Study: No overall negative impact aft...

Study: No overall negative impact after DADT repeal

There are 83 comments on the WTAE-TV Pittsburgh story from Sep 11, 2012, titled Study: No overall negative impact after DADT repeal. In it, WTAE-TV Pittsburgh reports that:

For nearly 17 years, gay and lesbian soldiers of the U.S. military were expected to deny their sexuality under threat of dismissal as part of the policy known as "don't ask, don't tell." The repeal of the policy on Sept.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WTAE-TV Pittsburgh.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#61 Sep 24, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, there you go. Any argument works, right. What about men who perform oral sex on women? And do not women seek out men, and other women, to perform oral sex on them? But how many times have gay men like you post they aren't "drawn" to women sexually? So, talk about something you have experience in, and having oral sex with a woman is not one of those experiences.
And where do you get all this 'fear' of being overpowered and raped crap when referring to "str8"? Is that the way you get your's off, overpowering and raping another defenseless man? And just for your future reference, any man who rapes a woman is not a man. Any pos who talks about raping another human being is not a man.
But relax Captain America, you can always TRY to fit in your old uniform a few times a year and march in a parade.

My guess is that's about the only time anyone ever cheers for you (especially women)
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#62 Sep 24, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>ooo shaking in my boots.
Just because you served doesn't make you a hero or a decent American.
Like I said you took an oath to defend the Constitution.
Maybe you should have READ the Constitution before YOU LIED to your superiors about your motives for enlisting.
Here's a few Highlights "Captain American a.k.a. Frank Burns.
Article IV
Section 1.
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
Section 2.
The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
Okay little person- Article VI, Section 1 deals with "each state" and "every other state" pertaining to "acts, records, and judicial proceedings", or what right and responsibility that state has in Congress' laws pertaining to 'federal' acts, records and proceedings.

Section 2 state that a citizen of one state is entitled to "privileges" and "immunities" in the other several states. This is not a "rights" issue buddy boy because no 'Amendments' existed at this time.

Amendment IX doesn't do what you think it does. All it allows for is that rights "enumerated" in the Bill of Rights are not to be the only rights that citizens of all states may be entitled to.

Amendment XIV-Section 1 only says that states cannot deny it's natural born citizens rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Slavery just kinda slipped through the cracks a little.

And to make a long story short, when I took my oath in joining the military while still in the State of Texas, Sodomy, homosexuality to be exact, was against the law. I also gave my word to the US military that I would not involve myself in any behavior that "would bring discredit to my country or, it's military, or branch of service." Like I said, Sodomy was against the law-military law (UCMJ) included. That's why gays were bounced out on their asses without much fanfare-just hand them that BCD and kick their asses goodbye.

I kept my word you brainless little worm. But the gays weren't keeping theirs-liars, liars, panties on fires
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#63 Sep 24, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>And if you knew anything you'd know that I've been following this "history" of the military since I was 7 years old. The Pentagon ran dozens of studies trying to prove what you claim would happen. NONE of them gave the results they wanted.
As for me mouthing off to the wrong person, it's happened many times GOMER and each time he left just as bloody and bruised as I did.
I thanked you for your service and I'm tempted to rescind that. IMO you are a disgrace to the uniform and the Nation.
And I told you I don't give a doo-doo about the thank you note. But now you are doing the Doodle Bug on us with about the DOD not getting what it wanted out of the studies. What did DOD want you little pissant? Cite the DOD file numbers jerkoff!

BTW, you walked away, huh? You left her standing?
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#64 Sep 24, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>No pumpkin head I was referring to studies about gays and lesbians in uniform not the racial desegregation of the 40's. I'd bet you don't even know without checking how long it took Truman to finally get desegregation implemented.
Didn't the teach you in boot camp that if you don't know the answer keep your mouth shut or you'll embarrass the unit?
I don't care about what Truman did fairy captain.

