22 thoughts on “Senate votes to repeal DADT: Open forum”

  2. Since Dr. Throckmorton likes to keep the debate on an elevated and mature level, I thought I would direct you all to Bryan Fischer’s, um, commentary on today’s vote. I wouldn’t have thought it possible, but he may just have topped himself. This is better than the one where he advocates driving the grizzly to extinction or where he renders moral judgment on Sea World.

    He starts out by calling the GOP senators who voted for repeal “traitors”. Not traitors to their party or to principle, but to their country. (By extension, that must mean that Adm. Mullen, WWII hero Senator Dan Inouye, and combat veteran and former Marine Sen. Jim Webb are also part of the traitorous cabal.)

    It goes downhill from there. The armies of our allies are emasculated” and now ours will be “feminized”* and permanently weakened. (Please disregard Fischer’s column of months ago, wherein he argued that gays are extraordinarily brutal and conquered Europe for Hitler.)

    Chaplains will abandon their posts. And then:

    “The draft will return with a vengeance and out of necessity. What young man wants to voluntarily join an outfit that will force him to shower naked with males who have a sexual interest in him and just might molest him while he sleeps in his bunk? . . .

    The new Marine motto: “The Few, the Proud, the Sexually Twisted.” Good luck selling that to strong young males who would otherwise love to defend their country. What virile young man wants to serve in a military like that?”

    (Personally, I like that better than “An Army of One”.) Anyway, Fischer concludes with with the modest proposal that the US has sealed its demise and will now inevitably be consigned to the scrap heap of history.

    http://www.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147501318

    * For an example of a feminized institution, see the Congressional Medal of Honor.

  6. “It is time to recognize that sacrifice, valor and integrity are no more defined by sexual orientation than they are by race or gender, religion or creed. It is time to allow gay and lesbian Americans to serve their country openly.” — President Obama

  7. “It is time to recognize that sacrifice, valor and integrity are no more defined by sexual orientation than they are by race or gender, religion or creed. It is time to allow gay and lesbian Americans to serve their country openly.” — President Obama

  8. To simple-minded folk like me, openness and honesty seems to be much better from the point of view of ‘morale’; silly ‘guessing games’ about who MIGHT be gay are surely not good for the effectiveness of a combat unit.

    Making too much sense will not serve you well when dealing with the US right wing.

  9. Fischer’s contradictory ‘philosophical belching’ is to be expected, given his confused and obsessive mentality. Maybe he thinks women are ‘brutal’, hence his ‘gay = nazi’ and ‘gay = feminizing views’?

    @ Warren : You’re the psychologist. What do you reckon?

    To simple-minded folk like me, openness and honesty seems to be much better from the point of view of ‘morale’; silly ‘guessing games’ about who MIGHT be gay are surely not good for the effectiveness of a combat unit.

  10. Good luck selling that to strong young males who would otherwise love to defend their country. What virile young man wants to serve in a military like that?”

    Fischer seems to have put a lot of serious thought into “strong, virile, young, males.”

  11. To simple-minded folk like me, openness and honesty seems to be much better from the point of view of ‘morale’; silly ‘guessing games’ about who MIGHT be gay are surely not good for the effectiveness of a combat unit.

    Making too much sense will not serve you well when dealing with the US right wing.

  12. Fischer’s contradictory ‘philosophical belching’ is to be expected, given his confused and obsessive mentality. Maybe he thinks women are ‘brutal’, hence his ‘gay = nazi’ and ‘gay = feminizing views’?

    @ Warren : You’re the psychologist. What do you reckon?

    To simple-minded folk like me, openness and honesty seems to be much better from the point of view of ‘morale’; silly ‘guessing games’ about who MIGHT be gay are surely not good for the effectiveness of a combat unit.

  13. Good luck selling that to strong young males who would otherwise love to defend their country. What virile young man wants to serve in a military like that?”

    Fischer seems to have put a lot of serious thought into “strong, virile, young, males.”

  14. Since Dr. Throckmorton likes to keep the debate on an elevated and mature level, I thought I would direct you all to Bryan Fischer’s, um, commentary on today’s vote. I wouldn’t have thought it possible, but he may just have topped himself. This is better than the one where he advocates driving the grizzly to extinction or where he renders moral judgment on Sea World.

    He starts out by calling the GOP senators who voted for repeal “traitors”. Not traitors to their party or to principle, but to their country. (By extension, that must mean that Adm. Mullen, WWII hero Senator Dan Inouye, and combat veteran and former Marine Sen. Jim Webb are also part of the traitorous cabal.)

    It goes downhill from there. The armies of our allies are emasculated” and now ours will be “feminized”* and permanently weakened. (Please disregard Fischer’s column of months ago, wherein he argued that gays are extraordinarily brutal and conquered Europe for Hitler.)

    Chaplains will abandon their posts. And then:

    “The draft will return with a vengeance and out of necessity. What young man wants to voluntarily join an outfit that will force him to shower naked with males who have a sexual interest in him and just might molest him while he sleeps in his bunk? . . .

    The new Marine motto: “The Few, the Proud, the Sexually Twisted.” Good luck selling that to strong young males who would otherwise love to defend their country. What virile young man wants to serve in a military like that?”

    (Personally, I like that better than “An Army of One”.) Anyway, Fischer concludes with with the modest proposal that the US has sealed its demise and will now inevitably be consigned to the scrap heap of history.

    http://www.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147501318

    * For an example of a feminized institution, see the Congressional Medal of Honor.

  15. If they were actually enforcing that one, it would cover every heterosexual male in the military.

  17. Oh yes, not also that Intersexed and Trans people were never covered by DADT. They could be asked, and would be dismissed. This is still in effect, and will be even after DADT repeal, no matter what happens.

    The UCMJ still bans “sodomy”, but as such bans have been deemed unconstitutional in other contexts, this is a dead issue.

  18. Well, if the military says it has all policies, procedures, and regulations in place…. and if the chairman of the joint chiefs says there will be zero impact on morale, recruitment, or unit cohesion… and if the SecDef concurs… and if the President also concurs with both of them… then 60 days later, DADT will no longer be operative, and whatever rules and regulations the military decide to put in place will be effective.

    Such as a rule that bans all gays from service. It wasn’t the ban on gays that was deemed unconstitutional. It was the fact that they could serve – but weren’t allowed to give a truthful answer if asked the name of their partner.

    I expect actual implementation to be just after the 2012 elections.

  19. If they were actually enforcing that one, it would cover every heterosexual male in the military.

  21. Oh yes, not also that Intersexed and Trans people were never covered by DADT. They could be asked, and would be dismissed. This is still in effect, and will be even after DADT repeal, no matter what happens.

    The UCMJ still bans “sodomy”, but as such bans have been deemed unconstitutional in other contexts, this is a dead issue.

  22. Well, if the military says it has all policies, procedures, and regulations in place…. and if the chairman of the joint chiefs says there will be zero impact on morale, recruitment, or unit cohesion… and if the SecDef concurs… and if the President also concurs with both of them… then 60 days later, DADT will no longer be operative, and whatever rules and regulations the military decide to put in place will be effective.

    Such as a rule that bans all gays from service. It wasn’t the ban on gays that was deemed unconstitutional. It was the fact that they could serve – but weren’t allowed to give a truthful answer if asked the name of their partner.

    I expect actual implementation to be just after the 2012 elections.

Comments are closed.