-23-2012, 11:16 PM
Are you completely $#&^ing clueless as to the real military? And do you ever know what you're arguing about?

What you've said equates to "chaplains can't say anything against homosexuality due to code of conduct". Pullin said "they should be able to say something as part of free speech".

You're fighting against your own point.

Educating clueless people really is like pullin' teeth...


Everyone, most servicemembers have received the DADT repeal training. Bottom line, we are told to act like professionals. So that means do not display anger, bigotry or hypocrisy in your views if you were against the change.

On the other hand, advocates for the repeal should show some class and restraint for their cause being passed. Your words and over-zealous reaction (which is understandable) can be seen as insensitive, unnecessary, and purposely instigating a reaction from the other end.

If you are leaders; then start acting like it; even on a forum that does not supposedly present your actual character. Professionalism on both sides. That is what we need to be.

"seems kinda pointless...we do have free speech after all..."

His comment came directly after the Swousa post and appeared to be in response. Granted, Pullinteeth didn't quote Swousa, but not everyone does that. I am not familiar with everyone's posting style as I am new to the forum, so this did appear to be a response to Swousa's post as it was directly after it with little specifics stating he was referring to the chaplains.

Hey, if Pullinteeth was referring to the chaplains, then, yes, he actually got one right.

Pullinteeth
02-24-2012, 10:49 AM
"seems kinda pointless...we do have free speech after all..."

His comment came directly after the Swousa post and appeared to be in response. Granted, Pullinteeth didn't quote Swousa, but not everyone does that. I am not familiar with everyone's posting style as I am new to the forum, so this did appear to be a response to Swousa's post as it was directly after it with little specifics stating he was referring to the chaplains.

Hey, if Pullinteeth was referring to the chaplains, then, yes, he actually got one right.

Did you happen to notice the gap in time? Or the fact that I posted in literally DOZENS of threads within an hour or so? Let me give you a hint..it was for a purpose...

imported_Seasons
02-24-2012, 01:25 PM
Did you happen to notice the gap in time? Or the fact that I posted in literally DOZENS of threads within an hour or so? Let me give you a hint..it was for a purpose...

Hey, at least we keep further burying the dead thread this way.

Banned
02-24-2012, 05:05 PM
Yeah, I actually used to try and argue with Pullinteet, before I figured out why he was doing it... :D

candycane3482
02-25-2012, 02:22 PM
You sound like a member of the Hitler Youth. This is more godless, Marixst secularism of our military by the God haters. It's okay to be out of the closet, but not to mention God?! Is there some type of don't ask don't tell policy regarding faith I am not aware of? Maybe one day this policy will also be repealed and Christians will have as much freedom as sodomites.

You don't take an oath to god in the military (not in the US) so how is this representative of "Hitler Youth?" And "Sodomites" Really? LOL! No wonder you have negative rep and you've barely been on here. Christians are the majority in the military. In the Army. How often do you see prayers before ceremonies that reflect all religions? They're largely Christian based. So don't give me that bullshit. Yeah it's okay to be homosexual but not talk about god. God has nothing to do with this Army. Go join some Christian army.

candycane3482
02-25-2012, 02:24 PM
So chaplains shouldn't be visiting the troops during field excercises and in combat? What about the role of the chaplain in combat theaters? In your opinion he should not be present and only reserved to the chapel and chaplain's office?

Maybe soldiers should only be talking about their sex lives in the privacy of their homes. They can do THAT on THEIR own time and don't need to be discussing it at work.

Did I say that? I said AT WORK!! In the office. I know the chaplain visits them out and about. That's fine.

Yeah soldiers SHOULD be talking about sex lives OUTSIDE OF WORK. But you know who are the biggest offenders of that? MALES. You know how many sex stories I've heard? I personally don't give a shit if it's during lunch or something but if we're supposed to be doing work, I say something. But you know what, it's okay for straight dudes to just go off about their sexual exploits and brag. No one wants to hear that and it's usually bullshit anyway. BUT I think you missed my point (and this thread is super old).

Right Wing
02-29-2012, 10:08 AM
You don't take an oath to god in the military (not in the US) so how is this representative of "Hitler Youth?" And "Sodomites" Really? LOL! No wonder you have negative rep and you've barely been on here. Christians are the majority in the military. In the Army. How often do you see prayers before ceremonies that reflect all religions? They're largely Christian based. So don't give me that bullshit. Yeah it's okay to be homosexual but not talk about god. God has nothing to do with this Army. Go join some Christian army.

I have a negative "rep"? Really? You have to be kidding me! I didn't expect that from a forum which appears to have the strong possibility of consisting of high school drop outs living in their mothers' basements infatuated with the military because of playing too much Call of Duty, intead of studying for the GED. But, hey, if you picked up a history book, instead of reading the Huffington Post every now and then, you would see the correlation between a poster here stating heavy disdain for God while blindly following a president and the Hitler Youth.

By the way, let's look at your president you are to swear an oath to. His campaign was on a promise of bringing the troops back home, yet, it took him about three years to finally bring them home from one front. In the meantime, he provided air support in Libya in violation of the War Powers Act, not to mention the Constitution. In fact, he stated he didn't need to satisfy the War Powers Act, so he didn't even need to get to the Constitution. He has apologized for the Koran burning in Afghanistan as troops are being murdered. Now, he in the process of involving support to the rebel forces in Syria. These rebel forces consist of Al-Qaeda. How would it feel to support Al-Qaeda while still at war against them?

