[Hoot Gibson]

Good luck with the Secret Service.

Do you realize how stupid and petty threats like this make you look? If you are drinking heavily, then you owe me an apology when you sober up. If you are sober, then you should seek professional help.

[TheRealVille]

[/B]



THE UNITED STATES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights (to be protected and upheld by law), that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


This sentence has been called "one of the best-known sentences in the English language" and "the most potent and consequential words in American history".

The passage has often been used to promote the rights of marginalized people throughout the world, and came to represent a moral standard for which the United States should strive. This view was notably promoted by Abraham Lincoln, who considered the Declaration to be the foundation of his political philosophy, and argued that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted.

THE greatest president of all time tends to take a different view than you. If Lincoln says we should interpret the entire constitution document through this one sentence that's good enough for me.

Where in that line does it say that we use the Bible as the US law book, or even insinuate it? That's referring to mens rights. I don't know if you realize it or not, but you just answered the question from the opening post, about gays in the military.

[TheRealVille]

Do you realize how stupid and petty threats like this make you look? If you are drinking heavily, then you owe me an apology when you sober up. If you are sober, then you should seek professional help.

Nope not drunk, or needing help. Thank you though. I owe you nothing.

[TheRealThing]

Where in that line does it say that we use the Bible as the US law book, or even insinuate it? That's referring to mens rights. I don't know if you realize it or not, but you just answered the question from the opening post, about gays in the military.

Thanks, I always appreciate it when you point out the superficial aspects of these discussions. I believe you've managed to miss the central issue regarding this whole debate. ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL there are several ways to disqualify one's self from that state of God given equality we all happily found ourself in at birth. For instance, murder or any other capital crime not only lands one in jail but, in some cases costs one his life. Likewise, there are a number of offenses which cause one to fall from favor with God and he turns people over to a reprobate mind for their trespass. Murder, sodomy, homosexuality, are crimes against man and God that are best described as unnatural. When people are given over to vile affections, or committ atrocities such as murder, people who don't do these kinds of things feel very uncomfortable when they come in contact with them. In a nut shell, this is why there will be nothing but trouble that comes from the unfortunate repeal of Don't ask don't tell.

American courts should have never taken up the matter to begin with, we certainly should not be trying to circumvent God's law. I'll meet you halfway, men shouldn't legislate matters that call for the redefining or overturning of the precepts of God's written Word (law) and, men can just stick to writting and enforcing the laws of this land, leave God out it. No wait a second, without the ultimate authority to define what is moral and immoral there would be no standard, no basis for comparison, on which to weigh men's actions in the balance. We would be reduced to one man's word against the other. So, if we take God's law out of the legal proccess we have no ultimate authority by which to set standards. That would have the effect of reducing our legal system and our legislative branches of government to endless debate, infighting, legal manuvering and chaos. And that friends is exactly the state of affairs we and our nation now find ourselves.

Without the fine distinctions of right and wrong as set forth in God's Holy Scriptures all one is left with is who can out argue his opponent. A vast wasteland of endless debate. The day we questioned "IN GOD WE TRUST" is the day we left the path. That is why we have a rudderless and impotent, finger pointing bruhaha for a congress. Once we removed the standard on which to base our judgements, we began to lose our grip on domestic and world affairs.

And for the record RV, anybody who tries to say our great land was not founded on Christian principles is either wilfully ignorant of our nation's factually recorded history, (I mean, you have heard of the Library of Congress haven't you?), or they are completely misguided, or they are flat out lying to distort the facts. The records of the beginings of our great nation are REPLETE with references to the Godly principles that guided the thoughts and actions of the founding fathers. Anybody who says different falls into one of the three catagories I have outlined above.

[vundy33]

Where the **** do any of you think you get an opinion on the subject? If you're not active/reserve military, then we say **** you.

We, in the infantry, for the most part DO NOT give a shit if someone is gay, pretty much all of us know if a guy in the unit is gay, and usually he's or they are some of the best damn infantryman you'll see. I would say that 9 out of 10 infantry soldier could give a shit less about the end of DADT, and are just glad it's over.

It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7. You all have no idea. Some of you that have posted in here may be active military, but I doubt it. In our opinion, if you aren't active military or at the very LEAST a veteran, then you don't fucking rate an opinion.


