12 hr MadAmerican v Yes, it was I was active duty at that time, and it worked. I recently was talking to a Colonel who is active duty and we were discussing this very topic and he told me that since they lifted the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that man on man sexual assult, sexual discrimination, and sexual harrassment cases have jumped through the roof. Most cases are those that involve supervisory personnel using rank and power for sexual favors of young personnel recently enlisted. Post
23 hr cat2009 v Yes, it was A soldier doesn't need to know the sexuality of the person in their group. The only thing I would be concerned with is if that person could save my life if need to. Post
May 20 bsking v Yes, it was every nation's military has an image to project. I don't really think we want the image of two men or two females in uniform holding hands and worse Post
May 18 Ghost116 v No, it wasn't I'm in the military. I could care less if the guy fighting next to me is gay. It should only matter that he can physically do the job to standard. Where he sticks his dick should not matter. Post
u May 16 Gatnos v No, it wasn't Homosexuals should be discharged from the military. They are a demoralizing factor and a security risk. Post
u May 16 Btmoody v I have mixed feelings here As someone serving in the military I can say from what I've seen it's really not a big deal. I thought it was fine the way it was but honestly it's fine now too. I don't think either policies were detrimental to our forces and I never noticed a difference. What I will say, however, is that the military is ran a little different than most things in the country and not all our rights carry over perfectly. I remember hearing once that I joined the military to protect my people's rights not to enjoy them myself. For example, there's certain things I can not do as a member of the armed forces like publicly endorse a candidate, for obvious reasons of course. The military is ... Post
May 15 NoAmnestyEVER v Yes, it was Yes, but a far better solution would be to kick them out of the military with a dishonorable discharge, the same way George Washington did, after he prosecuted gays for sodomy. r1 reply Post
May 10 JTHEM v No, it wasn't This really an issue for heterosexuals . But, honesty certainly solves most problems in the long term. Post
May 9 harold_lloyd v Yes, it was It was, for its time. But it's time passed, and something more reflective of the society was put in place. Post
12 hr MadAmerican v Yes, it was I was active duty at that time, and it worked. I recently was talking to a Colonel who is active duty and we were discussing this very topic and he told me that since they lifted the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that man on man sexual assult, sexual discrimination, and sexual harrassment cases have jumped through the roof. Most cases are those that involve supervisory personnel using rank and power for sexual favors of young personnel recently enlisted. Post
23 hr cat2009 v Yes, it was A soldier doesn't need to know the sexuality of the person in their group. The only thing I would be concerned with is if that person could save my life if need to. Post
May 20 bsking v Yes, it was every nation's military has an image to project. I don't really think we want the image of two men or two females in uniform holding hands and worse Post
May 18 Ghost116 v No, it wasn't I'm in the military. I could care less if the guy fighting next to me is gay. It should only matter that he can physically do the job to standard. Where he sticks his dick should not matter. Post
u May 16 Gatnos v No, it wasn't Homosexuals should be discharged from the military. They are a demoralizing factor and a security risk. Post
u May 16 Btmoody v I have mixed feelings here As someone serving in the military I can say from what I've seen it's really not a big deal. I thought it was fine the way it was but honestly it's fine now too. I don't think either policies were detrimental to our forces and I never noticed a difference. What I will say, however, is that the military is ran a little different than most things in the country and not all our rights carry over perfectly. I remember hearing once that I joined the military to protect my people's rights not to enjoy them myself. For example, there's certain things I can not do as a member of the armed forces like publicly endorse a candidate, for obvious reasons of course. The military is ... Post
May 15 NoAmnestyEVER v Yes, it was Yes, but a far better solution would be to kick them out of the military with a dishonorable discharge, the same way George Washington did, after he prosecuted gays for sodomy. r1 reply Post
Tue Randolf People like you dont deserve the freedoms that alloted to you. Im no flamer either im a married man with kids and a united states marine, but hateful ignorance towards others should not be tolerated. If they wanna do there own thing an pay there own way its non of my concern or yours. Post @Randolf
May 10 JTHEM v No, it wasn't This really an issue for heterosexuals . But, honesty certainly solves most problems in the long term. Post
May 9 harold_lloyd v Yes, it was It was, for its time. But it's time passed, and something more reflective of the society was put in place. Post
May 6 Bill2E v Yes, it was Its a good policy if you know how to "Don't Tell". the problem was it got pushed to the limit and now we are looking at the real situation that gays are openly welcome in the Armed Services. As long as they don't press the issue and require special privileges, it may fly, otherwise there will be a crash down the road. I have no problems with gays in the military, just don't try to influence others to join your cause, let them be themselves also. No peeking in the showers Post
