Obama urges repeal of ban on open gay...

Obama urges repeal of ban on open gays in military

There are 79 comments on the San Bernardino County Sun story from Jan 28, 2010, titled Obama urges repeal of ban on open gays in military. In it, San Bernardino County Sun reports that:

President Barack Obama is urging Congress to repeal the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military, but Democratic allies and Republican opponents alike are criticizing his approach.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Bernardino County Sun.

“ ILKS r kewl ”

Since: Apr 09

Conch republic

#41 Jan 28, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
Now on to the problems at hand, this is not really a "gay rights" issue. This is what is good for the military and the country issue. Human nature be it gay or hetrosexual dictates that we will be lesses focused if you are around people that you find attractive. If you put 1 guy with 20 women you bet he is going to find one or more attractive and because of this he will be lessed focused. This is the same as putting 1 gay man around 20 other man. Very basic. Imagine what this is like when you were are 20 something...hormones are raging. I know if I was 1 guy around 20 girls I am going to be less focused. Any one that is honest and not subject to an adgenda will agree.
Look at the navy boats that allow women on board. More pregancy, more drama and more tax payers money wasted. Yes, Navy boy, I called it a boat.
The question is, do you want less focused people protecting our nation. You want gays in the the military, fine. Make special units. If they want to serve, have at. The military is not the place for social change. The miltary protects a democracy, it is not a democracy.
I'm so tired of the gay rights people crying foul everytime something is don't exactly the way they want it. They sound like spoiled little children. On the other hand, I am tired of the other side trying to hide gays in the closet too. There has to be some middle ground.
Both sides need to relax and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Relax Francis.
I take that agreement back.......... and I do so strongly.
As you can see by my profile I am a RETIRED US Marine.. I as well have been to several combat theaters... and I have seen my Marines spill blood and give their lives. TWO of which were gay (I had full confidence as did my unit).
The crux of this issue is that gays being able to serve their country and die for it overshadows some wimps idea he "might get hit on". Well dawg... WMs get hit on daily and that is against the UCMJ isnt it? Yes it is.. unfortunately it is not enforced. IF and WHEN the leadership decides to enforce its rules on fraternization and proper CONDUCT becoming of a Marine or any service person for that matter, this will be a moot issue. The ONLY reason that this bullshit is being bounced around is that the military LEADERSHIP is incapable or uninterested in ENFORCEMENT of its own ideals, its traditions and leadership!
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#42 Jan 28, 2010
McMike wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you maybe like to explain how so many other countries are allowing gays to serve in their militaries without it having an ill affect? You can not keep homosexuals from serving because a **** is going to get upset about it.
How righteous are you? First, being a Marine gives me first hand knowledge of the situation. I had the honor of leading men from both coasts and in between into battle.(And yes, some were probably gay.) It is painfully obvious you don't really care about the military or the Marines, as you fail to even capitlize the title, Marine. Unlike you, I am not relying on hersay from another person. I am lucky enough to survived in two combat theaters. Sadly, I have seen the blood of my fellow Marines spilled. I have seen my fellow Marines die. Nothing any man, women, hetrosexual or homosexual should have to see. You lack the standing to downgrade my service to this great country. I was in between you and the bad guy. Because of my service and the service of others, I(we) did protect you. No matter how much that FACT is disgusting to you. Because of my service, I have first have hand knowledge of the pending problem.
It is obvious you are an ideologue with an adgenda. When you lack the ability to communicate, you result to name calling. You lack the honesty to even acknowledge human nature. Obviously, I did not or would not in the heat of the battle be gazing at a female. You seem to be begging the question in your response. Since you have never served, you base you opinion on books, movies, friends and rumors. In some cases this might be fine, but in life or death matters, it does not pass the test. If you can't admitt that 99.99% of 18-24 year olds have raging hormones and lack self control, well you live in a bubble. Whether I did or did not control my hormones is not the point. But, if you must know, man, I enjoyed women from many different countries. Am I proud of my choice, no, but they are my choices. You can judge me, that is fine. I stand behind my actions, be it good or bad.
You brag of being open minded, but really is that always right as you would infer. Unlike you, I am able to see both sides of the story. Be it good or bad. So, in fact, I am the one that in open minded. You are "open minded" when it fits your adgenda.
Like I said, if a homosexual wants to serve have at it. At this point in our history, the military is not ready for openly gay persons to serve. You seemed to gloss over my very valid points. You choose to attack very small portions that fit your narrow view. I'm sorry you are so closed minded and fail to see any of the vaild arguments posed by me and others.
You should also see my humor in my post and realize that I am not so uptight I can't joke about the issue. You take yourself to seriously and lack the knowledge to spout dis-information.
Semper Fi
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#43 Jan 28, 2010
McMike wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you serious? Yup, if I'm in a war with a chance of getting my head shot off I'm really not going to give a rat's **** as to what's going on around me as long as I can check out the **** of the really hot guy next to me. You do realize there are women in the armed services, right? Doesn't your argument fall apart since, according to your logic, now that there are women around all the straight guys aren't going to be able to perform to the best of their ability.
For once I wish homophobes would actually have an argument that wasn't totally devoid of logic. It would be a lot easier to debate and maybe come out with an agreement if their "reasoning" was so full of it.
Where did I say anything about this happening in "foxhole" or in a battle? You are an angry little man
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#44 Jan 28, 2010
Troth for Leogere wrote:
<quoted text>I take that agreement back.......... and I do so strongly.
As you can see by my profile I am a RETIRED US Marine.. I as well have been to several combat theaters... and I have seen my Marines spill blood and give their lives. TWO of which were gay (I had full confidence as did my unit).
The crux of this issue is that gays being able to serve their country and die for it overshadows some wimps idea he "might get hit on". Well dawg... WMs get hit on daily and that is against the UCMJ isnt it? Yes it is.. unfortunately it is not enforced. IF and WHEN the leadership decides to enforce its rules on fraternization and proper CONDUCT becoming of a Marine or any service person for that matter, this will be a moot issue. The ONLY reason that this **** is being bounced around is that the military LEADERSHIP is incapable or uninterested in ENFORCEMENT of its own ideals, its traditions and leadership!
Why? Where did I say homosexuals couldn't serve. Serve away. Too much of an idealogue if you can't come to a compromise. Like I said, the military is not the place for social change. Maybe someday, but not now.

