THe PC Police Again Shut Down Truth Seaking

@joefromchicago,

Dont pretend you are here to discuss...you are here to enforce your opinion in others. You are a nazi in a new PC uniform, only what you hate has changed, the methodlogy is very similar.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

Quote:
full of bluster, but provides nothing besides his say-so.
And you are so bigotted you cant see how this applies to you ? You want to change the world prove it will do no harm...
you remeber the doctors creed ? Do no harm? Well it applies to PC thugs too.

Is that an oxymoron ?

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

You are dismissive of any evidence that doesnt agree with you.

Kinda hard to dismiss something that hasn't been presented.

2 Replies

@DrewDad,

Quote:

Kinda hard to dismiss something that hasn't been presented.

And yet you refuse to define what it takes to make an argument worthy of your response. Kinda hard to take you seriously when it appears that you are blatantly using a dodge maneuver.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

refuse to define what it takes to make an argument worthy of your response

Sorry Hawkeye but the person taking the position that a comment by some military man concerning gays being the cause for a **** poor peace keeping force not reacting correctly have some worth that need to be look into. is the one who need to back it up.

Frankly as I think that it is a worthless comment I for one have no clue how you could place lipstick on that pig.

That is your job to convict people that there is some indications that having gays openly servicing in the arm forces is going to in some manner reduce the fighting ability of those arm forces.

Dealing with the fact that gays had been servicing openly in a lot of fine first world fighting forces for decades now.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Dealing with the fact that gays had been servicing openly in a lot of fine first world fighting forces for decades now

that is factually incorrect. For decades a person could not be thrown out for being gay, but it is only recently that any forces were open enough that gays routinely felt that they could be open about their situation.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

that is factually incorrect. For decades a person could not be thrown out for being gay, but it is only recently that any forces were open enough that gays routinely felt that they could be open about their situation.

You might wish to start by backing up the above claim.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

Quote:
Ionus wrote:
You are dismissive of any evidence that doesnt agree with you.

Kinda hard to dismiss something that hasn't been presented.

You contiue to provide examples of your bigotry without even a hint of realisation of what you are doing. What is the view like from Mt Olympus, oh mighty mover of worlds ?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

While it is generally accepted that homosexuals serve in all of the
militaries examined for this study, few serve openly (and none, of
course, can be open in the United Kingdom). RAND researchers were
frequently told that if a meeting on this subject had not been requested
by the visiting Americans, there would be no occasion to have a meeting
to discuss the issue. Despite tolerance for homosexuality in the
society and the decriminalization of homosexual acts, in none of these
societies is homosexuality widely accepted by a majority of the
population.17 (The trend in society at large, however, is toward the
expansion of legal rights of homosexuals.) In the Netherlands, easily
the most tolerant and encouraging environment for homosexuals to serve,
fewer than 1 percent of the men in the Dutch military identified
themselves as “predominantly homosexual” on a questionnaire; 3.5 percent
of women indicated that they were homosexual; and 4.8 percent of the men
stated that they had had homosexual experiences at some time in their
lives.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR323/mr323.ch1.pdf

page 14

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Dont pretend you are here to discuss...you are here to enforce your opinion in others. You are a nazi in a new PC uniform, only what you hate has changed, the methodlogy is very similar.

The "I'm just a little boy and you're picking on me" routine is really lame, Ionus. Joe can't enforce his opinion on anyone here or, respected member of the bar community that he is, it's not likely that JfC is going to be setting federal policy for the US government.

Have you not suggested that you have put forward your opinions on this issue? If you have, then you are also trying to force your opinions of Joe and ... .

If you haven't, and this certainly seems to be the case, then that's your fault, so please stop whining.

What Joe, and a number of others have been telling you is the fact situation. And 24 or whatever number of years of grunt/low rank officer or high rank officer opinion/experience is not going to change those facts, especially when they are bigoted opinions meant to deny on the basis of race, creed, color, sexual orientation, gender, ... .

You're in the wrong century.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

And yet you refuse to define what it takes to make an argument worthy of your response. Kinda hard to take you seriously when it appears that you are blatantly using a dodge maneuver.

It's hard to respond to something so inane. Let me give it a whirl.

If you've got the goods, lay them out. Go for the brass ring Don't stop anywhere short of your absolute best. Put all your cards on the table. It's your side of the discussion.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

If you've got the goods, lay them out. Go for the brass ring Don't stop anywhere short of your absolute best. Put all your cards on the table. It's your side of the discussion.

