VOTE NOW on DADT. Greenville NC TV running a poll

[henryclay]

as far as your opinion on my status as a moderator, that's exactly what it is - an opinion. my opinions as to your posts have had no impact on my ability to moderate fairly.

Right back at you. If you don't like my opinions, you can counter them with anything that suits your fancy. And fancy is what it is up to now, unless, like you have asked me to do, , , , , ,

You can present some examples to verify your views of my intolerance towards others. You ARE tolerant of the views of others aren't you?

If so, why are we having this discussion? And why didn't you answer the "we" part?

Oh, , , on moonbeam. I will give moonbeam the benefit of the doubt and wait for things to run their course, thanks. The atmosphere is already murky enough.

[chiver78]

I have zero intention of continuing to discuss this topic any further. if either of you is inclined to do so, please note that your off-topic posts will be removed.

thanks.

[henryclay]

Thank you chiver, for getting back on topic. I started the thread, and it sure would be nice if one of my threads would stay on topic.

[steff]

to stay "on topic"...

again, congrats to the many men and women in voluntary service of our country who are now allowed to live their lives as everyone else does. I read an article about a lesbian servicewoman (who has a partner & children) was finally able to put a family picture on her desk for the first time.

sometimes it's the simple things that can mean so much to a person..... congrats to them all again!

[chiver78]

Sept 23, 2011 14:29:52 GMT -5 steff said:

to stay "on topic"...

again, congrats to the many men and women in voluntary service of our country who are now allowed to live their lives as everyone else does. I read an article about a lesbian servicewoman (who has a partner & children) was finally able to put a family picture on her desk for the first time.

sometimes it's the simple things that can mean so much to a person..... congrats to them all again!

[reformeddaytrader]

Sept 23, 2011 14:22:57 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Thank you chiver, for getting back on topic. I started the thread, and it sure would be nice if one of my threads would stay on topic.

Maybe because you love the controversial threads so much Henry ...they seem to bring out the best and/or the worse sometimes....

BTW I am very familiar with Greenville NC and it is a one of many cities in North Carolina that I really enjoyed along with Jacksonville, Morehead City, Chapel Hill, and Durham that treated members of the military like "First Class" citizens... They are all Pro Military cities in NC which might explain this poll somewhat..

[mmhmm]

Sept 23, 2011 11:01:55 GMT -5 henryclay said:

mmhmm,

I can't imagine going through life denying the truth of who I am. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

If I may, you must be referring to the cross dressing aspect of showing "Who I am".

Along those lines, other than in the military, we don't see one single place in all of society where sex deviants and straights are FORCED to live and commingle 24/7/365. Likewise, because we already know what the outcome will be, we don't see, EVEN IN THE MILITARY, where opposite sexes FORCED to live and commingle 24/7/365. So if we are going to have sex deviants in the military, why can't we recognize that each and every one of them "claims" to be someone who they are not, , , and "that someone" is really a person of the opposite sex.

So, knowing the ultimate result of having the opposite sexes cohabit, and since it is the presence of the deviants that would cause the problems, , , , and since those deviants are not attracted to the "opposite sex", I have a suggestion.

Put all the "now happy because they can be the real persons who they have always been", together with people of the sex that they are not attracted to. Have them dress like their new found selves really want to dress, and do the kinds of jobs people of their sexual preferences do. Problem solved.

You DO agree, don't you?

On the Tenneeseer thing, I have wondered if anybody noticed. And I wonder if anybody will notice when it happens again. If the reason it takes so long is that I don't make an issue of it, nothing will change in that regard because I won't be making an issue of it in the future. I may very well respond, but I will try to keep it within mixed company parameters when I do.

My comment doesn't speak to the issue of "showing" anything. It speaks to denial of self. Gay people are simply people. Perhaps, they don't have the same urges as you do. Maybe, they don't think as you think. They're still people and, as such, shouldn't be required to skulk about hiding from stigma that has no basis. The problem is with those who choose to judge and to hate, not with those who simply are who they are.

While military personnel do live very closely together, they don't have to sleep in one another's beds, or eat one another's food. They live close together, but separately. There's no reason why that cannot continue as it always has. There have always been gays in the military. What's the horror of knowing who they are as opposed to not knowing who they are? Treat them as another human being, not a sexual object, and it won't make a particle of difference.

[mmhmm]

This message has been deleted. Double post.

[henryclay]

controversial threads?

What is controversial about one's views on any given subject? I agree a lot more than I disagree, and I try never to be disagreeable.

Controversial is when extraneous and non-productive adverbs and adjectives start to flow about what people believe, or what they know about others.

Take this thread as an example. I posted that there was a poll. The first few responses weren't concerned abut the contents of the poll, but were taking issue with there even being a poll, and the perceived personalities of anyone who would still be interested in the repeal of DADT, and here it seems pointed at the people most affected by it.

I offered no opinions on the poll, and only voiced one proposition with regard to repealing DADT. Since my suggestion didn't suit some posters, the thread went to hell in a handbasket fast.

Maybe we can recover the thread, and maybe not. In any event the poll has been taken down. It was still running 66% against repeal when it happened and had close to 700 votes. Not many on a national level, but for Greenville, NC, it was significant.