Excuse my language, but I'm quite sick of homophobic bullshit and this argument all together. If getting rid of DADT does anything, it will make the services better. Mark that shit down. And that's coming from a combat veteran infantryman with 4 years in.

Our opinion is exactly the opposite of what dumbass, unknowing civilians think it is in my experience in discussing the subject with them.

[SKINNYPIG]

Where the **** do any of you think you get an opinion on the subject? If you're not active/reserve military, then we say **** you.

We, in the infantry, for the most part DO NOT give a shit if someone is gay, pretty much all of us know if a guy in the unit is gay, and usually he's or they are some of the best damn infantryman you'll see. I would say that 9 out of 10 infantry soldier could give a shit less about the end of DADT, and are just glad it's over.

It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7. You all have no idea. Some of you that have posted in here may be active military, but I doubt it. In our opinion, if you aren't active military or at the very LEAST a veteran, then you don't fucking rate an opinion.


Excuse my language, but I'm quite sick of homophobic bullshit and this argument all together. If getting rid of DADT does anything, it will make the services better. Mark that shit down. And that's coming from a combat veteran infantryman with 4 years in.

Our opinion is exactly the opposite of what dumbass, unknowing civilians think it is in my experience in discussing the subject with them.

I would think any citizen of the USA could have an opinion on it, and in this country I would think we could voice that opinion.

[Bob Seger]

Where the **** do any of you think you get an opinion on the subject? If you're not active/reserve military, then we say **** you.

We, in the infantry, for the most part DO NOT give a shit if someone is gay, pretty much all of us know if a guy in the unit is gay, and usually he's or they are some of the best damn infantryman you'll see. I would say that 9 out of 10 infantry soldier could give a shit less about the end of DADT, and are just glad it's over.

It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7. You all have no idea. Some of you that have posted in here may be active military, but I doubt it. In our opinion, if you aren't active military or at the very LEAST a veteran, then you don't fucking rate an opinion.


Excuse my language, but I'm quite sick of homophobic bullshit and this argument all together. If getting rid of DADT does anything, it will make the services better. Mark that shit down. And that's coming from a combat veteran infantryman with 4 years in.

Our opinion is exactly the opposite of what dumbass, unknowing civilians think it is in my experience in discussing the subject with them.

That's certainly some well thought out and articulate phrasing Vundy. Really makes you look intelligent and your opinion worthy of consideration.


While you are entitled to an opinion just like everyone else, it certainly does not give you an exclusive on the thought process on the whole deal just because you or anyone else may have served or are serving in the armed forces. What you did was throughly insult the convictions of the millions of God fearing soldiers that have served this country since the 1700's that may have an entirely different concept of what morality is, than what you may have. If you are "sick of the homophobic BS and this arguement altogether" then perhaps you should go back to the barracks and play with your little XBox some more and not look at stuff on this thread that may contradict your own choice of immorality. If you dont want to do that, then just shut up when someone else may not agree with you.

Listen junior, you did not have to join the military. While I am thankful for your service, I think you may need reminded that it is now strictly a VOLUNTEER entity that is 100% funded by the AMERICAN TAX PAYER. Nobody forced you to join anything. Like it or not, ultimately the voice of the moral majority should be able to decide the issues, since we are footing the bill 100%. In other words you and everybody else knew what the rules of the game were before you joined. If you didn't like them, feel free to not join, and just hang out at the gay bars with RV and Wildcat. They are totally legal and you all should have a blast together doing whatever vile and unnatural thing you can imagine to one another. I guess what makes America great is that while myself or anyone else may not like it, being a queer is not illegal.

[TheRealVille]

That's certainly some well thought out and articulate phrasing Vundy. Really makes you look intelligent and your opinion worthy of consideration.


While you are entitled to an opinion just like everyone else, it certainly does not give you an exclusive on the thought process on the whole deal just because you or anyone else may have served or are serving in the armed forces. What you did was throughly insult the convictions of the millions of God fearing soldiers that have served this country since the 1700's that may have an entirely different concept of what morality is, than what you may have. If you are "sick of the homophobic BS and this arguement altogether" then perhaps you should go back to the barracks and play with your little XBox some more and not look at stuff on this thread that may contradict your own choice of immorality. If you dont want to do that, then just shut up when someone else may not agree with you.