How does it feel for soldiers to die while Obama violates the Constitution and is sacrificing them to make defense contractors rich?

imported_Seasons
02-29-2012, 01:33 PM
I have a negative "rep"? Really? You have to be kidding me! I didn't expect that from a forum which appears to have the strong possibility of consisting of high school drop outs living in their mothers' basements infatuated with the military because of playing too much Call of Duty, intead of studying for the GED. But, hey, if you picked up a history book, instead of reading the Huffington Post every now and then, you would see the correlation between a poster here stating heavy disdain for God while blindly following a president and the Hitler Youth.

By the way, let's look at your president you are to swear an oath to. His campaign was on a promise of bringing the troops back home, yet, it took him about three years to finally bring them home from one front. In the meantime, he provided air support in Libya in violation of the War Powers Act, not to mention the Constitution. In fact, he stated he didn't need to satisfy the War Powers Act, so he didn't even need to get to the Constitution. He has apologized for the Koran burning in Afghanistan as troops are being murdered. Now, he in the process of involving support to the rebel forces in Syria. These rebel forces consist of Al-Qaeda. How would it feel to support Al-Qaeda while still at war against them?

How does it feel for soldiers to die while Obama violates the Constitution and is sacrificing them to make defense contractors rich?

You're completely looney...says the active duty Captain.

Banned
02-29-2012, 05:18 PM
You don't take an oath to god in the military (not in the US) so how is this representative of "Hitler Youth?" And "Sodomites" Really? LOL! No wonder you have negative rep and you've barely been on here. Christians are the majority in the military. In the Army. How often do you see prayers before ceremonies that reflect all religions? They're largely Christian based. So don't give me that bullshit. Yeah it's okay to be homosexual but not talk about god. God has nothing to do with this Army. Go join some Christian army.

I heard the Lord's Resistance Army is hiring... he'll fit right in...

LogDog
02-29-2012, 06:07 PM
I heard the Lord's Resistance Army is hiring... he'll fit right in...
I'm sure he'll feel at home with them.

2786

candycane3482
02-29-2012, 07:47 PM
I have a negative "rep"? Really? You have to be kidding me! I didn't expect that from a forum which appears to have the strong possibility of consisting of high school drop outs living in their mothers' basements infatuated with the military because of playing too much Call of Duty, intead of studying for the GED. But, hey, if you picked up a history book, instead of reading the Huffington Post every now and then, you would see the correlation between a poster here stating heavy disdain for God while blindly following a president and the Hitler Youth.

By the way, let's look at your president you are to swear an oath to. His campaign was on a promise of bringing the troops back home, yet, it took him about three years to finally bring them home from one front. In the meantime, he provided air support in Libya in violation of the War Powers Act, not to mention the Constitution. In fact, he stated he didn't need to satisfy the War Powers Act, so he didn't even need to get to the Constitution. He has apologized for the Koran burning in Afghanistan as troops are being murdered. Now, he in the process of involving support to the rebel forces in Syria. These rebel forces consist of Al-Qaeda. How would it feel to support Al-Qaeda while still at war against them?

How does it feel for soldiers to die while Obama violates the Constitution and is sacrificing them to make defense contractors rich?

Ah sarcasm in the first paragraph. Really? You think those of us on the forum are " high school drop outs living in their mothers' basements infatuated with the military because of playing too much Call of Duty, intead of studying for the GED."

Who on here follows Hitler Youth? What?

Your name says it all. Like there are any better candidates on the Republican side. Give me a break!! I bet you are going to vote for Santorum...

LogDog
02-29-2012, 08:33 PM
Ah sarcasm in the first paragraph. Really? You think those of us on the forum are " high school drop outs living in their mothers' basements infatuated with the military because of playing too much Call of Duty, intead of studying for the GED."

Who on here follows Hitler Youth? What?

Your name says it all. Like there are any better candidates on the Republican side. Give me a break!! I bet you are going to vote for Santorum...
That's a given. The question that should be asked of Right Wing is "Do you love Santorum?"

Banned
02-29-2012, 09:04 PM
I'm sure he'll feel at home with them.

2786

I dunno... have they repealed DADT yet? I would hate for the poor guy to be caught in a compromising situation with a male penguin the back of an AMREP...

LogDog
02-29-2012, 10:44 PM
I dunno... have they repealed DADT yet? I would hate for the poor guy to be caught in a compromising situation with a male penguin the back of an AMREP...
Remember the saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime"

I think we should amend it for Right Wing's sake to say "Give Right Wing a fish and he'll have dates for the rest of his life."

SeaLawyer
03-01-2012, 06:51 PM
Will adultery, then, no longer be punishable by the UCMJ? I think we all know such a topic is circumstantial--regardless whether they repeal or don't repeal the DADT policy.

imported_Seasons
03-02-2012, 06:38 PM
Will adultery, then, no longer be punishable by the UCMJ? I think we all know such a topic is circumstantial--regardless whether they repeal or don't repeal the DADT policy.