Did you not read that I support the fact. I think both sides are way over the top as if this were an actual war.

Relax Gomer
Perez

Santa Rosa Beach, FL

#45 Jan 28, 2010
Just repeal the stupid ban already obama. Obama can't do ANYTHING RIGHT what an idiot. What idiot made the don't ask don't tell policy huhhh let me see ohhh I bet I know Jerrry farwell. Well farwell he's dead ha ha ha

“ ILKS r kewl ”

Since: Apr 09

Conch republic

#46 Jan 28, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
Why? Where did I say homosexuals couldn't serve. Serve away. Too much of an idealogue if you can't come to a compromise. Like I said, the military is not the place for social change. Maybe someday, but not now.
Did you not read that I support the fact. I think both sides are way over the top as if this were an actual war.
Relax Gomer
Uh 'gomer'? I can tell now what 'kind of a Marine' you were.
The issue I have with your little diddy is this:
Thin blue line wrote:
Like I said, if a homosexual wants to serve have at it. At this point in our history, the military is not ready for openly gay persons to serve.
That statement is BS and you know it. What the hell do you think an "openly gay person" is? I am "openly heterosexual"........ does that mean anything? I'd like to hear your 'interpretation'.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

#47 Jan 28, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
Like wow...did you only read one part of my comment. I wish freak sacks like you could read and see I have enough logic to state both sides and say both are both wrong in their own way. Did you read the entire portion of the comment about women and the Navy. Read the DOJ report and the problems associated with women on ship.
Just like an agenda based ideologue to not read the entire post.
Where did I say I was against homosexuals....learn to read. Sounds like you have issues. You are closed minded and devoid of the ability to a truthful debate.
Just because you call someone homophobic does not mean it true or can make someone back down.
"Freak sacks"... Yup, you're not homophobic at all. None the less, any man who says homosexuals shouldn't serve in the military because gay men just couldn't get control of their hormones is not only a homophobe but a freaking idiot.

As for not reading your entire posting - your postings are a mile long and tend to verge on ranting and raving.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

#48 Jan 28, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
How righteous are you? First, being a Marine gives me first hand knowledge of the situation. I had the honor of leading men from both coasts and in between into battle.(And yes, some were probably gay.) It is painfully obvious you don't really care about the military or the Marines, as you fail to even capitlize the title, Marine. Unlike you, I am not relying on hersay from another person. I am lucky enough to survived in two combat theaters. Sadly, I have seen the blood of my fellow Marines spilled. I have seen my fellow Marines die. Nothing any man, women, hetrosexual or homosexual should have to see. You lack the standing to downgrade my service to this great country. I was in between you and the bad guy. Because of my service and the service of others, I(we) did protect you. No matter how much that FACT is disgusting to you. Because of my service, I have first have hand knowledge of the pending problem.
1st off, as I was saying, your postings are way too long to respond to all of it so I'll take it piece by piece.