Listen junior, you did not have to join the military. While I am thankful for your service, I think you may need reminded that it is now strictly a VOLUNTEER entity that is 100% funded by the AMERICAN TAX PAYER. Nobody forced you to join anything. Like it or not, ultimately the voice of the moral majority should be able to decide the issues, since we are footing the bill 100%. In other words you and everybody else knew what the rules of the game were before you joined. If you didn't like them, feel free to not join, and just hang out at the gay bars with RV and Wildcat. They are totally legal and you all should have a blast together doing whatever vile and unnatural thing you can imagine to one another. I guess what makes America great is that while myself or anyone else may not like it, being a queer is not illegal.

Ignorance at it's highest point. Straight people can advocate the rights of all types of people. You and TRT always want to bring the "God" thing into the discussion, explain this one. Any where from 10-19%(depending on the species) of animals are gay. Did god make gay animals? Maybe you and your other ignorant hick acting homophobic buddies can go hang out in a library and read some books about animals and explain that one.

[Bob Seger]

But a simple minority of "unnatural" gay people have that right? How about putting it to a vote in this country? Wanna see what those results might be?

Who told you that animals have gays? How would you know their intentions? God made animals the ability to reproduce in many different capacities. Humans not!!

Because there is nothing else in this life. It all revolves around that.

Your simple answer is that animals do not have souls and have not a guide in which to live their live's by.

By the way, I live green and dont need to waste money on gas going to the library. I watch Animal Planet at home.

[TheRealThing]

[quote=vundy33]Where the **** do any of you think you get an opinion on the subject? If you're not active/reserve military, then we say **** you.

We, in the infantry, for the most part DO NOT give a shit if someone is gay, pretty much all of us know if a guy in the unit is gay, and usually he's or they are some of the best damn infantryman you'll see. I would say that 9 out of 10 infantry soldier could give a shit less about the end of DADT, and are just glad it's over.

It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7. You all have no idea. Some of you that have posted in here may be active military, but I doubt it. In our opinion, if you aren't active military or at the very LEAST a veteran, then you don't fucking rate an opinion.


Excuse my language, but I'm quite sick of homophobic bullshit and this argument all together. If getting rid of DADT does anything, it will make the services better. Mark that shit down. And that's coming from a combat veteran infantryman with 4 years in.

Our opinion is exactly the opposite of what dumbass, unknowing civilians think it is in my experience in[B] discussing the subject






^PREFACE- NOBODY ON HERE EVER EVEN HINTED THEY HATE GAYS!

With the rapier wit and eloquent style you have demonstrated on here, I can only imagine the profound insight and wisdom that would come from any discussions in which you were involved. In fact I'd bet any eavesdropper would likely hve mistaken your conversation as some sort of book review between laureates of renown.

But on a serios note, likely you are too narrow or too young or both, to have much of an opiinion about much of anything. Still, it's easy to see why you're infantry, I'm sure you do it well and, I'm glad you're out there defending where all the blood is actually spilled. It's probably better if you let the other guys do most of the heavy thinking, and talking for that matter. You don't have the time or the inclination to screw around with what might be ethical, you've got a job to do, right?

I would say this to you though. Many of us on this board served. [B]All U.S. fighting men by definition are to serve with honor and respect. There are a lot of very good reasons why those two traits are fundamental must haves for those who serve. Evidently, you couldn't imagine in your wildest dreams that you could be spitting your insults at officers and high end NCO's but, I can assure you that's exactly what you're doing. I for one have never heard a combat veteran talk like you do. Sounds like barracks bravado to me but, in any case, what ever you need to do to keep your edge, go for it. The thing about being a good rooster is knowing when to crow, yours was premature. But, though I may appreciate you sevice, like Seger said, serve or don't serve. Nobody ever suggested on this thread that gays should not seve, always have and always will. But, that wasn't quite good enough for the left,they want that lifestyle to be validated by the military and socially through the courts. That is one of the precepts of Secular Humanism. This, they believe will give them the respect they crave, they're tired of living in shame. That is what drove DADT, the social agenda of the ultra liberal left was foisted upon the military, over the objections of the military chain of command. It could never have happened without the tremendous power that an uber-left president brought to bear on all the brances of the militay Chiefs of Staff.