Boot camp? Nope! They did require us to answer though. Right, wrong, or indifferent. It was E&E that taught me to keep my mouth shut, brown eye.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#65 Sep 24, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>But relax Captain America, you can always TRY to fit in your old uniform a few times a year and march in a parade.
My guess is that's about the only time anyone ever cheers for you (especially women)
You are so wrong, snicker, snicker.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#66 Sep 24, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>And if you knew anything you'd know that I've been following this "history" of the military since I was 7 years old. The Pentagon ran dozens of studies trying to prove what you claim would happen. NONE of them gave the results they wanted.
As for me mouthing off to the wrong person, it's happened many times GOMER and each time he left just as bloody and bruised as I did.
I thanked you for your service and I'm tempted to rescind that. IMO you are a disgrace to the uniform and the Nation.
7 years old? You haven't learned a damn thing in 5 years have ya, circle jerk commando?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#67 Sep 24, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay little person- Article VI, Section 1 deals with "each state" and "every other state" pertaining to "acts, records, and judicial proceedings", or what right and responsibility that state has in Congress' laws pertaining to 'federal' acts, records and proceedings.
Section 2 state that a citizen of one state is entitled to "privileges" and "immunities" in the other several states. This is not a "rights" issue buddy boy because no 'Amendments' existed at this time.
That is your opinion but not what is written IN PLAIN ENGLISH!
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>Amendment IX doesn't do what you think it does. All it allows for is that rights "enumerated" in the Bill of Rights are not to be the only rights that citizens of all states may be entitled to.
That's what I said GOMER.
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>Amendment XIV-Section 1 only says that states cannot deny it's natural born citizens rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Slavery just kinda slipped through the cracks a little.
Like most people you are incorrect. Though both amendment 14 and 15 were proposed and passed at the same time, the part of 14 I mentioned makes no distinction because of race or even natural born status. Like I said you should have made sure you understood what you swore to defend while fighting in Viet Nam. BTW isn't your years of service the only war we lost?
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>And to make a long story short, when I took my oath in joining the military while still in the State of Texas, Sodomy, homosexuality to be exact, was against the law. I also gave my word to the US military that I would not involve myself in any behavior that "would bring discredit to my country or, it's military, or branch of service." Like I said, Sodomy was against the law-military law (UCMJ) included. That's why gays were bounced out on their asses without much fanfare-just hand them that BCD and kick their asses goodbye.
I kept my word you brainless little worm. But the gays weren't keeping theirs-liars, liars, panties on fires
I'm sure a lot of folks echoed the same sentiment when they were asked to serve next to a negro. It still didn't make it morally right. Or constitutionally.

As for Texas, I also know that when they DID revise their sex laws and kept sodomy illegal between 2 men (they had to change it because they risked the chance someone would notice they weren't enforcing sodomy laws on heterosexual married couples) they decided sex with animals was OK.

Are your cows and chickens still nervous whenever you show up??

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#68 Sep 24, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>
7 years old? You haven't learned a damn thing in 5 years have ya, circle jerk commando?
I apparently learned enough to make a fool of you. BTW I was born in the 50's.

“Child of the Universe”

Since: Aug 09

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

#69 Sep 24, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I apparently learned enough to make a fool of you. BTW I was born in the 50's.
Notice that all he can do is use words as attempts at insults - Tinky Winky, brown eye, etc. The sign of a small mind, resorting to derision in a feeble effort to feel superior.

His arguments have been proven false many times over by greater minds than his - he'll go to his death a bitter old bigot.

Let him. His kind of thinking is already extinct - he just doesn't accept it yet. He has to cling to whatever he can to make himself feel of relevance and worth. It's all false...
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#70 Sep 25, 2012
Let me point out why you're *glaringly* uneducated, on a public board no less.
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>
Your temper tantrum is duly noted.
Wait, wait.

You *could see* how I reacted to your post? You *witnessed* it?
PATRIOT wrote:
But the fact is you just don't get it do you?
Actually, you don't. But you were unable to point out that I don't, while I've detailed your failings above and below. Hang on, this gets good.
PATRIOT wrote:
You being gay is not a problem with me.
Wait, wait.

I'm a complete stranger to you; you have never seen, heard or met me.

You *KNOW* my orientation??
PATRIOT wrote:
You coming on Topix with your bigotry against me just because I don't embrace your SEXUAL ORIENTATION lifestyle is a problem with me.
Your stupid, snot-nosed assumptions about *perfect strangers* are a problem with me.
PATRIOT wrote:
Where in any law does it say I have to like you?
The antigay frequently attempt to *TURN THE ISSUE INTO* this. They also accuse everyone who supports gay rights of being gay.