You can go on and on and on all you want how you being a Marine gives you all this knowledge yet you then go on to make assumptions about gay men and AS A GAY MAN I can assure you I can easily get a grip on my freakin hormones. However, the hypocrisy coming form you is unreal. Would you like an award for having a fellow Marine be killed? While you're at it why don't you get me one for having good friends gay bashed and killed? If you want to start bitchign about self-serving, sanctimonious, righteous assh*les I suggest you go glance in the mirror first. And exactly how do you think I'm downgrading your service to my country? Because I didn't capitalize Marines? That's such a stretch it's unreal. I was writing a typing a paper last night for my nephew and wasn't sure if I should capitalize "popes". While my English/grammar skills aren't the best I can easily run circles around you in mathematics. And what "FACT" are you talking about???? While you may seem to think your 1st-hand service gives you knowledge of the issue, I can assure you me being a homosexual gives me just as much knowledge as you as to why gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. It's called EQUAL RIGHTS and if most of the civilized countries in the world can allows gays and lesbians to serve openly then America needs to get passed it's homophobia and do the same.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

#49 Jan 28, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
It is obvious you are an ideologue with an adgenda. When you lack the ability to communicate, you result to name calling. You lack the honesty to even acknowledge human nature. Obviously, I did not or would not in the heat of the battle be gazing at a female. You seem to be begging the question in your response. Since you have never served, you base you opinion on books, movies, friends and rumors. In some cases this might be fine, but in life or death matters, it does not pass the test. If you can't admitt that 99.99% of 18-24 year olds have raging hormones and lack self control, well you live in a bubble. Whether I did or did not control my hormones is not the point. But, if you must know, man, I enjoyed women from many different countries. Am I proud of my choice, no, but they are my choices. You can judge me, that is fine. I stand behind my actions, be it good or bad.
You brag of being open minded, but really is that always right as you would infer. Unlike you, I am able to see both sides of the story. Be it good or bad. So, in fact, I am the one that in open minded. You are "open minded" when it fits your adgenda.
And you don't have an agenda also? You are desperate to make sure gays and lesbians are kept as 2nd class service members and your reasoning of hormones does NOT add up. You go from telling me you're not speaking of being in battle but then go on to discuss not checking out women while doing battle. Which is it? Are you worried gay men might not be able to stop checking out the ass of a cute guy while they're getting shot at or do you think a gay man is going to risk isolation and possible violence from the group while they're at a base in peace time by not taking control of his raging hormones??? As I've said before, your argument is not adding up to squat. The ONLY argument I've heard from you to deny gays and lesbians being able to serve openly is due to hormones. It's an idiotic argument. The military will still be a very "macho" and probably very homophobic institution so a gay man is not going to risk ANYTHING by going after every cute guy around him especially if he's in battle having the other side shoot at him.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

#50 Jan 28, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
You brag of being open minded, but really is that always right as you would infer. Unlike you, I am able to see both sides of the story. Be it good or bad. So, in fact, I am the one that in open minded. You are "open minded" when it fits your adgenda.
Like I said, if a homosexual wants to serve have at it. At this point in our history, the military is not ready for openly gay persons to serve. You seemed to gloss over my very valid points. You choose to attack very small portions that fit your narrow view. I'm sorry you are so closed minded and fail to see any of the vaild arguments posed by me and others.
You should also see my humor in my post and realize that I am not so uptight I can't joke about the issue. You take yourself to seriously and lack the knowledge to spout dis-information.
Semper Fi
How are you "seeing" both sides of the story when all you can talk about is how the hormones of a gay man will make it impossible for him to serve openly in the military? I have yet to hear ONE thing from you which could be considered a statement outside of your own agenda. How is the military not ready for gay to serve openly? Do you honestly think if gays can serve openly gays and lesbians, who are already serving by the way, are suddenly going to go from being good soldier to sexual raving mad men who can't get control of their hormones. You've been in the Marines and I'm sure you can assure me exactly how most Marines would act if a gay man was constantly on the prowl for sex. And you don't have POINTS, you have one single point you've made about hormones and it's not a valid point at all.

btw, sorry I don't see the humor in your postings. You try living the life of an out gay man and see how quickly you lose your sense of humor when you constantly deal with people who seem to think you're not worthy of the same rights already afforded to them. What cracks me up about you "macho" straight men is you guys would fall apart in a heartbeat if you had to walk a step in a gay man's shoe and deal with what society dishes out to him. It takes more balls and courage to be out and proud something, as a Marine, you might be able to understand.