My argument is this, how can man regulate or change or overturn God's Law? Since God created us and everything that constitues the universe around us and has proclaimed Himself the Begining and the End, the Alpha and Omega, the Great I Am, He is omniscient and omnipotent, and despite what anybody anywhere says, HE WILL JUDGE EVERY MAN thus, I believe that is a reasonable question to ask since He has made His position on this matter clear. And especially when one takes into consideration that God has warned man that if we try to change His law in any point, even so much as the dotting of an i or the crossing of a t, the judgements of God will be added to the men who try. That's pretty stiff even for a combat vet 4 years in, wouldn't you say?

[TheRealThing]

Ignorance at it's highest point. Straight people can advocate the rights of all types of people. You and TRT always want to bring the "God" thing into the discussion, explain this one. Any where from 10-19%(depending on the species) of animals are gay. Did god make gay animals? Maybe you and your other ignorant hick acting homophobic buddies can go hang out in a library and read some books about animals and explain that one.

Everytime I think I've seen the most rediculous assertion ever, you post and up the ante.:notworthy

[TheRealVille]

Everytime I think I've seen the most rediculous assertion ever, you post and up the ante.:notworthy

Check it out, it's 100% fact. Scientists have studied this for decades and decades.

[TheRealThing]

Ignorance at it's highest point. Straight people can advocate the rights of all types of people. You and TRT always want to bring the "God" thing into the discussion, explain this one. Any where from 10-19%(depending on the species) of animals are gay. Did god make gay animals? Maybe you and your other ignorant hick acting homophobic buddies can go hang out in a library and read some books about animals and explain that one.

RV just because my dog humps everything from work boots to footballs doesn't make him gay. But, just address one thing for me if you would. Are you really categorically saying that you can't see or understand the insoluable link between morality and the Almighty? But, just by way of conversation how or why would one leave the Author and Finisher out of a question of moral implication? As I have said, without an absolute standard, in this case God's law, the best that we could ever hope for is endless debate. I know you have to be able to see that. It is the exact reason America has so much trouble legislating any point these days at the local, state or federal level. There is no line one cannot cross. or at minimum one that cannot be equivocated, with mitigation. Without some absolutes the sanity which once (rather recently) was the fabric of America is gone forever.

[TheRealVille]

RV just because my dog humps everything from work boots to footballs doesn't make him gay. But, just address one thing for me if you would. Are you really categorically saying that you can't see or understand the insoluable link between morality and the Almighty? But, just by way of conversation how or why would one leave the Author and Finisher out of a question of moral implication? As I have said, without an absolute standard, in this case God's law, the best that we could ever hope for is endless debate. I know you have to be able to see that. It is the exact reason America has so much trouble legislating any point these days at the local, state or federal level. There is no line one cannot cross. or at minimum one that cannot be equivocated, with mitigation. Without some absolutes the sanity which once (rather recently) was the fabric of America is gone forever.

I leave "him" out of the discussion because there is no him. Believe in your fairy tale all you want, that's your right. I agree with that right also, btw.

[TheRealVille]

RV just because my dog humps everything from work boots to footballs doesn't make him gay. But, just address one thing for me if you would. Are you really categorically saying that you can't see or understand the insoluable link between morality and the Almighty? But, just by way of conversation how or why would one leave the Author and Finisher out of a question of moral implication? As I have said, without an absolute standard, in this case God's law, the best that we could ever hope for is endless debate. I know you have to be able to see that. It is the exact reason America has so much trouble legislating any point these days at the local, state or federal level. There is no line one cannot cross. or at minimum one that cannot be equivocated, with mitigation. Without some absolutes the sanity which once (rather recently) was the fabric of America is gone forever.

If you want to discuss a good Louis L'Amour book, we can do that. His books mean a lot more to me than that fairy tale book that you keep wanting to bring into my government.

[vundy33]

[quote=vundy33]Where the **** do any of you think you get an opinion on the subject? If you're not active/reserve military, then we say **** you.

We, in the infantry, for the most part DO NOT give a shit if someone is gay, pretty much all of us know if a guy in the unit is gay, and usually he's or they are some of the best damn infantryman you'll see. I would say that 9 out of 10 infantry soldier could give a shit less about the end of DADT, and are just glad it's over.

It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7. You all have no idea. Some of you that have posted in here may be active military, but I doubt it. In our opinion, if you aren't active military or at the very LEAST a veteran, then you don't fucking rate an opinion.


