Revenge of the Homosexual Lobby

[HannibalGuy]

A Federal Appeals Court has ruled 2-1 that colleges can ban military recruiting on campus and still demand federal aid. That decision negates the Solomon amendment passed in 1996 that allows the government to withhold federal funds from colleges which ban the military. Now the two judges believe that schools are entitled not to associate with groups whose policies they oppose, and I agree with those judges about the rights deal. But the federal government also has a right to define which schools and states and individuals receive federal dollars, doesn't it? This all comes back to the don't-ask-don't-tell military policy which some believe is discriminatory. To refresh your memory, that policy says gays can be discharged from the military if they do the following: openly admit their sexual orientation, practice homosexual sex in a public way, marry someone of the same sex. Otherwise, gays can serve their country. The military can't ask any person about his or her sexuality period. That policy is sane. It eliminates conduct that could cause severe morale problems, while protecting the privacy of all Americans who choose to serve in the military. But some activists don't like it. Thus, the controversy.

It is no secret that colleges like New York University, George Washington University, Stanford and Georgetown, just to name a few, have an intense anti-military presence on campus, and that's pretty frightening in the middle of a war on terror where the military is the first line of defense for all Americans. I believe this court ruling will be overturned, again because the federal government has a right to regulate who receives federal money, and the don't ask-don't tell policy is not unconstitutional. But the message here is chilling. The politically correct crowd is hell bent on punishing those with whom it disagrees. We've seen that with the Boy Scouts, and now here it is again with the U.S. military. This entire controversy is based on the belief that gays have the right to publicly define their sexuality anytime anyplace. That, of course, is wrong. It is simply inappropriate to inject your private life in many situations. A military structure and a scouting experience are just two of them. This anti-military ruling is simply revenge, and activist judges are the hitmen. Keeping sex out of the barracks and out of scouting is simply logical. But, for fanatics, logic doesn't matter, and that's what we're dealing with here, fanatics. Any college that bans the military from recruiting on campus is making a grave mistake.

[bmain77]

I have one problem with what you seem to be asserting a couple times in your post. It seems as though you believe that gay people cannot control their sexual urges, especially where you say its wrong for "gays to define their sexuality anytime anyplace" and and the part about keeping sex out of the "barracks and scouting." The mere presence of homosexuals doesn't automatically mean sex is going to take place. ALso how does one define their sexuality? Is holding hands or kissing in public "defining your sexuality:, because If it is then its wrong for both heteros and homos to do so it public if you follow that logic. Heteros holding hands and so on are choosing when are where to define there sexuality.

[HannibalGuy]

Originally posted by bmain77
It seems as though you believe that gay people cannot control their sexual urges, especially where you say its wrong for "gays to define their sexuality anytime anyplace" and and the part about keeping sex out of the "barracks and scouting." The mere presence of homosexuals doesn't automatically mean sex is going to take place.
No, it dosen't mean that sex will take place, it means that it's innapropiate for gays let everybody else know they're gay in innapropiate situations, like when they're in the army or the scouts.

Is holding hands or kissing in public "defining your sexuality:, because If it is then its wrong for both heteros and homos to do so it public if you follow that logic. Heteros holding hands and so on are choosing when are where to define there sexuality.
No, it's not defining your sexuality. It's just showing affection. Defining your sexuality would be deliberatly telling others your gay.

[bob]

I feel quite strongly about this, as I have several gay relatives, and I find this entire post a bit offensive. Whether you're in the army or the scouts or whatever, you're gay if you're gay. You should never have to hide it or be ashamed of it. Gay people don't go around talking about how wonderful it is to have sex with people of the same sex....they act almost exactly like heterosexual people.

I think it's ludicrous that one would assert that there is a problem in America with gays being too open about their sexuality.

[free]

HannibalGuy, I completely agree that the federal government should be able to distribute funds as they see fit. The only way I think that colleges should be able to receive federal funding is if they agree to allow all forms of thoughts and opinions be heard, whether they be hetero, homo, military, socialist, facsist, religious, you name it.