“Son of Abraham”

Since: Aug 07

Natural Deviant

#51 Jan 28, 2010
btw, these simple spelling mistakes aren't grammar. I type 90 words per minute and don't proof.
Really

Redlands, CA

#52 Jan 29, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
How righteous are you? First, being a Marine gives me first hand knowledge of the situation. I had the honor of leading men from both coasts and in between into battle.(And yes, some were probably gay.) It is painfully obvious you don't really care about the military or the Marines, as you fail to even capitlize the title, Marine. Unlike you, I am not relying on hersay from another person. I am lucky enough to survived in two combat theaters. Sadly, I have seen the blood of my fellow Marines spilled. I have seen my fellow Marines die. Nothing any man, women, hetrosexual or homosexual should have to see. You lack the standing to downgrade my service to this great country. I was in between you and the bad guy. Because of my service and the service of others, I(we) did protect you. No matter how much that FACT is disgusting to you. Because of my service, I have first have hand knowledge of the pending problem.
It is obvious you are an ideologue with an adgenda. When you lack the ability to communicate, you result to name calling. You lack the honesty to even acknowledge human nature. Obviously, I did not or would not in the heat of the battle be gazing at a female. You seem to be begging the question in your response. Since you have never served, you base you opinion on books, movies, friends and rumors. In some cases this might be fine, but in life or death matters, it does not pass the test. If you can't admitt that 99.99% of 18-24 year olds have raging hormones and lack self control, well you live in a bubble. Whether I did or did not control my hormones is not the point. But, if you must know, man, I enjoyed women from many different countries. Am I proud of my choice, no, but they are my choices. You can judge me, that is fine. I stand behind my actions, be it good or bad.
You brag of being open minded, but really is that always right as you would infer. Unlike you, I am able to see both sides of the story. Be it good or bad. So, in fact, I am the one that in open minded. You are "open minded" when it fits your adgenda.
Like I said, if a homosexual wants to serve have at it. At this point in our history, the military is not ready for openly gay persons to serve. You seemed to gloss over my very valid points. You choose to attack very small portions that fit your narrow view. I'm sorry you are so closed minded and fail to see any of the vaild arguments posed by me and others.
You should also see my humor in my post and realize that I am not so uptight I can't joke about the issue. You take yourself to seriously and lack the knowledge to spout dis-information.
Semper Fi

First, and most important, thank you for your service. Also, I did not mean to show lack of respect by not capitalizing Marine, and I won't do that again.
Second, my initial comment was directed to the guy with the gay fantasies. I do appreciate your points, and I'm sure they are shared by many.
Third, I believe that it's in the best interest of this society to move past divisive labels. While this may sound idealistic and naive to you, I see that any time people can take an "us" versus "them" approach, "them" gets discriminated against. I'd way rather we start judging people on their ability to do the job.
Fourth, I really am a teacher. Trust me, I know about hormones, but we don't use them as an excuse to sexually molest or harass people. That point is totally beyond my understanding.
Finally, it was not my intention to insult you. I'm sorry.
Spider

Alpharetta, GA

#53 Jan 29, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
<quoted text>
Now on to the problems at hand, this is not really a "gay rights" issue. This is what is good for the military and the country issue. Human nature be it gay or hetrosexual dictates that we will be lesses focused if you are around people that you find attractive. If you put 1 guy with 20 women you bet he is going to find one or more attractive and because of this he will be lessed focused. This is the same as putting 1 gay man around 20 other man. Very basic. Imagine what this is like when you were are 20 something...hormones are raging. I know if I was 1 guy around 20 girls I am going to be less focused. Any one that is honest and not subject to an adgenda will agree.
Look at the navy boats that allow women on board. More pregancy, more drama and more tax payers money wasted. Yes, Navy boy, I called it a boat.
The question is, do you want less focused people protecting our nation. You want gays in the the military, fine. Make special units. If they want to serve, have at. The military is not the place for social change. The miltary protects a democracy, it is not a democracy.
I'm so tired of the gay rights people crying foul everytime something is don't exactly the way they want it. They sound like spoiled little children. On the other hand, I am tired of the other side trying to hide gays in the closet too. There has to be some middle ground.
Both sides need to relax and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Relax Francis.
But gays are *already* in the military to the tune of 64,000; and have been for years. No hormone problem.
Spider

Alpharetta, GA

#54 Jan 29, 2010
Thin blue line wrote:
Look at the navy boats that allow women on board. More pregancy, more drama and more tax payers money wasted.
If they were gay there wouldn't be any pregnancy

Problem solved
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#55 Jan 29, 2010
McMike wrote:
<quoted text>
"Freak sacks"... Yup, you're not homophobic at all. None the less, any man who says homosexuals shouldn't serve in the military because gay men just couldn't get control of their hormones is not only a **** but a freaking idiot.
As for not reading your entire posting - your postings are a mile long and tend to verge on ranting and raving.
You are so blinded by your rage you didn't even read what I wrote. Amazin. I said all 18-24 year olds have impulse control issues. It is impossible to have a honest debate, when you lie. Freak sack, is not a pejorative for homosexuals. It my way of saying you are a moron.