Excuse my language, but I'm quite sick of homophobic bullshit and this argument all together. If getting rid of DADT does anything, it will make the services better. Mark that shit down. And that's coming from a combat veteran infantryman with 4 years in.

Our opinion is exactly the opposite of what dumbass, unknowing civilians think it is in my experience in[B] discussing the subject






^PREFACE- NOBODY ON HERE EVER EVEN HINTED THEY HATE GAYS!

With the rapier wit and eloquent style you have demonstrated on here, I can only imagine the profound insight and wisdom that would come from any discussions in which you were involved. In fact I'd bet any eavesdropper would likely hve mistaken your conversation as some sort of book review between laureates of renown.

But on a serios note, likely you are too narrow or too young or both, to have much of an opiinion about much of anything. Still, it's easy to see why you're infantry, I'm sure you do it well and, I'm glad you're out there defending where all the blood is actually spilled. It's probably better if you let the other guys do most of the heavy thinking, and talking for that matter. You don't have the time or the inclination to screw around with what might be ethical, you've got a job to do, right?

I would say this to you though. Many of us on this board served. [B]All U.S. fighting men by definition are to serve with honor and respect. There are a lot of very good reasons why those two traits are fundamental must haves for those who serve. Evidently, you couldn't imagine in your wildest dreams that you could be spitting your insults at officers and high end NCO's but, I can assure you that's exactly what you're doing. I for one have never heard a combat veteran talk like you do. Sounds like barracks bravado to me but, in any case, what ever you need to do to keep your edge, go for it. The thing about being a good rooster is knowing when to crow, yours was premature. But, though I may appreciate you sevice, like Seger said, serve or don't serve. Nobody ever suggested on this thread that gays should not seve, always have and always will. But, that wasn't quite good enough for the left,they want that lifestyle to be validated by the military and socially through the courts. That is one of the precepts of Secular Humanism. This, they believe will give them the respect they crave, they're tired of living in shame. That is what drove DADT, the social agenda of the ultra liberal left was foisted upon the military, over the objections of the military chain of command. It could never have happened without the tremendous power that an uber-left president brought to bear on all the brances of the militay Chiefs of Staff.

My argument is this, how can man regulate or change or overturn God's Law? Since God created us and everything that constitues the universe around us and has proclaimed Himself the Begining and the End, the Alpha and Omega, the Great I Am, He is omniscient and omnipotent, and despite what anybody anywhere says, HE WILL JUDGE EVERY MAN thus, I believe that is a reasonable question to ask since He has made His position on this matter clear. And especially when one takes into consideration that God has warned man that if we try to change His law in any point, even so much as the dotting of an i or the crossing of a t, the judgements of God will be added to the men who try. That's pretty stiff even for a combat vet 4 years in, wouldn't you say?

Hahahahahhaha, well, if you've never heard a combat vet talk like me, you're not a combat vet. Don't question my intelligence, I'm much smarter than my post shows, notice I included that the subject really pisses me off, lol. And I don't give a shit what you are, this is a sports forum, don't pull rank like a dumbass.

And in my post, look at this sentence.."It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7". You can change the hating to "being a dumbass about the situation" because you don't know what the damn word means.

If you disagree with DADT enough for it to effect you or your duty as an SNCO or Officer, or the respect you have for you gay troops, then you are a piece of SHIT SNCO of Officer.

Take that to the bank, sir/sarn't.

[vundy33]

And the reason I think civilians should keep their noses OUT of the situation is because when civilians and civilian leadership gets involved in military matters, it gets so damn jacked up that it doesn't even look like whatever it intended to be.

WE are the ones that serve. Let US decide, not CiC, not congress, senate, or the Supreme Court.

Of course everyone can have their opinions on it, that's perfectly fine.

I think if the military made the decision, DADT would have been gone alot sooner. Most of us just do not care, we're all brothers, no matter how stuck-up and moto TheRealThing is and how big of a POG he is.

[vundy33]

[quote=vundy33]Where the **** do any of you think you get an opinion on the subject? If you're not active/reserve military, then we say **** you.

We, in the infantry, for the most part DO NOT give a shit if someone is gay, pretty much all of us know if a guy in the unit is gay, and usually he's or they are some of the best damn infantryman you'll see. I would say that 9 out of 10 infantry soldier could give a shit less about the end of DADT, and are just glad it's over.

