US is 40th in gay friendliness in the military

I think in a few years the US will at least be in the top 20. They really are trying to be more welcome to gay people.

 

Yes I know.

We all have to be the same.

 

The military should be used to kill people and break things. Not a social experiment to be "all inclusive".

 

Doesn't mean the military should discriminate against whoever they want or to deny one's constitutional rights.

 

You bring glad tidings to America's enemies.

 

What do you mean?

 

I didn't realise the strength of the military rested on the amount of gay men it admitted - kind of lame OP if you ask me - who wants a gay friendly army anyhow?

 

Sexuality shouldn't even be an issue when it come too the military.

 

You know if the military can end racism it can end bigotry towards homosexuals without any kind of outside social engineering.

This just occurred to me.

 

Have you noticed when you go down that list...the less educated and free and more religious those countries get

 

After WWII Eisenhower had gained enough respect for the black soldiers that he desegregated the military. But that didn't end the bigotry at all. Goldwater had no problem with gays in the military. Those were the days before Reagan poisoned the well by bringing in racist former southern segregation era evangelicals

 

In the modern military there are courses that train people to overcome their racism and bigotry in order to work together.

Such as:

http://www.examiner.com/article/army-training-manual-assume-racism-is-everywhere-everyday

But I was wrong in my assertion that the military has ended racism, but it is trying to combat it.

 

Our enemies know this is yet more evidence that our civilian leadership is content to incrementally demoralize our military, which it sees as nothing so much as a vehicle for social experimentation and appeasement of certain special interest groups.

 

One of the funny quirks of history is the worship of the Spartan warrior culture by many of today's real and wannabe wariors. These guys were some of the toughest fighters ever, yet they all had lovers in the ranks. You fight for a lover even more feriociously than for a fellow a soldier.

Just a bit of irony for the homophobes among us.

 

France has a military? Amazing.

 

No American with a lick of sense wants soldiers who are fighting for their "lovers", as such soldiers can easily be made to fight against their country, as did Ernst Roehm and his merry band of perverts. You're welcome.

 

I didn't realize the strength of the military rested on the amount of straight men it admitted. Kind of lame if you ask me.

Your statement could be used for pretty much anything. African Americans, Asian Americans, Catholics, Baptists, etc.

Non-homophobes?

The military should be used to kill people and break things. Not a social experiment to be "exclusive."

What are you even talking about? How is anyone demoralized by not making LGBT people hide in the closet while in the military?

Plenty of other militaries are doing just fine with LGBT soldiers.

 

The question is retarded.

You lack the wherewithal to comprehend the answer, and you'd rather be dead than address that deficiency.

By what metric?

 

Rohm was a German. Pray tell when he fought against his own county.

He was seriously wounded in WWI. He was a Brown Shirt who thought he was fighting for German unity. In fact, the reason Hitler had him killed was that after the Putsch in Bavaria, Hitler decided to use politics instead of military force. Rohm and his gay buddies wanted to go to war with the corrupt Bavarian government, so Hitler had him killed.

Now, what was that silliness about "fighting against his country"?

Or did you attend the Dumkoff Academy of German History?

 

The homophobic military will still stomp the crap out of you...

 

When he fought for Hitler, obviously.

 

Your response is invalid.

You apparently lack the ability to form a coherent and rational explanation.

What metric do you accept? By what metric is our military or any other military doing bad because of gays openly serving?

 

How many countries are there? About 250? We should be 250th. Catering to the gutter dwelling lunatic fringe is for losers.

 

On the contrary, it's both accurate and perfectly on point, at least WRT your retarded question.

No one can form an explanation that enemies of reason will find rational, sorry for any inconvenience.

Nice of you to admit - to the savvy observer, if not yourself - that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

It doesn't. The only thing the military should be concerned with is efficiency. Nobody should give even the smallest (*)(*)(*)(*) about anything else. Hence it shouldn't be "gay friendly" it should just not give a damn about gays, just like it shouldn't give a damn about straights either. Provided people's sexuality doesn't have some affect on efficiency somehow, the military should just give a big I DON'T CARE to both gays and straights.