As for my rants. They are the truth. No matter how much you dislike what I am saying. Did you notice that I said homosexuals should be allowed to serve. You pick and chose small parts and twist to your adgenda.

I have no problem with homosexuals. Just militant homosexuals. Just as I have problems with militant whites, black, hispanics...etc
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#56 Jan 29, 2010
McMike wrote:
btw, these simple spelling mistakes aren't grammar. I type 90 words per minute and don't proof.
Like I said, you are an angry militant. Very un-happy. I'm sorry. Maybe you should seek counseling. You do bash my service and if you had the skill of understanding. I said, they should be allowed to serve, but for whatever reason, the military is not ready for it. It's obvious this is not about the military as you show contempt for my service to you. This is about your own adgenda. I don't have adgenda. If some homosexual wants to serve his country with honor. Have at it. Stop cherry picking portions of my comments for your benefit.
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#57 Jan 29, 2010
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
First, and most important, thank you for your service. Also, I did not mean to show lack of respect by not capitalizing Marine, and I won't do that again.
Second, my initial comment was directed to the guy with the gay fantasies. I do appreciate your points, and I'm sure they are shared by many.
Third, I believe that it's in the best interest of this society to move past divisive labels. While this may sound idealistic and naive to you, I see that any time people can take an "us" versus "them" approach, "them" gets discriminated against. I'd way rather we start judging people on their ability to do the job.
Fourth, I really am a teacher. Trust me, I know about hormones, but we don't use them as an excuse to sexually molest or harass people. That point is totally beyond my understanding.
Finally, it was not my intention to insult you. I'm sorry.
Thanks. Maybe you could pass on your even tempered attitude to some of the other people here. I wish we could all get along too, but for whatever reason, it's not happening and probably never will.

I realize I don't have the answer to every question. I can only speak of my experiences. Like I said, I have no problem with homosexuals serving as long as it doesnt create a problem.

I agree both sides have some growing up to do. As some of the previous bloggers have shown they have no more tolerance than they anti-gay side too.
Frank

Ontario, CA

#58 Jan 29, 2010
God bless Obama! Or should I say god blessed us with Obama!!!
Ego te absolvo

Trinity, TX

#59 Jan 29, 2010
McMike wrote:
<quoted text>
You know you're totally right. Gay men raping straight men happens all the time in our society, outside of the military, where one can be out and proud.
I disagree. It's usually boys and young men, which is evident by the activity of homosexual priests for a preceding fifty years in increasing frequency. Use of drugs by homosexuals to neutralize other's natural resistance to perversion is also common.
Thin blue line

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#60 Jan 29, 2010
Troth for Leogere wrote:
<quoted text>Uh 'gomer'? I can tell now what 'kind of a Marine' you were.
The issue I have with your little diddy is this:
<quoted text>
That statement is BS and you know it. What the hell do you think an "openly gay person" is? I am "openly heterosexual"........ does that mean anything? I'd like to hear your 'interpretation'.
If the military were ready, it would have been done. Society would have demanded change and they have not (democracy.) Maybe the tide will change, but for now it is what it is.

I'd like to hear your "interpretation" of my service. Give you a hint, First Gulf War and Somalia. Grunt. A Marine Corps Com with "v" and 10 other less important ribbons. 4 times rifle expert, 2 time pistol expert. 5 "300" PFT's. Meritorious promotion to L/Cpl and Corporal and discharged as a Sergeant. All in 4 years. College degree in history with a minor in Political Science.

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.

Howard McKeon Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ex-lawmakers swing through the revolving door (Apr '15) Apr '15 Black Annie 1
News Obama push leaves 136 prisoners held at Guantanamo (Dec '14) Dec '14 Better DEAD than RED 7
News Obama effort leads to surge in Guantanamo releases (Dec '14) Dec '14 Cat74 4
News Obama administration to free more GITMO detainees (Nov '14) Nov '14 tha Professor 15
News Obama wants $3.2 billion to fight Islamic State... (Nov '14) Nov '14 sure 2
News Congress vote on campaign against ISIS could la... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Le Duped 1
News King: Obama wrong to hold news conference on Iraq (Jun '14) Jun '14 SirPrize 15
More from around the web