It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7. You all have no idea. Some of you that have posted in here may be active military, but I doubt it. In our opinion, if you aren't active military or at the very LEAST a veteran, then you don't fucking rate an opinion.


Excuse my language, but I'm quite sick of homophobic bullshit and this argument all together. If getting rid of DADT does anything, it will make the services better. Mark that shit down. And that's coming from a combat veteran infantryman with 4 years in.

Our opinion is exactly the opposite of what dumbass, unknowing civilians think it is in my experience in[B] discussing the subject






^PREFACE- NOBODY ON HERE EVER EVEN HINTED THEY HATE GAYS!

With the rapier wit and eloquent style you have demonstrated on here, I can only imagine the profound insight and wisdom that would come from any discussions in which you were involved. In fact I'd bet any eavesdropper would likely hve mistaken your conversation as some sort of book review between laureates of renown.

But on a serios note, likely you are too narrow or too young or both, to have much of an opiinion about much of anything. Still, it's easy to see why you're infantry, I'm sure you do it well and, I'm glad you're out there defending where all the blood is actually spilled. It's probably better if you let the other guys do most of the heavy thinking, and talking for that matter. You don't have the time or the inclination to screw around with what might be ethical, you've got a job to do, right?

I would say this to you though. Many of us on this board served. [B]All U.S. fighting men by definition are to serve with honor and respect. There are a lot of very good reasons why those two traits are fundamental must haves for those who serve. Evidently, you couldn't imagine in your wildest dreams that you could be spitting your insults at officers and high end NCO's but, I can assure you that's exactly what you're doing. I for one have never heard a combat veteran talk like you do. Sounds like barracks bravado to me but, in any case, what ever you need to do to keep your edge, go for it. The thing about being a good rooster is knowing when to crow, yours was premature. But, though I may appreciate you sevice, like Seger said, serve or don't serve. Nobody ever suggested on this thread that gays should not seve, always have and always will. But, that wasn't quite good enough for the left,they want that lifestyle to be validated by the military and socially through the courts. That is one of the precepts of Secular Humanism. This, they believe will give them the respect they crave, they're tired of living in shame. That is what drove DADT, the social agenda of the ultra liberal left was foisted upon the military, over the objections of the military chain of command. It could never have happened without the tremendous power that an uber-left president brought to bear on all the brances of the militay Chiefs of Staff.

My argument is this, how can man regulate or change or overturn God's Law? Since God created us and everything that constitues the universe around us and has proclaimed Himself the Begining and the End, the Alpha and Omega, the Great I Am, He is omniscient and omnipotent, and despite what anybody anywhere says, HE WILL JUDGE EVERY MAN thus, I believe that is a reasonable question to ask since He has made His position on this matter clear. And especially when one takes into consideration that God has warned man that if we try to change His law in any point, even so much as the dotting of an i or the crossing of a t, the judgements of God will be added to the men who try. That's pretty stiff even for a combat vet 4 years in, wouldn't you say?

And what the hell? I thought you were against gays serving openly, Bob Seger as well. I usually agree with you on topics in this board, but if you disagree with it, then we disagree on it.

[Bob Seger]

Well it's like this Vundy. You dont really understand how I feel about the American soldier and of how deeply that I admire the job they do. You however I probably view as an exception.


It's a good thing that you feel so highly of yourself and of your importance. It's very apparent you have a tortured soul that hungers way down deep for some unknown something. Based on your posts I am more inclined to somewhat feel you are more borderline embarrassment to the uniform, rather than hero, and that is a real shame. You want to talk of honor and respect? You sir are no Dakota Meyer. Watch and learn, junior.

But then again, I am sure you just dont care.

[TheRealThing]

[quote=TheRealThing]

And what the hell? I thought you were against gays serving openly, Bob Seger as well. I usually agree with you on topics in this board, but if you disagree with it, then we disagree on it.

I AM against them serving openly because of the reason I have outlined twice. And MY problem with it is that it was rammed down the armed services throats over the objections of the Joint Chiefs. It was singularly a civilian left wing, liberal, plot to push forward one of their looney toons wierd agenda top 10ers.

[Bob Seger]

If you want to discuss a good Louis L'Amour book, we can do that. His books mean a lot more to me than that fairy tale book that you keep wanting to bring into my government.