Adultery has generally been placed under the "discredit to the uniform" or "damage to unit morale" flags in the cases its gone to Court Martial.

Pullinteeth
03-04-2012, 12:20 AM
Will adultery, then, no longer be punishable by the UCMJ? I think we all know such a topic is circumstantial--regardless whether they repeal or don't repeal the DADT policy.

It is but only if it can be proven that said adultery was prejudicial to good order and discipline...just like the rule against sodomy...

LogDog
03-04-2012, 01:03 AM
It is but only if it can be proven that said adultery was prejudicial to good order and discipline...just like the rule against sodomy...
From what I've seen in the past adultery is mainly used to pile on other charges against the person especially when the charges aren't particularly strong. If they can't convict on other charges they can usually convict on the adultery charges.

Banned
03-07-2012, 11:53 PM
Remember the saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime"

I think we should amend it for Right Wing's sake to say "Give Right Wing a fish and he'll have dates for the rest of his life."

No no you got it wrong - "Give Right Wing a fish and he'll get laid today. Teach Right Wing to fish, and he can get laid for the rest of his life".

candycane3482
03-12-2012, 02:58 PM
Will adultery, then, no longer be punishable by the UCMJ? I think we all know such a topic is circumstantial--regardless whether they repeal or don't repeal the DADT policy.

They already did repeal DADT. Why would adultery no longer be punishable? It's still a UCMJ violation as far as I know. Not really the same thing (but I don't think adultery really should be something punishable under UCMJ). I mean yeah I can see why it is to a point.

Pullinteeth
03-12-2012, 06:58 PM
They already did repeal DADT. Why would adultery no longer be punishable? It's still a UCMJ violation as far as I know. Not really the same thing (but I don't think adultery really should be something punishable under UCMJ). I mean yeah I can see why it is to a point.

Ummmm because the Federal Court said so? Kind of like sodomy and being gay (towards the end of DADT the services were required to provide proof that service was detrimental to good order and disipline in order to boot them...)...

candycane3482
03-12-2012, 11:10 PM
Ummmm because the Federal Court said so? Kind of like sodomy and being gay (towards the end of DADT the services were required to provide proof that service was detrimental to good order and disipline in order to boot them...)...

But they haven't taken adultery out of UCMJ yet. They also as far as I knew haven't completely taken sodomy off the books because when they were going to get rid of that as a violation of UCMJ it also would've made bestiality non-punishable so they were going to re-word it and make a separate bill or something? I just remember that it went from being taken out of UCMJ and then it wasn't because of wording.

DarkHeart
03-29-2012, 06:08 PM
But they haven't taken adultery out of UCMJ yet. They also as far as I knew haven't completely taken sodomy off the books because when they were going to get rid of that as a violation of UCMJ it also would've made bestiality non-punishable so they were going to re-word it and make a separate bill or something? I just remember that it went from being taken out of UCMJ and then it wasn't because of wording.

Just goes to show how messed up the system is in general, that it is this hard to simply amend/edit a law. How hard is it to remove sodomy from the books or to say that its only punishable if a party wasn't consenting? It makes me wonder if the "bestiality" thing only came up because someone wanted to start that argument again.

candycane3482
03-29-2012, 06:44 PM
Just goes to show how messed up the system is in general, that it is this hard to simply amend/edit a law. How hard is it to remove sodomy from the books or to say that its only punishable if a party wasn't consenting? It makes me wonder if the "bestiality" thing only came up because someone wanted to start that argument again.

You would think it's not that hard to change around some words but apparently it is lol. I don't know why bestiality and sodomy are the same article though...

Chief568
04-03-2012, 06:36 PM
So YOU are OK with everyone who believes in God to get out of "your military" huh? You DO realize that that would leave you WOEFULLY undermanned, do you not? And that means a DRAFT...which means YOU would have to train the recruits that DO NOT WANT to be there. Believe me, it would NOT be a picnic.

MORE to the point, you would have to have someone who doesn't want to be there and has NO feeling of brotherhood to you covering your back!

Oh and in addition to that, ALL Chaplains would be gone...guess you'll HAVE to go to mental health to talk about that PTSD you get.

See how illogical your statement is?

AJBIGJ
04-03-2012, 06:49 PM
See how illogical your statement is?

Who are you speaking towards?

Chief568
04-03-2012, 06:52 PM
My apologies...I was speaking towards the person who said if they feel they take order from God then they need to get out of the military.

AJBIGJ
04-03-2012, 06:58 PM
My apologies...I was speaking towards the person who said if they feel they take order from God then they need to get out of the military.

No worries, this would be one of the times I myself would use the "Reply with Quote", I'm still parsing back through previous posts trying to determine who is in the conversation.

candycane3482
04-03-2012, 10:46 PM
So YOU are OK with everyone who believes in God to get out of "your military" huh? You DO realize that that would leave you WOEFULLY undermanned, do you not? And that means a DRAFT...which means YOU would have to train the recruits that DO NOT WANT to be there. Believe me, it would NOT be a picnic.

MORE to the point, you would have to have someone who doesn't want to be there and has NO feeling of brotherhood to you covering your back!