You sound typically antigay.
PATRIOT wrote:
Of course you want a law that says I have to because you are who, and what you are. A little sissy with self-worth problems.
This. describes. you. I have a hunch, I have a deep-seated hunch, that *YOU* see *YOURSELF* as a sissy with self-worth problems.

Don't try to put your filthy, snot-nosed damage on me. That damage is yours. It was created by people *around you* and you didn't know how to handle it. Get it the fuck away from me and *do not pretend* you can equate me with the train wreck *YOU* are making of yourself here.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#71 Sep 25, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
Well, there isn't such a law, and I know it, and you know it.
This is known as a "straw man"; it's a logical fallacy. You have made *multiple presumptions* you couldn't possibly prove in a court of law, and now you're *proceeding therefrom*.
PATRIOT wrote:
So, in the typical fashion of gay social reconstruction, you and your ilk continue to attack, continue to confront, continue to demand, and continue to throw gay fits when you don't get your way, or someone stands up to you when you become bitchy.
No, actually; you and *your* ilk continue to suck snot like crybabies and to *claim you have a reason* for disliking your fellow human beings. You attack, you get attacked. If you don't like it, leave the country. The first amendment guarantees the right of anyone to stand up for their *deeply held moral beliefs*.
PATRIOT wrote:
What is absolutely laughable is when you gays accuse heteros of WANTING to be gay-it's one of our latent secret desire so you say.
You're sitting there telling me *you know my orientation*; my guess *is* that you could be latently gay, because your calling it "laughable" only makes you look like a flapping pussy. You're pretending there's *no psychology* behind that? How about the fact that you are speaking to a *PERFECT STRANGER* and have presumed multiple things about their lives? You get that "privilege" alone? Are you honestly stupid? This boggles my mind.
PATRIOT wrote:
Is this reverse degradation supposed to make us feel like some form of lowlife sexual deviant?
Your filth precedes you. It has nothing to do with your attempt to control this conversation, which I'm clearly not falling for.
PATRIOT wrote:
Just like the Muslim who can't be tolerant of folks who make fun of their prophet, you can't be tolerant of us Christians because we believe in what is taught us about homosexuality in the Old Testament-we choose not to engage in that sort of anti-Christian behavior.
Well, no. It's that you have such fucking big mouths about it, some of you,*and then pretend you have no right* to be attacked back for opening your big mouths and spewing vomit and snot about other people who have never bothered you.

Perhaps people who take pride in America aren't used to seeing *crybabies* talk about this all goddamn day like they have *personal issues* with their own sexuality.
PATRIOT wrote:
It's our freedom guaranteed by the Constitution you like to mock.
You mock it by pretending no one is allowed to answer to the filth you spew. You mock it by pretending you have any "religion" to speak of.
PATRIOT wrote:
Yet you stand there and foam at the mouth
You *saw* this?

Do you always lay waste to your own veracity by making claims *that you couldn't possibly know* because others are invisible and unknown to you?
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#72 Sep 25, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
by DEMANDING 'tolerance' from folks who can not, will not, embrace your self-indulgence, self-serving homosexual behavior.
All of what you describe seems to be emanating from *you*. You are the one with the problem; you're the one acting like a sociopathic rapist who must "destroy" the other, and you're the one spewing obscene filth as you pretend to justify this with "religion" and pretend you're *not* slandering an entire class of people and those who support them.

Get a goddamn backbone and get over it; you speak up, others speak up. I don't back down because some *mendacious freak* is telling me what I'm "supposed to believe" about his right to be utterly, blatantly *abusive and hateful* toward a minority.
PATRIOT wrote:
And furthermore, you come on her spouting all your 'venom'
And you're not venomous? Hmmmm?
PATRIOT wrote:
about people who don't want to have anything to do with the homosexual behavior by defining us a the ones who are mentally ill, morally void, and grossly intolerable without putting up anything but your inbred lies as proof.
Yeah, that's not a conversation and it's not up for discussion. I'm not debating with you whether you have problems and have acted like the most dishonorable type of human being possible. I am *telling* you that that is what I see here.