You can't pick and choose freedom of speech, though. If you think the military has a right to hand out flyers to recruit people, then homosexuals, communists and conservatives should have the same rights.

What I am basically saying is that you can't have it both ways. If the miltiary can speak out publically, not harrassing anyone, just delivering what they believe in, I don't see why a scout leader shouldn't have the same rights, as long as he doesn't harrass anyone.

[HannibalGuy]

Originally posted by bob
Gay people don't go around talking about how wonderful it is to have sex with people of the same sex....they act almost exactly like heterosexual people.
I'll say it AGAIN; it is simply inappropriate to inject your private life in many situations! A military structure and a scouting experience are just two of them.

[bmain77]

Originally posted by HannibalGuy
I'll say it AGAIN; it is simply inappropriate to inject your private life in many situations! A military structure and a scouting experience are just two of them.

Then damn it that hetero drill sargeant or the straight scout leader had better not discuss his marriage to a women with my gay kids!!!!:D I can't have that sort of lifestyle rubbed in their faces.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by bob

I think it's ludicrous that one would assert that there is a problem in America with gays being too open about their sexuality.

I just don't think it is appropriate for anyone to go around discussing their sex life. I would not want a hetero teacher discussing his or her sex life with my kids. In fact I think teachers should keep their private lives to themselves. My experience is that most do. I never really heard my teachers ever talk about their husbands or wives or kids. They just stuck to the subject at hand. If a gay teacher or scout leader brings up their sex preference it just invites controversy. I think they should just keep it to themselves and so should the heteros. In private converstaions with friends that is different- then anything goes.

Also college campuses should be open to military recruiting- let the students decide whether they want to talk to the recruiters or not. These colleges have some pretty wild groups coming in to talk so they should not start censoring who gets to talk or not.

[darchangel]

Originally posted by HannibalGuy

Defining your sexuality would be deliberatly telling others your gay.


oh god...we can't have that. :rolleyes:

i'm really tired of the 'don't ask, don't tell' mentality...all i'm saying is that if britney spears can whore it up with everything with a penis within a 500 mile radius on national television, then gay men should be allowed to have their boyfriends at a boy scout cookout without getting an interrogation that would make Hitler cringe.


Through LIke Crue

~darchangel~

[<3mekthx]

I don't see how you equate Britney Spears whoring it up on national tv to a boy scout cookout. Aren't there a few gay guys whoring penis on national t.v?

[darchangel]

Originally posted by <3mekthx
I don't see how you equate Britney Spears whoring it up on national tv to a boy scout cookout. Aren't there a few gay guys whoring penis on national t.v?

do you even read my posts before you reply to them?

was i comparing/equating Britney to a boy scout cookout? no. i was saying if heterosexual relations can be openly displayed in a garish, disgusting matter, then homosexual relations should be able to be equally displayed without persecution.

as for 'whoring penis on national t.v.,' you'd have to give some actual examples of what you consider 'whoring penis' before i could respond to that.


Through Like Crue

~darchangel~

[Lynn7]

Eek! I say no whoring around for anyone. Britney has become a laughing stock over it anyway. I say that everyone should be classy in their behavior at all times and should keep sex lives private. I also prefer sex scenes in the movies to be left to the imagination where they are much more romantic and exciting that they often are onscreen. :D

[<3mekthx]

i'm really tired of the 'don't ask, don't tell' mentality...all i'm saying is that if britney spears can whore it up with everything with a penis within a 500 mile radius on national television, then gay men should be allowed to have their boyfriends at a boy scout cookout without getting an interrogation that would make Hitler cringe.


Please forgive me if I'm wrong, but I took this as you were comparing the two. If Britney Spears can whore it up on tv, then gay guys should be able to be a couple at boy scout cookouts. I've read it about 6 times (yes I read your posts before I reply, well some of them ;) ) and I come up with the same conclusion.

It's not a big deal, I just wanted to understand what you were saying. I hope you don't feel like I'm being an ass to you or anything. I like listening and learning from people with different points of view. It's one great thing about this forum, all these differing points of views and and absolutely no personal insults. I like to learn from the "other side'" rather than just having the mindset of "I'm right, you're wrong."