That's about what I figured. It's "MY" ? I thought it was "OURS"?.nicker:

[Bob Seger]

[quote=TheRealThing]



Hahahahahhaha, well, if you've never heard a combat vet talk like me, you're not a combat vet. Don't question my intelligence, I'm much smarter than my post shows, notice I included that the subject really pisses me off, lol. And I don't give a shit what you are, this is a sports forum, don't pull rank like a dumbass.

And in my post, look at this sentence.."It seems to me that most of the hating on gays in the military comes from the fat, non-combat, POG, ***** ass Fobbits that have nothing else to do except bitch and moan about something 24/7". You can change the hating to "being a dumbass about the situation" because you don't know what the damn word means.

If you disagree with DADT enough for it to effect you or your duty as an SNCO or Officer, or the respect you have for you gay troops, then you are a piece of SHIT SNCO of Officer.

Take that to the bank, sir/sarn't.

Now that's classic.nicker:

[TheRealVille]

That's about what I figured. It's "MY" ? I thought it was "OURS"?.nicker:

It is ours, as long as some of the ours don't try to push their religious views into it, something the forefathers never wanted. Go to bed Kimball, it's past your bedtime.

[Bob Seger]

It is ours, as long as some of the ours don't try to push their religious views into it, something the forefathers never wanted. Go to bed Kimball, it's past your bedtime.

Nah, that's not what you think. Come on now, be honest. It's "our" when it's all set up in the demented, perverted, or sickening manner to suit "your" tastes. But when it's not, it's "my". Kinda sounds more like it, huh? lol

Yeah truthfully it is. Hey, I cant help it RV, perhaps it's just the Apple Day hoopla or something, but tonight I am an insomniac.

[vundy33]

[quote=vundy33]


I AM against them serving openly because of the reason I have outlined twice. And MY problem with it is that it was rammed down the armed services throats over the objections of the Joint Chiefs. It was singularly a civilian left wing, liberal, plot to push forward one of their looney toons wierd agenda top 10ers.

The point of my view on it is that the force, for the most part, and every services leader except Marine Commandant, General Conway, was indifferent to getting rid of DADT. And we have a very, very conservative military, naturally. If you are a vet, or AD, you should know by now that we don't go on ethics. We go on what we are forced to go on by a few civilians, with input from our commanders, but when it comes down to it, their word means little.

If Pres. Obama or any other politician hadn't mentioned getting rid of DADT, it wouldn't be close to a subject, and it would go back most Americans not even know what DADT means.

Again, we, the military, are indifferent to it for the most part. Live and let live. Our job is to take the lives of the people who want to hurt us, and we do it good, whether you like penis or vagina. Who am I, or you, to judge?

When it comes down to it, they'll be judged by one ultimately. Whatever happens happens.

[Hoot Gibson]

First of all, nobody has the right to tell me whether, as a civilian, I am entitled to express an opinion on this issue. The reason that DADT, a policy which was working just fine as far as I know, was repealed was because of the political pressure applied to elected liberal Democrats, chief among them was civilian President Barack Obama. My opinion on this issue is just as valid as the opinions of those civilians who successfully lobbied for the repeal of DADT. As I explain below, I agree with Vundy that the opinions of those who are serving in the military should be weighed much more heavily than the opinions of civilians. Military policies and procedures should not be politicized but that is the system that we have in place.

Ideally, American presidents would promote generals to positions such as those on the Joint Chiefs of Staff based on merits rather than political considerations, but that often has not been the case. Therefore, the opinions of the Chiefs of Staff and other high ranking generals and admirals are often more reflective of the current president's political opinions rather than the opinions of those below the Chiefs in the chain of command.

I agree that civilians such as our president (whoever he may be) should rely heavily on the knowledge and experience of military professionals before making policy changes but too often changes are made to the military to reward special interest groups for their support during campaigns. This is not a direct criticism of President Obama, he is not the first president to use the military for social engineering and he will not be the last. Every president, be they Democrat or Republican, wants to put his supporters in positions of trust, which explains how somebody as incompetent as Wesley Clark rose so high in the ranks.

The repeal of DADT is not a huge issue for me, but I opposed it because it is yet another change to the best military in the world that came about because of political considerations rather than practical ones. Vundy is right about this being a decision made by civilians and pushed on the military.