You get unilateral, I get unilateral. Don't like it? Go suck up your vomit and spew it to someone who will fall for this absolute, intolerable filth you call "your set of rights." I'm not interested in your view of the nation; I view you as anti-American.
PATRIOT wrote:
Well, you were told to hold your nose while you were being spoon fed all this gay movement/freedom shit. But once you take your fingers away, you smell the shit and you taste the shit. I just don't consume the shit you do-so if you can't handle that, tuff, bitter, shit.
Your pretending that you can "characterize" all that has gone on here, and then comment upon what *you* claim to be truth, only serves to make you look exponentially more mendacious.

I can't understand why the antigay are such blathering, nattering, weeping pussies. It simply doesn't make sense; no one asked for their opinion and no one who thinks they're *amoral* is interested. You don't get to accomplish anything here but to have been knocked off your pedestal and to look like a dumbass. Do not bother me with your *damage* and your *problems*; I am not interested in what anyone has done to you. Leave the country if you're so *weak-willed* that you cannot live and let live.

Christ.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#73 Sep 25, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, there you go. Any argument works, right. What about men who perform oral sex on women? And do not women seek out men, and other women, to perform oral sex on them? But how many times have gay men like you post they aren't "drawn" to women sexually? So, talk about something you have experience in, and having oral sex with a woman is not one of those experiences.
If what you say is true, you could only speak about *that which you have experience in*, and you have basically implied that you are *NOT* gay. Wait a sec; how does this work?... anyone can claim that nobody may speak of a matter unless they know firsthand, but the antigay "magically" get to talk about all things gay *despite knowing absolutely nothing whatsoever* about the lives and histories of gay people? I mean, after all, the antigay claim it's a choice, yet gay people *aren't* saying that. So who is talking about things they *DON'T* know about? Hmmmmm?
PATRIOT wrote:
And where do you get all this 'fear' of being overpowered and raped crap when referring to "str8"?
Because of the way you act on the boards. Because of your need to "assert" your "masculinity." Do you have an education? Do you know basic psychology?
PATRIOT wrote:
Is that the way you get your's off, overpowering and raping another defenseless man?
Or is this self-referential? From what I've heard, men *FREQUENTLY* do this to women,

*ESPECIALLY* in the military.
PATRIOT wrote:
And just for your future reference, any man who rapes a woman is not a man. Any pos who talks about raping another human being is not a man.
Right. Well, then, perhaps you want to check your big mouth and think twice about how *you're* acting here. You're behaving like a social rapist, to be honest. You're acting like you have *some right* to tell others they cannot be who they are. I'm watching and witnessing you do it. What "exception" allows you to act like that here? What "magical exception" permits this? I mean, for all you know and *given what you have said*, how do you presume anyone gives a shit? For all you know,

they don't care about your posts

and they're simply using them

to attack

your ilk.

Think about it.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#74 Sep 25, 2012
PATRIOT wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you idiot stick, as stupid as you are, I'm posting on US Military Form Topix. Just so happens DADT shows up on the fairy channel. So, what are you doing over here on a real man's forum?
Why the need to assert your "masculinity"? Why? Why? Why?

Why the *presumptive need* to be *SURE* everyone knows, to be *SURE* there can be *NO DOUBT*-- this despite the fact that I *PROMISE* you anyone pro-gay sees your ilk as cavernous, infected pussies, I *promise* you this,*nothing* you say will change that.
PATRIOT wrote:
And the one thing you will never be able to say is that you served at all.
Right. This is how you get your honor.

And yet you destroy it wholesale with your behavior.

They didn't teach you manners and dignity, did they? Because I'm *watching* you act like a train wreck.
PATRIOT wrote:
So, if the world starts tearing itself apart, however it chooses to develop, I can assure you it won't be my body you find in the streets first.
Talk never equates to action. I'm not saying you're right or wrong; I'm saying your declaration that you *know* this is BS.
PATRIOT wrote:
And read this very carefully. I said that homosexuality is not a behavior I embrace.
It's based on inborn orientation that they cannot change. What you think of the behavior is *literally immaterial*. I can't fathom, can't fathom, can't fathom how you say this and *DON'T* think they have a right to call you names, as well.
PATRIOT wrote:
I said people like you make me sick to my stomach-you and like you.
You don't wanna know,