Oh and in addition to that, ALL Chaplains would be gone...guess you'll HAVE to go to mental health to talk about that PTSD you get.

See how illogical your statement is?

I'm not sure who you're talking to. I don't think we would be undermanned if everyone who believed in god got out. Depends on which god we're talking about. I don't think we'll ever go back to a draft unless it's a dire situation. Shit - DoD told Congress that if they don't cut the military's benefits, they'll have to cut an ADDITIONAL 60,000 troops on TOP of the cuts they're already making.

Well I'd rather not have someone who uses religion and blind ignorance as a moral compass and treats people like shit because of it.

I have never talked to a chaplain about ANY of my problems. I never would. If I had PTSD, I would go see an actual mental health professional for it.

So tell me how illogical the statement your replying to is and then I'll tell you how illogical your statement is.

Shrike
04-04-2012, 02:39 PM
So YOU are OK with everyone who believes in God to get out of "your military" huh? You DO realize that that would leave you WOEFULLY undermanned, do you not? And that means a DRAFT...which means YOU would have to train the recruits that DO NOT WANT to be there. Believe me, it would NOT be a picnic.

MORE to the point, you would have to have someone who doesn't want to be there and has NO feeling of brotherhood to you covering your back!

Oh and in addition to that, ALL Chaplains would be gone...guess you'll HAVE to go to mental health to talk about that PTSD you get.

See how illogical your statement is?

Which god are you talking about? And the chaplains could all go away tomorrow for all I care. If we have to cut people we might as well start with them.

Banned
04-04-2012, 03:22 PM
So YOU are OK with everyone who believes in God to get out of "your military" huh? You DO realize that that would leave you WOEFULLY undermanned, do you not? And that means a DRAFT...which means YOU would have to train the recruits that DO NOT WANT to be there. Believe me, it would NOT be a picnic.

MORE to the point, you would have to have someone who doesn't want to be there and has NO feeling of brotherhood to you covering your back!

Oh and in addition to that, ALL Chaplains would be gone...guess you'll HAVE to go to mental health to talk about that PTSD you get.

See how illogical your statement is?

If everyone in "God's Team" got out tomorrow, the signing bonuses would be frickin awesome.

DarkHeart
05-02-2012, 10:42 PM
If everyone in "God's Team" got out tomorrow, the signing bonuses would be frickin awesome.

Man making rank in the Navy would be so easy. Feel free to leave any time guys!

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-02-2012, 03:19 AM
As far as I know, neither chaplains nor servicemembers in general have ever got in trouble for saying that normal premarital sex is a sin, as long as they don't repeatedly pound the Bible over the head over someone who isn't interested. But now when it comes to homosexuality, it is apparent that some chaplains are being discriminated against.

The opposition of both the current administration and the ill-named Servicemembers Legal Defense Network to this common sense protection of freedom of religion for chaplains is very telling. It shows they aren't satisfied with homosexuals being allowed to serve openly. They intend to exterminate anyone who disagrees, especially Catholics. It won't be long before they demand the burning of all Bibles currently on military installations as "hate literature."

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-02-2012, 03:24 AM
You would think it's not that hard to change around some words but apparently it is lol. I don't know why bestiality and sodomy are the same article though...

Probably because they are both sexual perversions that are dishonorable and bring shame on anyone who engages in them and any organization with which they are associated (e.g. the military). As always, I speak of the act itself and not the desire to engage in it. It's no one's fault what he desires, just what he chooses to do.

Quid
06-02-2012, 03:25 AM
Probably because they are both sexual perversions that are dishonorable and bring shame on anyone who engages in them and any organization with which they are associated (e.g. the military). As always, I speak of the act itself and not the desire to engage in it. It's no one's fault what he desires, just what he chooses to do.

Oh hey it's the guy who can't justify shit sans bible.

Hey guy.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-02-2012, 03:31 AM
How often do you see prayers before ceremonies that reflect all religions? They're largely Christian based.

In what unit??? I don't think I've ever heard a Christian-based prayer at a ceremony. They're always addressed to some unnamed deity, they certainly aren't "in Jesus name," and they're usually pre-written scripts more directed towards the audience than towards the supposed god being prayed to. I'd much rather hear a real, devout Muslim or Jewish prayer than the bland speech you are calling "Christian based."

LogDog
06-02-2012, 05:17 AM
In what unit??? I don't think I've ever heard a Christian-based prayer at a ceremony. They're always addressed to some unnamed deity, they certainly aren't "in Jesus name," and they're usually pre-written scripts more directed towards the audience than towards the supposed god being prayed to. I'd much rather hear a real, devout Muslim or Jewish prayer than the bland speech you are calling "Christian based."
Obviously, you fell asleep or just didn't hear it. In nearly every non-Chaplin led prayer at the squadron/group/wing level function I attended ended with "...in Jesus' name, amen."

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-02-2012, 01:23 PM
Must be an Air Force thing. Obviously, someone with Soldier in their name probably doesn't attend many "squadron/group/wing level functions."

Shrike
06-02-2012, 05:23 PM
Oh hey it's the guy who can't justify shit sans bible.

Hey guy.

He's been gone for a while. His parents probably sent him to Fred Phelps' Bible Camp for Precocious Preteens.