I am ready when and if Drewdad decides he wants to take this subject seriously. So far he is happy enough pissing in my ear and telling me that is it raining.

2 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

The "I'm just a little boy and you're picking on me" routine is really lame, Ionus.

Describing you as a PC Nazi doesnt mean you are picking on me. I understand you have problems with logic, your bigotry shows that.

Quote:

Joe can't enforce his opinion on anyone here or,

Apparently joe is just a little boy and I am picking on him...feel the need to pick him up and give him a big hug ?

Quote:

Have you not suggested that you have put forward your opinions on this issue? If you have, then you are also trying to force your opinions of Joe and ... . If you haven't, and this certainly seems to be the case, then that's your fault, so please stop whining.

If I have, it is my fault. If I havent, it is my fault. If homosexuals and women damage the military, it is the military's fault. At no stage is it your fault. It is only your opinion, why should you have to justify any changes you want made ? Dont we realise who you are ? You are PC !

Quote:

especially when they are bigoted opinions meant to deny on the basis of race, creed, color, sexual orientation, gender, ... .

Why are you so sadly stupid ? You know nothing of the topic except it feels good for you to demand homosexuals serve openly in the military. That is the extent of your knowledge and you use the term bigot without the slightest idea of what it means. You are a bigot. You have not allowed one fact to get in the way of your factless self aggrandising opinion.

Quote:

You're in the wrong century.

Awww...isnt that lovely ! She is a modern militant libbie demanding all sorts of things like burn the bra it is a symbol of man's oppresion ! Designed by women for women who need it to run to the bus for their liberated jobs or their liberated tits will beat them to death. You are in the wrong half of your brain. Leave the emotions and use the logic half.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

You used a Randa study to back up a statement of your so you must give the Randa think tank some credit I would assume?

If so then their conclusion that gays can be openly integrated successfully would also carry great weight correct?

Mr323.ch1.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The research conducted by RAND provides evidence that homosexuals
can be successfully integrated into military and public security
organizations.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“A policy based on the principle that sexual orientation is not
germane to military service thus emerged as the most promising option
for achieving the President’s objectives. This option ends
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation while assuring the
requirement that military order and discipline be maintained. It
- 34 - The option assessed here, a conduct-based set of standards applied
under the premise that sexual orientation, as such, is “not germane” to
military service, appears to meet the President’s criteria and to be
consistent with empirical research and historical experience. By
following this implementation strategy, the Department of Defense should
be able to increase the probability that a policy that ends
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
discrimination based on sexual orientation can be implemented in a
practical and realistic manner and that the order, discipline, and
individual behavior necessary to maintain cohesion and performance are
more likely to be preserved.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Drewdad isn't the only one here. More people than just him have asked for reasons and after how many pages and postings there still ain't none as far as I can see.

If you feel your points have merit, lay them out. Don't worry about who pisses anywhere.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Leave the emotions and use the logic half.

You obviously forget all that you had written just before this gem. Are you familiar with the word hypocrite?

But let's not leave it there. Put your fingers where your mouth is, you know the logic part, and type out your reasons, 1, 2, 3 ...

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

“The research conducted by RAND provides evidence that homosexuals
can be successfully integrated into military and public security
organizations.”

What we need is the military to conduct research into the Rand corporation and tell them how to do research.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Drewdad isn't the only one here. More people than just him have asked for reasons and after how many pages and postings there still ain't none as far as I can see.

Then I suggest you go back to the start of the thread and read.

Quote:

If you feel your points have merit, lay them out.

You have laid out one point. It is politically correct to demand any new wave bullshit and then walk away like a dog shitting on the footpath. Others will have to clean it up.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Are you familiar with the word hypocrite?

So you have learnt the word bigot and how it applies to you ? Ok. Lets move on to hypocrite.

Definitions of hypocrite on the Web: a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives

You arent concerned about people. You are doing this to feel important and righteous. If you worried one iota about people you would worry about them being killed by your foolish ideas rather than the small percentage of homosexuals who want to join the military because they have heard about the ****-fest women are enjoying.

3 Replies

@Ionus,

Still no reasons to support your increasingly lame position, Ionus. Am I to take it that this is the sum total of 24 years of military experience talking?

1 Reply

THe PC Police Again Shut Down Truth Seaking

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know