Oh, yeah. But the cops around there know the difference between 35 miles an hour and 36 miles an hour.

They are running a poll right now on whether people agree with the threatened US veto of the Palestinian application for a UN seat and statehood. It is 80/20 in agreement.

[Tennesseer]

This thread turned controversial with reply #9: "sexual deviants".

There is a difference between polling about something already a done deal (the repeal of DADT) and somthing that has yet to happen (the potential veto by the U.S. of Palestine's recognition of statehood).

Creating a poll about DADT is like creating a poll today about 'Should the U.S. invade Iraq and depose Saddam Hessein'.

It's done. It's over.

[mmhmm]

If I may, you must be referring to the cross dressing aspect of showing "Who I am".

You're right, henry. Controversial comments are those that assume what another means, or is thinking, and spin is added through the use of verbiage the victim of the assumption didn't use --- as occured in the quoted statement. You don't know to what I MUST be referring, quite obviously, because you pointed to individuals showing who they are while I simply stated others should not be required to deny who they are. Were this sort of thing done less, we'd have a lot less contentious discussions here in P&M.

[reformeddaytrader]

In November 2010, the Defense Department published a comprehensive report on the effects of repeal. The report included the results of a survey of military personnel on bases throughout the United States and overseas, including 400,000 servicemembers and 150,000 military spouses.[104] Overall, 70 percent of military personnel thought that integrating gays into the military would be positive, mixed, or of no consequence.[63] However, 60 percent of personnel in the Marine Corps and combat specialties said that repealing the ban would be negative.[63]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_ask,_don%27t_tell

Only 60%? We really need to work on that one with the Marines....Henry.. What are those 40% thinking? Or are they mostly in the "no consequence" category or could care less and tired of talking about this subject??

[henryclay]

I have no idea how close we are to the edge here, before posts get deleted, but if the moderators can stray away from topic I trust their tolerance will allow for responses.

In that regard, thank you mmhmm for this observation:

You're right, henry. Controversial comments are those that assume what another means, or is thinking, and spin is added through the use of verbiage the victim of the assumption didn't use

Because it fits the following precisely, , , , in my opinion, of course, and was uncalled for. Especially the "we" part. I still don't know who the "we" is supposed to be.

we already live with the fact that you despise those that do not see things exactly your way.

And this one:

my comment was not at all intended to bait, it was an observation - made after reading many comments from you about your absolute distaste and disgust for people who choose to publicly disagree with you

And after making those posts, threatening to delete future posts by others who stray off topic.

I have to wonder where the line is drawn, or whether it can be moved according to the adrenalin flow of the biggest cock on the block.

I would hope that someone, somewhere, sometime, would give credit to the mission of our military and respect that there are some things that involve people in the military that no other segment of society can even imagine. Loading torpedo tubes on a submarine that doesn't see the sunshine for months on end. Keeping the boiler temperatures up on our ships without relief for months on end. Being deprived of the company of the opposite sex for months on end. But now injecting possible disruptive sex practices into it all through some misguided response to political allies.

It is ludicrous at best to do it at all, and disaster awaits for doing it during a war, and we have more than one war already going against us at the moment.

[chiver78]

Sept 23, 2011 16:32:51 GMT -5 henryclay said:

I would hope that someone, somewhere, sometime, would give credit to the mission of our military and respect that there are some things that involve people in the military that no other segment of society can even imagine. Loading torpedo tubes on a submarine that doesn't see the sunshine for months on end. Keeping the boiler temperatures up on our ships without relief for months on end. Being deprived of the company of the opposite sex for months on end. But now injecting possible disruptive sex practices into it all through some misguided response to political allies.

It is ludicrous at best to do it at all, and disaster awaits for doing it during a war, and we have more than one war already going against us at the moment.

what you (and others) have failed to explain is why having women and men, both sex-deprived and serving alongside each other, is any different today than it was a month ago? why does it matter whether you assume everyone in the submarine is straight or whether you know for sure - because they have told you otherwise - that they are not?

can you answer that for me, please? I've only been asking it since the DADT threads first started appearing. nobody's answered it yet.

[reformeddaytrader]

I think DADT in the military could be a generation thing Henry because the older military and veterans groups seem to have been opposed to the repeal while @ 70% of the troops today are OK with it...

There is a lot of opposition to repealing DADT by those who served before DADT was inacted by President Clinton..

[reformeddaytrader]

what you (and others) have failed to explain is why having women and men, both sex-deprived and serving alongside each other, is any different today than it was a month ago? why does it matter whether you assume everyone in the submarine is straight or whether you know for sure - because they have told you otherwise - that they are not?

It is basically that the military is slow or reluctant to engage in Social Experimentations.... Their old customs, traditions, culture, and ethos are not easy to change or revise.. Probably because the Generals and Admirals who run the Pentagon are mostly very conservative in their thinking about social issues would be my opinion... But to his credit Obama as their Commander in Chief was able to get them to support the repeal of DADT along with the studies done on this subject among the ranks

[chiver78]

Sept 23, 2011 16:43:25 GMT -5 @reformeddaytrader said:

what you (and others) have failed to explain is why having women and men, both sex-deprived and serving alongside each other, is any different today than it was a month ago? why does it matter whether you assume everyone in the submarine is straight or whether you know for sure - because they have told you otherwise - that they are not?