LogDog
06-02-2012, 07:04 PM
Must be an Air Force thing. Obviously, someone with Soldier in their name probably doesn't attend many "squadron/group/wing level functions."
You are a soldier who posts on the Air Force portion of this forum, hmmmm? That must mean you did fall asleep or you just didn't understand the words that were spoken at your Army function.

LogDog
06-02-2012, 07:04 PM
Must be an Air Force thing. Obviously, someone with Soldier in their name probably doesn't attend many "squadron/group/wing level functions."
You are a soldier who posts on the Air Force portion of this forum, hmmmm? That must mean you did fall asleep or you just didn't understand the words that were spoken at your Army function.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-02-2012, 07:23 PM
HOME Forum> Hot Topics> DADT> Chaplains seek protection for troops to share views on homosexuality

How is that "the Air Force portion"?

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-02-2012, 07:23 PM
He's been gone for a while. His parents probably sent him to Fred Phelps' Bible Camp for Precocious Preteens.

How is it that you haven't been banned yet? I left the forum to give them time to clean out the trash. Obviously they haven't.

Shrike
06-02-2012, 10:53 PM
How is it that you haven't been banned yet? I left the forum to give them time to clean out the trash. Obviously they haven't.

That's about the response I'd expect from a morally-stunted man-child who sees the world only in terms of absolutes - things are either black and white, there can be no shades of gray. You disagree with what I say and can't logically argue against my points so you'd prefer to see me silenced. You're midset fits right in with both the uber-liberal and the far-right religious nut.

But c'mon, admit it - you left the forum because you got tired of having your idiotic blatherings torn apart by pretty much everyone on here except for the occasional member of the Christian Taliban that agreed with you.

I'm not going to waste time on you anymore. Any "argument" you choose to put forth has been thoroughly shot down numerous times. So any time you feel like posting more of your ignorance on here I'll just refer you back to the DADT section.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-03-2012, 12:10 AM
You don't make points. You only make personal attacks.

Slime like you are why there are so few serious discussions in these forums.

Quid
06-03-2012, 12:54 AM
You don't make points. You only make personal attacks.

Slime like you are why there are so few serious discussions in these forums.

Hey.

Hey guy.

How's calling people names going?

Shrike
06-03-2012, 01:22 AM
You don't make points. You only make personal attacks.

Slime like you are why there are so few serious discussions in these forums.

See here for my response: http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?83-DADT

Pullinteeth
06-04-2012, 02:39 PM
Probably because they are both sexual perversions that are dishonorable and bring shame on anyone who engages in them and any organization with which they are associated (e.g. the military). As always, I speak of the act itself and not the desire to engage in it. It's no one's fault what he desires, just what he chooses to do.

So Lesbians get a free pass? Because YOU don't find what they do disgusting? Interesting.

It seems to me that you think VERY highly of yourself. You get to decide who is a Christian and who isn't, what is immoral and what isn't....seems like "someone" has a bit of a God complex...

AJBIGJ
06-04-2012, 07:50 PM
I'll throw in two statements which I think sum this issue up nicely:

1. Allowing Chaplains to choose to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies in base chapels = good idea.

2. Forcing Chaplains to perform any type of marriage ceremonies in base chapels they otherwise would disagree with = very bad idea.

Hopefully we can apply simple common sense here and do the first one without it devolving into the second.

JD2780
06-04-2012, 07:53 PM
HOME Forum> Hot Topics> DADT> Chaplains seek protection for troops to share views on homosexuality

How is that "the Air Force portion"?

I've been at Army functions and sometimes it was very christian based. Oh well.

JD2780
06-04-2012, 07:57 PM
How is it that you haven't been banned yet? I left the forum to give them time to clean out the trash. Obviously they haven't.

Trash or just folks with differing opinions?

Fanatics.

"Slime" like Shrike, have also been known to provide great advice to folks also. Catch him on a topic that doesnt have a fantatic (extremist) involved and you'd be surprised.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-05-2012, 01:02 AM
Trash or just folks with differing opinions?

Fanatics.

"Slime" like Shrike, have also been known to provide great advice to folks also. Catch him on a topic that doesnt have a fantatic (extremist) involved and you'd be surprised.

Different opinions are great. But, as always, Shrike personally attacked me as soon as he saw my post that he disagreed with. In any decently moderated forum, he would be banned.

Shrike
06-05-2012, 02:52 AM
Different opinions are great. But, as always, Shrike personally attacked me as soon as he saw my post that he disagreed with. In any decently moderated forum, he would be banned.

See here for my response, and for exactly why you have earned the right to be thrown in with slime like Fred Phleps: http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?83-DADT

Pullinteeth
06-05-2012, 11:28 AM
I'll throw in two statements which I think sum this issue up nicely:

1. Allowing Chaplains to choose to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies in base chapels = good idea.

2. Forcing Chaplains to perform any type of marriage ceremonies in base chapels they otherwise would disagree with = very bad idea.
Hopefully we can apply simple common sense here and do the first one without it devolving into the second.

As you may or may not know, that is already the rule. Not just for this issue but for ALL issues. Since Chaplains are essentially on "loan" from their particular faith group, they CANNOT be required to do anything that runs contrary to the beliefs of their faith group. If they were, the group could just pull their endorsement and they walk.