May 5 dontmatter v No, it wasn't oops, hit the wrong button, should say "YES IT WAS". as you can see, the world is laughing at our dysfunctional military, it sees our polluted military as a joke now, which it is. sexual orientation has nothing to do with military,,,,,you are there to kill people that become hostile and are a threat. do you think they ask before war what your sexual preference is? no they would just kill you either way! r5 replies Post
May 14 darkknight8472 So if you are there to kill, why should your sexual preference matter? Post @darkknight8472
May 15 NoAmnestyEVER Don't ask don't tell was Clinton's baby. Guess he hoped it would apply to his own sexual escapades in civilian life. Post @NoAmnestyEVER
May 15 NoAmnestyEVER @darkknight8472 - Because gays are the ones who are gonna get killed, by their fellow soldiers. B1 Post @NoAmnestyEVER
u May 16 Btmoody @NoAmnestyEVER Not true at all. If one of my Marines came out as gay I would still die for him and fight by his side and I'm positive he would do the same for me. Post @Btmoody
u May 16 Btmoody I think as long as it doesn't turn into a sideshow of special privileges and sensitivity training there's really no problem at all. Post @Btmoody
u May 4 BossTweed v No, it wasn't Nope............No one should be expected to be ashamed of, or apologize for, being born Gay. Period. That policy was from back in a time when most thought all Gays wore dresses. Gays are just as different within their sexuality as any one else. We all need to get over Gay stuff and move on. Post
u May 2 seedtick v Yes, it was There used to be no problem with knowing who flipped or who flopped. Now the First Sergeant of each unit must post a list of all soldiers along with their sexual preference. That way everyone knows who to shower with. Why the hell do they even have separate facilities for men and women? It doesn't matter any more. r2 replies Post
u May 15 seedtick @darkknight8472 I was being facetious about the list posting. But, not about the rest. Post @seedtick
May 2 Denizen_Kate v No, it wasn't The only purpose it served was to gratify homophobes who would prefer that homosexuality didn't exist or that they never need know about it. Post
May 2 MarkJM v I have mixed feelings here For the time in which it was passed, it was a good and necessary policy. That's because in the 90's gays weren't as accepted by society as compared to today. Now that gays/lesbians have become more accepted in society, it was necessary to repeal it. Post
u Sep '12 edindav v No, it wasn't To hide your sexuality cannot be healthy and surely if you are in the services then you worrying about what person you find sexually attractive and if your superiors are going to find out. Does not make a good soldier and surely there have been tens of thousands of homosexual men and woman who have served in the services and there seem to have been no complaints of being gay stopping you from performing your duties. I believe that joining such a homophobic place such as the army takes a very strong person who is gay and your sexuality should not come into it. Await the you homosexual loving , pinko, not in our services comments. Small minds. B2 r4 replies e47 endorsed Post
u Sep '12 Pacdog v Yes, it was Keep your private life PRIVATE. nobody needs to know what you do on your own time. B3 r8 replies e39 endorsed Post
Sep '12 Mr_GO_HERD v No, it wasn't As a Veteran I can say that I don't care who you want to sleep with as long as you had my back. Sexual orientation doesn't matter under fire B1 e33 endorsed Post
Sep '12 Speedieg v No, it wasn't Forcing people to lie about themselves to do a job of protecting our freedoms is unethical. The emotional harm to them and the outright hypocrisy of repressing their freedom while defending freedom for others was a travesty. B1 e13 endorsed Post
Sep '12 RadAuthNat v Yes, it was Yes, we all know they are out there; but they need to stay in the background. It is not productivly healthy to have the gays/lesbos out front in the society. B3 r5 replies e10 endorsed Post
Sep '12 citizen7 v I have mixed feelings here I don't think it's good to have to hide who you love and care about. In the same instance it has had a place to help stop discrimination, however it truly is discrimination in it's own right. So therefore, I have truly mixed feelings concerning this topic. I think it should be up to the person whether they want to talk about it or not, but there shouldn't be a law telling them they can't.. e10 endorsed Post
Sep '12 CanisCanemEdit v No, it wasn't 24 years I served with soldiers of all sexual orientations. Straight, Gay, Bi, Lesbian, loyal spouses, cheating assholes, man whores, sluts...I even once met a GI that had a rubber woman for a companion. The thing is, when the shit hits the fan, all that crap goes out the window and the only thing that matters is finishing the mission and getting home alive. Most every soldier I ever met gave two damns about Clinton or his DADT. At most it meant more bullshit "classes" for all soldiers. B2 r1 reply e5 endorsed Post
o Sep '12 Stratton v Yes, it was I think it was the right policy at the time, and should be seen as a bridge step between the old prohibition of homosexuals serving at all, and the current policy of being able to serve openly. I think history will see it as a positive step. B1 e4 endorsed Post
u Sep '12 Just_Lisa v Yes, it was I just can't understand shouting from the roof tops your sexual preference. Amongst friends, sure. It seems like to me that "coming out of the closet" is an attention thing, and gets a hu-rah and a pat on the back for being different. How many men who prefer women do you hear doing this? Or vice versa. I just think some things should remain private. B1 r3 replies e3 endorsed Post
Sep '12 Fishbone345 v I have mixed feelings here Originally it was intended to help stop discrimination by allowing Gays and Lesbians to serve in the military and keep their home life to themselves without fear of repercussion by knowledge. It morphed into something different however as is the case with most legislation. e4 endorsed Post