It is basically that the military is slow or reluctant to engage in Social Experimentations.... Their old customs, traditions, culture, and ethos are not easy to change or revise.. Probably because the Generals and Admirals who run the Pentagon are mostly very conservative in their thinking about social issues would be my opinion...

I would argue that it's more of a "social experiment" to essentially force a subsection of soldiers to lie about themselves in order to keep their jobs. how would you feel going to work every day, knowing you could lose your job and turn your life upside down because you can't tell anyone you prefer strawberries to peaches.

[mmhmm]

We'd all like explanations of those things we don't understand, henry. I'd love to know how someone else's sexual practices are "disruptive" to you. If they're not doing what they do in your bed, with you in it, I don't see how it impacts you in any way.

[reformeddaytrader]

Chaplains may be having a tough time with the Repeal of DADT according to this paragraph in Wiki

Chaplains and religious groups

Chaplain groups and religious organizations are taking various positions concerning the policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Some view that the policy must be withdrawn to make the military more inclusive. The Southern Baptist Convention is battling the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, warning that their endorsements for chaplains may be withdrawn if the repeal takes place.[133][134] They take the position that allowing gay men and women to serve in the military without restriction will have a negative impact on the ability of chaplains who think homosexuality is a sin to speak freely regarding their religious beliefs. The Roman Catholic Church has called for the retention of the policy, but has no plans to withdraw its priests from serving as military chaplains.[135] Sixty-five retired chaplains signed a letter opposing repeal, stating that repeal would make it impossible for chaplains whose faith teaches that same-sex behavior is immoral to minister to military servicemembers.[136] Other religious organizations and agencies call the repeal of the policy a "non-event" or "non-issue" for chaplains, claiming that chaplains have always supported military service personnel, whether or not they agree with all their actions or beliefs.[137][138][139]


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_ask,_don%27t_tell


And I am not sure if this is the current status among the Chaplains today or not??? My guess is they will have to just go along with this repeal and make the best of it despite their own misgivings but I cannot speak for Chaplains and they don't want me to either...

[chiver78]

Sept 23, 2011 16:59:52 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

We'd all like explanations of those things we don't understand, henry. I'd love to know how someone else's sexual practices are "disruptive" to you. If they're not doing what they do in your bed, with you in it, I don't see how it impacts you in any way.

bump, on the off chance that henry didn't see this question. still waiting on your answer, sir.

[henryclay]

chiver, aren't we getting things a bit bass ackwards here? I hardly know how to respond, but I'll try.

This thread was started as a reference to a poll by people in the vicinity of, and affected on a daily basis by, a large military installation.

Right away, with your posts among them, the thread left the theme set in it's opening and very quickly became an attack on me. Not on the theme of the thread. Not on my ideas, but on me.

I have tried in all my posts to give other posters the benefit of the doubt in their beliefs, even when I might be diametrically opposed to their views. I often fail miserably, but my goal is to always seperate the poster from the views expressed.

It becomes difficult to impossible to keep that seperation in mind when someone, anyone, , , and in particular a moderator, , , posts a direct attack, as in . . ."we already live with the fact that you despise those that do not see things exactly your way. . . . "

I say again, it is difficult to keep the poster seperate from the views that are expressed. And for emphasis I point to your own attack on ME, wherein you state what you preceive me to believe, rather than on what I have presented in my posts. And when asked to explain it, your response was to completely ingore the question, and was instead a threat to delete further posts.

So here we are, and after telling you that I asked my question before you asked yours, I'll leave you with something that was said a long, long time ago. Perhaps there is something in it that we all, moderators and mere mortals alike, need to consider from time to time.

When Socrates was asked to give an opinion on the writings of Heraclitus, many of which were incomprehensible to him, he said, "There are ideas in them which I have been able to understand, and they are certainly most wonderful. I gather from them that those which I have not been able to grasp are at least equally wonderful and true. We should not brusquely dispose of the words of another merely because they may be at first difficult to understand".

[chiver78]

nice dancing. it's not at all bass ackwards, as you say, to ask for a response to a direct question. I'll ignore the other stuff, because quite frankly you're seeing an insult where there wasn't one.

[reformeddaytrader]

It becomes difficult to impossible to keep that seperation in mind when someone, anyone, , , and in particular a moderator, , , posts a direct attack, as in . . ."we already live with the fact that you despise those that do not see things exactly your way. . . .

The above comment could NOT be further from the truth.

And I believe Henry Clay is owed an apology for that comment.


Doesn't this CofC rule apply anymore??

The short version: Treat your fellow posters with courtesy and respect. This means no personal attacks, racial slurs, stalking, etc.

[chiver78]

we're done here. this thread has had no posts on-topic in awhile, which is not at all surprising - it's about a poll on something that's already been done.

this thread is being locked.
-chiver78/Moderator