AJBIGJ
06-05-2012, 12:30 PM
As you may or may not know, that is already the rule. Not just for this issue but for ALL issues. Since Chaplains are essentially on "loan" from their particular faith group, they CANNOT be required to do anything that runs contrary to the beliefs of their faith group. If they were, the group could just pull their endorsement and they walk.

Currently it is, I hesitate to think that it could never be otherwise because I could easily see this going the direction of a lawsuit against a chaplain who refuses to perform a ceremony against their beliefs and a subsequent overreaction from papa government.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-07-2012, 04:13 AM
Currently it is, I hesitate to think that it could never be otherwise because I could easily see this going the direction of a lawsuit against a chaplain who refuses to perform a ceremony against their beliefs and a subsequent overreaction from papa government.

That's EXACTLY what they want. All-out war on anyone who disagrees with them.

I agreed with them when they want sodomy laws repealed. I even agreed with them when they wanted civil unions. Now that I see their real agenda (mandated nationwide affirmation), I'm starting to regret ever supporting them in any manner.

JD2780
06-07-2012, 01:40 PM
That's EXACTLY what they want. All-out war on anyone who disagrees with them.

I agreed with them when they want sodomy laws repealed. I even agreed with them when they wanted civil unions. Now that I see their real agenda (mandated nationwide affirmation), I'm starting to regret ever supporting them in any manner.

So you supported these heathens? Not very christian of you based on your arguements. You backed the sinners that are damned to hell. Look what you did!!!

JD2780
06-07-2012, 01:40 PM
That's EXACTLY what they want. All-out war on anyone who disagrees with them.

I agreed with them when they want sodomy laws repealed. I even agreed with them when they wanted civil unions. Now that I see their real agenda (mandated nationwide affirmation), I'm starting to regret ever supporting them in any manner.

So you supported these heathens? Not very christian of you based on your arguements. You backed the sinners that are damned to hell. Look what you did!!!

F4CrewChick
06-07-2012, 04:22 PM
Yes everything you say has been gone over multiple times...never ending cycle it seems with no answers.
The "answer" quite simply is, "live and let live." I don't 'identify' as a libertarian because I also believe wholeheartedly in social justice but it's a really good rule of thumb for living-in-harmony. Essentially, you may not like or 'approve' of something some else does or their 'world view; but unless it actually impedes on your ability to live life the way you see fit FOR YOURSELF, then it's none of your business and they should be 'allowed' to go on about their business. 'Ways of being' cannot include harm to others--like murder, abuse, thievery, etc., but unless others actions directly impinge upon your ability to do what you want or harm others, let it go.

Banned
06-07-2012, 04:35 PM
That's EXACTLY what they want. All-out war on anyone who disagrees with them.

I agreed with them when they want sodomy laws repealed. I even agreed with them when they wanted civil unions. Now that I see their real agenda (mandated nationwide affirmation), I'm starting to regret ever supporting them in any manner.

Then I'm sorry... you're going to hell.

F4CrewChick
06-07-2012, 11:25 PM
It doesn't say they will burn for all eternity, however:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.(Leviticus 20:13)In fact, that section of Leviticus is speaking to humankind's tendency toward Bacchanalian pursuits of happiness and the whorish inclinations of those who who have sex without love and commitment. I'll talk scripture with you all day if you want...

F4CrewChick
06-07-2012, 11:33 PM
The right to say your religious beliefs about homosexuality in general [not in a personal attack] is protected under the Constitution, just as homosexuals have the right to disagree with another service member's faith.

Bringing up the subject about "protection" seems downright ridiculous. It is already protected.OMG Scruples with positive rep points... It's nice you toned down your rhetoric. Welcome to the world of somewhat thoughtful free speech.

USAF-Controller
06-07-2012, 11:38 PM
That's EXACTLY what they want. All-out war on anyone who disagrees with them.

I agreed with them when they want sodomy laws repealed. I even agreed with them when they wanted civil unions. Now that I see their real agenda (mandated nationwide affirmation), I'm starting to regret ever supporting them in any manner.

If by "mandated nationwide affirmation" you mean "equal rights" then you are of course correct, sir.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-08-2012, 01:56 AM
If by "mandated nationwide affirmation" you mean "equal rights" then you are of course correct, sir.

They already have equal rights. I can't "marry" a person of the same sex any more than they can. Everyone has the same rights to get married. Some people just aren't intelligent enough to understand what marriage is.

F4CrewChick
06-08-2012, 02:01 AM
The amount of self-hate evident here is almost sad to watch. Is name-calling and "I know you are but what am I" all you are capable of?I was thinking the same thing but the more I read, the more I actually began to feel sorry for him. He is a lost, tortured soul.

JD2780
06-08-2012, 02:05 AM
If you want to take the bible literally than you wife is supposed to serve you, by serve we all know it pretty much means do whatever you ask, it also says to respect her, but serve none the less.

Get with the times homie.

USAF-Controller
06-08-2012, 02:59 AM
They already have equal rights. I can't "marry" a person of the same sex any more than they can. Everyone has the same rights to get married. Some people just aren't intelligent enough to understand what marriage is.

