what would you spend 369 million on?

[ThePixelGuru]

The point I am making is that if we define our sexuality as a "god given" or something we are born with then it will cause havoc.

A pedophile will be allowed to say "Its not my fault I was born this way" the same way a gay person can say "Its not my fault I was born this way".

We cannot prove either is or is not the case. I think it is very dangerous especially in todays society to push that envelope. Not to jump topics, but who would have ever thought that 4 out of 5 of our justices would have tried to rewrite the second amendment.

Maybe I am over thinking it, but it seems the americian way to allow someone to get a foot in a loop hole to allow everyone else in. Suing because coffee is too hot, suing because a pickle burn my lip , suing because I am overweight and broke a toilet seat.

I dont want to live in an America where we allow everyone to use the "Its not my fault I was born this way" defense

As long as our sexuality is a personal choice it should be allowed to be discouraged to be shown in any workplace.

And our response to pedophiles who say "it's not my fault I was born this way" should be "that's too bad, it hurts kids" while our response to gays who say "it's not my fault I was born this way" should be "that's ok, it doesn't hurt anyone." The difference is that pedophiles have relationships with children too young to give informed consent while gays have relationships with fully functional, logically thinking adults.

As far as employers asking employees not to be gay, that's not how it works. Employers can't ask their employees to be male or to be white, why should they be able to ask them to be heterosexual? Sexuality is not a choice - homosexual men's brains have been proven to be similar to women, there are proven genes that increase the likelihood of being gay (as does being a younger sibling), and scientists have even managed to flip a single fruit fly gene to get gay flies. The evidence just keeps piling up. Wait a few years and I bet we'll be able to figure out someone's sexuality based entirely on DNA.

EDIT: Of course, it shouldn't surprise me that people still can't accept homosexuality. After all, some states still have laws against sexual positions other than missionary...

[questionful]

and as questionful reminded us "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"

anyhow I guess that should apply to the military too.

I meant that it should be made illegal under federal law to discriminate against sexuality, in which case the army would have to follow the law like everyone else.

[wetwrks]

But in this circumstance society made a bad choice when it lumped a victimless lifestyle in with acts that harm others.

Ok, 2 days ago I had a "fellow" who was obviously hitting on me. I don't appreciate it and shouldn't have to put up with it. But he wouldn't stop even when I made it very obvious that I wasn't interrested. If it were a male/female situation she would dump a drink on him or slap him. Were I to react in any similar negative way I would be charged with a hate crime based on his sexuality. (Don't say it wouldn't happen because I can point out news articles that it has happened).

It is exactly this type of situation that the military is trying to prevent.

[MANN]

Coming next week: The debate over medical marijuana

lol.

Both of you make very valid points. I think on this one we will have to agree to disagree.

IMO keeping a dont ask dont tell policy with not allowing gays in the army is good. It allows guys to be guys. You dont have to have separate showers. You dont have to have separate rooms. The majority of men in the army are straight, and if it makes them uncomfortable then why cause it. (after all it is their "right to happiness")

When in Rome do as the Romans.

When in the Army be a man. If someone is gay and wants to serve our country fine. Just dont let anyone know you are gay.

[ThePixelGuru]

Ok, 2 days ago I had a "fellow" who was obviously hitting on me. I don't appreciate it and shouldn't have to put up with it. But he wouldn't stop even when I made it very obvious that I wasn't interrested. If it were a male/female situation she would dump a drink on him or slap him. Were I to react in any similar negative way I would be charged with a hate crime based on his sexuality. (Don't say it wouldn't happen because I can point out news articles that it has happened).

It is exactly this type of situation that the military is trying to prevent.

I've had a lot of women hit on me even after I've made it clear I wasn't interested, and somehow I managed to keep myself from slapping them. That's a really weak example. Besides, by that logic women shouldn't be allowed to serve, because they might be interested in the guys or vice versa.

[MANN]

I meant that it should be made illegal under federal law to discriminate against sexuality, in which case the army would have to follow the law like everyone else.

Be careful about that. there are many types of sexuality as stated before. i Dont want to open floodgates of any sexual preditors.

[Hilltop Customs]

I meant that it should be made illegal under federal law to discriminate against sexuality, in which case the army would have to follow the law like everyone else.

I agree, I was just "standing on the shoulders of giants" by refering back to your posting of the excerpt of The Preamble to explain why firing people based on sexuality should not be accepted.

[MANN]

I've had a lot of drunk women hit on me even after I've made it clear I wasn't interested, and somehow I managed to keep myself from slapping them. That's a really weak example.

but none the less you are dealing with a group of men. If one starts hitting on one someone could easily loose control and do something that they regret.

As I stated earlier. Preventing one gay person from being killed by someone in the army is worth the $. A trial to proscute the straight persons, and the lawsuits that would go against the armed forces would be 3 fold of 300million.

[questionful]

Be careful about that. there are many types of sexuality as stated before. i Dont want to open floodgates of any sexual preditors.

Well, you're right, but I meant morally acceptable ones like homosexuality.


I just think it's cool we had a mature debate on a controversial topic without getting the thread closed or anyone banned! Couldn't have done that on some other forums. . .

[Hilltop Customs]

Ok, 2 days ago I had a "fellow" who was obviously hitting on me. I don't appreciate it and shouldn't have to put up with it. But he wouldn't stop even when I made it very obvious that I wasn't interrested. If it were a male/female situation she would dump a drink on him or slap him. Were I to react in any similar negative way I would be charged with a hate crime based on his sexuality. (Don't say it wouldn't happen because I can point out news articles that it has happened).

It is exactly this type of situation that the military is trying to prevent.

man up and say sorry I dont swing that way. I highly doubt a women would dump a drink on someone without some type of provocation, more likely they would just tell them NO in some nice way.

I highly doubt splashing with a drink on someone would get you charged with a hate crime, more likely slapped in the face....but then again any other guy would probably sock you.

[wetwrks]

How would someone's gayness change your way of doing things?
Both parties, gay and hetero, should be able to pursue happiness without infringing on the other's ability to do the same.

In my case I cannot go to a public restroom without the possibility of having some lady acting like a man standing there staring at me.

Let's say for the sake of argument that a pedophile is born that way. That isn't his/her fault. And he is allowed to think whatever nasty things he likes to think about. BUT as soon as he chooses to act on his thoughts, ie, molests a child or what not, then he is affecting another person(s)'s ability to pursue happiness, and THAT is not allowed.

Oh you awful narrow minded individual, how can you discriminate against them like that. They cannot help it, it was how they were born.

people can do whatever awful stuff they want, and as long as it doesn't affect me, they can have at it!

That's just it. It may not be affecting you now. Just wait until they are allowed into your bathroom.

[questionful]

Well, whether you think openly gay people should be allowed in the army or not, there are probably hundreds of better ways $300+ million could be spent.

[MANN]

Well, whether you think openly gay people should be allowed in the army or not, there are probably hundreds of better ways $300+ million could be spent.

Our government is known for childish spending habbits. The DOD is no exception. The only way I could justify spending that kind of money on that is like I previously stated. It is less than what could be.

[wetwrks]

was under age, therefore cannot make the decision to consent

For how long? Children as young as 10 years old are now being considered (by the courts) to be capable of making proper adult decisions. How long will it be before it is pushed that the age of consent be lowered?

I have serious issues with children (as young as 10) being charged as adults in crimes.

[MANN]

It was fun. If this isnt locked maybe we can discuss some other problems in America tomorrow.