you don't wanna know,

what I think of people like you, but the *tip of the iceberg* is that I find you anti-American. That's but a tiny taste of what I think of people like you who make America look like a snot-sucking whore without the slightest moral backbone to speak of; you attempt to ruin it for everyone else.
PATRIOT wrote:
You are also a liar when you confront with accusations and no basis for the confrontation.
Like *YOU*, claiming I had a temper tantrum? Like *YOU*, claiming I'm gay? Like *YOU*, making claim after claim of complete strangers?
PATRIOT wrote:
You will reap what you sow. You will make the mistake of running your mouth to the wrong person one day, and even though I won't know when that day happens, I still have the pleasurable expectations it's coming your way.
Same to you. Same to you. Couldn't have said it better. You have a really big mouth, and I can't imagine you think you'll get away with this anywhere and everywhere. It's amazing to me that you don't think what you said also applies to you. Note your threat of implied violence; for you, I am sure, everything is solved with *violence*. That's the mark of true filth, if I do say so myself.

Hey, just exercising my *first amendment right*-- just like you are.
hi hi

Philadelphia, PA

#75 Sep 25, 2012
Leftatalbuquerque wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice that all he can do is use words as attempts at insults - Tinky Winky, brown eye, etc. The sign of a small mind, resorting to derision in a feeble effort to feel superior.
He's not honorable and I suspect it has to do with his upbringing; the military didn't create that, however *dishonorable* it has occasionally been in its past.

My mind boggles; if he speaks that way,*it hands all of YOU THE RIGHT to speak that way back*-- yet he acts as if this *IS NOT* your right.
Leftatalbuquerque wrote:
His arguments have been proven false many times over by greater minds than his - he'll go to his death a bitter old bigot.
I have a feeling something happened to him, something specific, and that it challenged his own notions of his honor or his masculinity, or both.
Leftatalbuquerque wrote:
Let him. His kind of thinking is already extinct - he just doesn't accept it yet. He has to cling to whatever he can to make himself feel of relevance and worth. It's all false...
Indeed.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#76 Sep 25, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>That is your opinion but not what is written IN PLAIN ENGLISH!
<quoted text>That's what I said GOMER.
<quoted text> Like most people you are incorrect. Though both amendment 14 and 15 were proposed and passed at the same time, the part of 14 I mentioned makes no distinction because of race or even natural born status. Like I said you should have made sure you understood what you swore to defend while fighting in Viet Nam. BTW isn't your years of service the only war we lost?
<quoted text>I'm sure a lot of folks echoed the same sentiment when they were asked to serve next to a negro. It still didn't make it morally right. Or constitutionally.
As for Texas, I also know that when they DID revise their sex laws and kept sodomy illegal between 2 men (they had to change it because they risked the chance someone would notice they weren't enforcing sodomy laws on heterosexual married couples) they decided sex with animals was OK.
Are your cows and chickens still nervous whenever you show up??
I see you didn't like being called down for bring wrong. That's life in the fast lane-get over it.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#77 Sep 25, 2012
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I apparently learned enough to make a fool of you. BTW I was born in the 50's.
You weren't born. Your ass was a test tube experiment 'gone wrong' and for a fact, medical science has thrown away more viable afterbirth that what you turned out to be.

You need to go over to the abortion Topix and link up with Petey, aka cpeter1313. Both of you old drag queens might find comfort in each other. Petey has a Dremel/Gremel he might want to introduce you to.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#78 Sep 25, 2012
Leftatalbuquerque wrote:
<quoted text>
Notice that all he can do is use words as attempts at insults - Tinky Winky, brown eye, etc. The sign of a small mind, resorting to derision in a feeble effort to feel superior.
His arguments have been proven false many times over by greater minds than his - he'll go to his death a bitter old bigot.
Let him. His kind of thinking is already extinct - he just doesn't accept it yet. He has to cling to whatever he can to make himself feel of relevance and worth. It's all false...
The death man in Iran had some very unflattering words to say about homosexuality yesterday. Of course one has to consider the source. He's the guy that calls for the extermination of an entire people, denies that there was a Holocaust, blames the US for all problems, and is willing to use a nuke to prove a point. He acts just like you do. Bitching, name calling, insulting, arrogant, threatening, and just a big pain in the butt.