I disagree. You are attracted to women and thus you have the right to marry any woman who will marry you. If you were attracted to men then you should have the right to marry any man who would marry you. Calling it a "civil union" won't cut it. Why, you ask? Just about every single state or federal form asks married or single. If two people stand together and promise to love and honor each other for the rest of their lives, that is marriage.

TheSoldierwhosaysNi
06-08-2012, 01:00 PM
I disagree. You are attracted to women and thus you have the right to marry any woman who will marry you. If you were attracted to men then you should have the right to marry any man who would marry you. Calling it a "civil union" won't cut it. Why, you ask? Just about every single state or federal form asks married or single. If two people stand together and promise to love and honor each other for the rest of their lives, that is marriage.

No. Marriage was created in order to stabilize societies and ensure that children were raised by both a man and a woman (who stand together and promise to love and honor each other for the rest of their lives). And the funny thing is that thousands of cultures who disagreed on everything else agreed on this and have for thousands of years. It's only very recently that some have gotten the idiotic notion that marriage doesn't require a man and a woman.

You might as well build a vehicle with two fuselages and no wings and try claiming it's still an airplane. People need to stop being so sensitive to being labeled "intolerant" that they enable this kind of stupidity.

JD2780
06-08-2012, 01:25 PM
No. Marriage was created in order to stabilize societies and ensure that children were raised by both a man and a woman (who stand together and promise to love and honor each other for the rest of their lives). And the funny thing is that thousands of cultures who disagreed on everything else agreed on this and have for thousands of years. It's only very recently that some have gotten the idiotic notion that marriage doesn't require a man and a woman.

You might as well build a vehicle with two fuselages and no wings and try claiming it's still an airplane. People need to stop being so sensitive to being labeled "intolerant" that they enable this kind of stupidity.

Tell me why it is impossible for 2 males or 2 females to do this?

How is it an idiotic notion? Because you said so?

imported_Seasons
08-29-2012, 06:43 PM
No. Marriage was created in order to stabilize societies and ensure that children were raised by both a man and a woman (who stand together and promise to love and honor each other for the rest of their lives).

That's actually quite false. Marriage was created in many cases to determine inheritance lines for offspring, a solution to the issue of illegitimate children seeking pieces of their parents' estates. The diction that children must be raised by one of each sex is very false, and in fact was never required; children were constantly raised by single parents or by hired nannies/stewards in place of any parent involvement.

Some, such as the Jews, believed that you could only have sex if you were married, and that sex was only for the effort of procreation, leading to the allowance of multiple wives if one could not bear children. This was a religious view of the time, but they were considered oddities amongst the other cultures.

Pullinteeth
07-12-2013, 02:59 PM
Methinks this guy is lying to make his case seem stronger....seems to happen a LOT in cases that revolve around DADT... The three things I saw that can't all be possible are these;

In addition to his reprimand, the Air National Guard terminated a six-year reenlistment contract. Instead, they gave Layne a one-year extension.

“I also reiterated that I respect his feelings but I’m not comfortable reenlisting him with his strong feelings about this matter,” he additionally wrote.

Attorney Wells told Fox News he wants the military to rescind the reprimand and reinstate the original six-year reenlistment contract.

You can't just terminate an enlistment contract...it doesn't work that way. If his CC wasn't comfortable re-enlisting him and gave him an extension INSTEAD, that would make sense but there would be no 6-year contract to reinstate....

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/airman-punished-for-objecting-to-gay-marriage-in-military-chapel.html

Pullinteeth
08-15-2013, 02:23 PM
Now THIS guy (and the TI referenced in the story) seem to have a vaild case... Interesting that both are in career fields that the AF is considering FORCING people to retrain into....

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/airmen-punished-for-objecting-to-gay-marriage.html

imnohero
08-15-2013, 02:31 PM
[from the story]
he said. “The narrative is that you cannot say anything that contradicts Air Force policy.”

Well, DUH! Whether it's about gay marriage, or anything else. He's got 19 years and this is just dawning on him?

Pullinteeth
08-15-2013, 02:51 PM
Well, DUH! Whether it's about gay marriage, or anything else. He's got 19 years and this is just dawning on him?

IMO, the shirt has less of a case because they are an advisor to the CC and if the CC doesn't like 'em, I THINK they can fire 'em??? The TI though, allegedly just said that he isn't a supporter of gay marriage BUT as an AF member would set his personal feelings aside and train everyone the same and used that as an EXAMPLE to illustrate a point... Seems like the TI had his priorities straight-seem to remember hearing something about service before self somewhere....

20+Years
08-16-2013, 07:32 PM
Seems like the TI had his priorities straight-seem to remember hearing something about service before self somewhere....

I think it was a GEICO commercial.

grimreaper
08-16-2013, 08:21 PM
Some ask what business the government has in "redefining marriage". Maybe they have a point but they fail to ask the next logical question: what business did the government have in defining "marriage" in the first place?

The government shouldn't "marry" anyone. It has no business regulating our private domestic arrangements in that fashion and there is no Constitutional justification for its doing so.