I get tired of receiving spam in my military email account announcing the latest celebration of another hyphenated-American group. I cannot believe that if the military decided to declare a week dedicated to Irish-American soldiers, that my morale would be boosted. From what I have seen, the military does a great job with its ceremonies recognizing individual and unit accomplishments but I strongly suspect that the hyphenated-American weeks and months originate from outside the military, just as the DADT policy and its recent repeal did.

[TheRealThing]

[quote=TheRealThing]

The point of my view on it is that the force, for the most part, and every services leader except Marine Commandant, General Conway, was indifferent to getting rid of DADT. And we have a very, very conservative military, naturally. If you are a vet, or AD, you should know by now that we don't go on ethics. We go on what we are forced to go on by a few civilians, with input from our commanders, but when it comes down to it, their word means little.

If Pres. Obama or any other politician hadn't mentioned getting rid of DADT, it wouldn't be close to a subject, and it would go back most Americans not even know what DADT means.

Again, we, the military, are indifferent to it for the most part. Live and let live. Our job is to take the lives of the people who want to hurt us, and we do it good, whether you like penis or vagina. Who am I, or you, to judge?

When it comes down to it, they'll be judged by one ultimately. Whatever happens happens.

I knew you weren't really reading my posts through, but that's OK. If you go back through our dialogue you may notice that I said the authority to judge mes's behavior lies with God not other (flawed) men, and certainly not your's trully. Further, it irritates me that the left is using the military for purposes of social engineering, if I can borrow the term Hoot just posted. I never said gays shouldn't be there, or that they wouldn't be good soldiers or anything negative except that DADT worked and why fix it? To me the clear answer is it's left wing socio/political sausage being forced through the US military machine to work out the bugs and give it credibility. They have enough to do to defend the nation and fight the whole planet IMO.

I understand your view and what other choice would you really have but, to accept what comes down the line and press on? That's the best way to deal with these things. I'm sure you feel like you can handle it and civilians, be they retired military or the angels on high, they can just ----off. Marines quote scripture and cuss in the same sentence so I can't line up with you a 100 percent about your ethics views but we're close enough.

[Bob Seger]

[quote=TheRealThing]

The point of my view on it is that the force, for the most part, and every services leader except Marine Commandant, General Conway, was indifferent to getting rid of DADT. And we have a very, very conservative military, naturally. If you are a vet, or AD, you should know by now that we don't go on ethics. We go on what we are forced to go on by a few civilians, with input from our commanders, but when it comes down to it, their word means little.

If Pres. Obama or any other politician hadn't mentioned getting rid of DADT, it wouldn't be close to a subject, and it would go back most Americans not even know what DADT means.

Again, we, the military, are indifferent to it for the most part. Live and let live. Our job is to take the lives of the people who want to hurt us, and we do it good, whether you like penis or vagina. Who am I, or you, to judge?

When it comes down to it, they'll be judged by one ultimately. Whatever happens happens.

For future references, if you would refrain from the tone you intially used and went this route, you might be surprised how civilized the discussion can be..

[vundy33]

[quote=vundy33]

I knew you weren't really reading my posts through, but that's OK. If you go back through our dialogue you may notice that I said the authority to judge mes's behavior lies with God not other (flawed) men, and certainly not your's trully. Further, it irritates me that the left is using the military for purposes of social engineering, if I can borrow the term Hoot just posted. I never said gays shouldn't be there, or that they wouldn't be good soldiers or anything negative except that DADT worked and why fix it? To me the clear answer is it's left wing socio/political sausage being forced through the US military machine to work out the bugs and give it credibility. They have enough to do to defend the nation and fight the whole planet IMO.

I understand your view and what other choice would you really have but, to accept what comes down the line and press on? That's the best way to deal with these things. I'm sure you feel like you can handle it and civilians, be they retired military or the angels on high, they can just ----off. Marines quote scripture and cuss in the same sentence so I can't line up with you a 100 percent about your ethics views but we're close enough.

Oh, I've read your posts.

Hasn't that how it's always been?

And we will always have to accept what comes down the line and press on. The civilian and ethics views thing...you've just been out of the shit for to long, man. You've forgotten what it's like to come back to a country that is more jacked up than the one you just left.

[vundy33]

[quote=vundy33]

For future references, if you would refrain from the tone you intially used and went this route, you might be surprised how civilized the discussion can be..

Like I've mentioned, it's a heated subject for me Kimball. I'm perfectly civilized when I have to be.