Tell ya what. When he launches into WWIII, the holy way, I'll just sit this one out and let the gay militia take him on.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#79 Sep 25, 2012
hi hi wrote:
Let me point out why you're *glaringly* uneducated, on a public board no less.
<quoted text>
Wait, wait.
You *could see* how I reacted to your post? You *witnessed* it?
<quoted text>
Actually, you don't. But you were unable to point out that I don't, while I've detailed your failings above and below. Hang on, this gets good.
<quoted text>
Wait, wait.
I'm a complete stranger to you; you have never seen, heard or met me.
You *KNOW* my orientation??
<quoted text>
Your stupid, snot-nosed assumptions about *perfect strangers* are a problem with me.
<quoted text>
The antigay frequently attempt to *TURN THE ISSUE INTO* this. They also accuse everyone who supports gay rights of being gay.
You sound typically antigay.
<quoted text>
This. describes. you. I have a hunch, I have a deep-seated hunch, that *YOU* see *YOURSELF* as a sissy with self-worth problems.
Don't try to put your filthy, snot-nosed damage on me. That damage is yours. It was created by people *around you* and you didn't know how to handle it. Get it the fuck away from me and *do not pretend* you can equate me with the train wreck *YOU* are making of yourself here.
Your mental disorder is called crybaby syndrome. You will stop wetting your bed and having fitful seizures if you will admit yourself to a clinic for non-gays who are gay.
PATRIOT

San Antonio, TX

#80 Sep 25, 2012
hi hi wrote:
<quoted text>
This is known as a "straw man"; it's a logical fallacy. You have made *multiple presumptions* you couldn't possibly prove in a court of law, and now you're *proceeding therefrom*.
<quoted text>
No, actually; you and *your* ilk continue to suck snot like crybabies and to *claim you have a reason* for disliking your fellow human beings. You attack, you get attacked. If you don't like it, leave the country. The first amendment guarantees the right of anyone to stand up for their *deeply held moral beliefs*.
<quoted text>
You're sitting there telling me *you know my orientation*; my guess *is* that you could be latently gay, because your calling it "laughable" only makes you look like a flapping pussy. You're pretending there's *no psychology* behind that? How about the fact that you are speaking to a *PERFECT STRANGER* and have presumed multiple things about their lives? You get that "privilege" alone? Are you honestly stupid? This boggles my mind.
<quoted text>
Your filth precedes you. It has nothing to do with your attempt to control this conversation, which I'm clearly not falling for.
<quoted text>
Well, no. It's that you have such fucking big mouths about it, some of you,*and then pretend you have no right* to be attacked back for opening your big mouths and spewing vomit and snot about other people who have never bothered you.
Perhaps people who take pride in America aren't used to seeing *crybabies* talk about this all goddamn day like they have *personal issues* with their own sexuality.
<quoted text>
You mock it by pretending no one is allowed to answer to the filth you spew. You mock it by pretending you have any "religion" to speak of.
<quoted text>
You *saw* this?
Do you always lay waste to your own veracity by making claims *that you couldn't possibly know* because others are invisible and unknown to you?
You're gay 'boggles'-that's a fact. If you have mixed emotional problems with what you identify yourself with, don't "dump' that on me.

See, I don't like you. Now I don't give a rat's assrunning whether that affects you one way or the other.

I don't agree with you. Your tuff shit issue, not mine.

So keep posting and I'll keep responded until i run out of 'snot', brain fart.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Military Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Why Are There Dozens of U.S. Military Bases in ... (Mar '09) 1 hr texasman 67
News More than 100 injured in Kiev as police clash w... 3 hr Oliver Cromwell 8
News 1 injured in Newberry Springs house fire 4 hr BradLafon 1
News China's parade: 850,000 volunteers, 12,000 troo... 4 hr USA won that War 1
News The Hillary Clinton double standard in a nutshe... 5 hr Mikey 3
News UR researcher gets pair of grants 5 hr WhiteLivesMatter 2
News NATO activates six command units on eastern fla... 6 hr RUSSO-NAZI INVASIONS 1
More from around the web