Instead of deciding who can be "married" and who cannot, instead of presuming to tell us how to lead our private lives, the government should rather treat ALL domestic arrangements as they would any other contract: the parties that were planning on cohabiting would draw up a contract between them stipulating their duties and expectations in the relationship. Basically, EVERY COUPLE, gay or straight, would be in a "civil union" as far as the law was concerned. The government's ONLY job would be to register that such a contract had been made and to adjudicate disputes arising from breach of that contract ("divorce"). ALL such contracts would be treated EQUALLY under the law and the parties to such contracts would enjoy the same legal rights regardless of the nature of their intimate relationship, so there would no longer be a civil rights issue.

None of this is to say people couldn't be "married" if they so choose, simply that this would no longer be the government's business. Rather, it would be up to them to find a church or religious organization willing to "marry" them. Since such a marriage would be a solely religious affair separate from and without legal bearing on the contractual union, these churches would be allowed to discriminate against whomever they want according to whatever doctrine guides them.

There is ALREADY a precedent for this. Divorced Catholics, for example, can remarry LEGALLY even if they forbidden to divorce by the Church. A situation thus exists wherein the remarried Catholic is married LEGALLY to his or her new spouse but remains married in the eyes of the Church to the original spouse.

If we could implement such a plan of removing the government altogether from this silly game of defining words and forced it to do its job and define the law, it would satisfy all but the nuts on both sides. REAL conservatives will be happy to see the government's influence removed from such a private aspect of citizens' personal lives as to with whom they choose to be. Libertarians will be happy on that account and because our fellow citizens are no longer being oppressed and discriminated against by an over-bearing state. Liberals will be happy because gay relationships will be able to enjoy equal protection under the law.

Then we can get back to the truly important issues, like arguing about which "race" is the most racist.

E4RUMOR
02-10-2014, 02:15 AM
http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/chaplains-seek-protection-for-troops-to-share-views-on-homosexuality-1.144399

Protection from what? People should only be talking about religion with the chaplain, at their religious observances or places of worship and that's it. There is no need to be discussing it at work. Do that on your off time. If you don't like homosexuals, fine. But that doesn't mean you get to spout off about it. Do racists get to spout off their hatred for blacks, etc? No. Respect people.

I ask the following to the part I made bold: 1) Where did you come to that conclusion, 2) Says who, and 3) Aren't you expressing a point of view, not a fact? If it is a point of view, why should I or anyone else follow it? Perhaps you should precede that with "In my opinion".

Furthermore, aren't you expressing intolerance by not respecting the point of view of those who disagree with homosexuality? And how would you know that's their view, and be afforded the opportunity to practice the tolerance you cherish unless they expressed it? Seems to be a double standard to me.

In reference to your statement about what people should talk to a chaplain about, and where, I could ask the same question: Is that an opinion or matter of fact? If it's opinion, ok. If not, who made you the ultimate authority on this matter? Because you made it a statement.

I suggest you talk to a Military Chaplain, and discover exactly what functions they perform. You'll find it's more than religion. Our Chaplain has expressed that more than 70% of his discussions with Military servicemembers have nothing to do with religion. Furthermore, did you know that the Military Chaplain has the only absolute confidentiality? In other words, you can go tell a Chaplain anything and he CANNOT and WILL NOT report it to anyone no matter what you say. Not even doctors or lawyers are extended that privelege.

Finally, where do you draw the conclusion that only religious people disagree with the homosexual lifestyle? If that's not the case, it makes it difficult to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the source of disagreement stimulates soley from religion, doesn't it?

AJBIGJ
02-10-2014, 11:27 AM
I ask the following to the part I made bold: 1) Where did you come to that conclusion, 2) Says who, and 3) Aren't you expressing a point of view, not a fact? If it is a point of view, why should I or anyone else follow it? Perhaps you should precede that with "In my opinion".

Furthermore, aren't you expressing intolerance by not respecting the point of view of those who disagree with homosexuality? And how would you know that's their view, and be afforded the opportunity to practice the tolerance you cherish unless they expressed it? Seems to be a double standard to me.

In reference to your statement about what people should talk to a chaplain about, and where, I could ask the same question: Is that an opinion or matter of fact? If it's opinion, ok. If not, who made you the ultimate authority on this matter? Because you made it a statement.

I suggest you talk to a Military Chaplain, and discover exactly what functions they perform. You'll find it's more than religion. Our Chaplain has expressed that more than 70% of his discussions with Military servicemembers have nothing to do with religion. Furthermore, did you know that the Military Chaplain has the only absolute confidentiality? In other words, you can go tell a Chaplain anything and he CANNOT and WILL NOT report it to anyone no matter what you say. Not even doctors or lawyers are extended that privelege.

Finally, where do you draw the conclusion that only religious people disagree with the homosexual lifestyle? If that's not the case, it makes it difficult to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the source of disagreement stimulates soley from religion, doesn't it?

FYSA, unless she's been just lurking since then, this easily one of the last times we've seen anything from candycane.

E4RUMOR
02-10-2014, 01:30 PM
FYSA, unless she's been just lurking since then, this easily one of the last times we've seen anything from candycane.

Thanks. The observations still stand, however.

AJBIGJ
02-10-2014, 02:20 PM
Thanks. The observations still stand, however.

I just wouldn't hold your breath for a quick response...