[hwacker]

Great post for the internet, too bad in real life it won't happen.

[Brenda]

hwacker hwacker:

Great post for the internet, too bad in real life it won't happen.

Same goes for all your comments, sweets

I can't believe you are the dickhead in real life as you pose to be here

[roger-roger]

hwacker hwacker:

Great post for the internet, too bad in real life it won't happen.

I say give it 10 years and the American military might be as socially enlightened as the Canadian one.

[hwacker]

Eisensapper Eisensapper:

hwacker hwacker:

Great post for the internet, too bad in real life it won't happen.

I say give it 10 years and the American military might be as socially enlightened as the Canadian one.

Well we can agree to disagree. But you're wrong

[roger-roger]

[ziggy]

hwacker hwacker:

Eisensapper Eisensapper:

hwacker hwacker:

Great post for the internet, too bad in real life it won't happen.

I say give it 10 years and the American military might be as socially enlightened as the Canadian one.

Well we can agree to disagree. But you're wrong

It's happening allready.Hope this guy didnt get kicked out.

[ziggy]

Another "Manly" video for Hwacker.

[BartSimpson]

Yeah, I'm going to be called a bigot but whatever.

There are some good reasons why gays are discouraged from military service in the USA.

#1 in practical matters is that homosexuals are statistically more likely to experience PTSD as many of them enter the service with existing emotional problems that are exacerbated by combat experiences. No, this kind of thing is not politically correct so you're not going to find the Pentagon publishing this kind of info outside of closed committee hearings so don't ask me for links.

#2 again, as a practical matter, homosexuals are statistically prevalent among those people who are either blackmailed into betraying military secrets or among those who freely betray military secrets.

#3 Unit cohesion studies (again, not politically correct) show degraded performance in units where soldiers have been indicated as homosexual.

#4 The US volunteer military predominantly and disproportionately recruits from Mid-Western and Southern states and among these volunteers who stay in the military for 8+ years those professing a devout Christian faith predominate. Recruiting studies indicate that this source of new recruits will decline if homosexuals are allowed to openly join the military.

Now of course I will allow that not all queers make for bad soldiers and I'm sure that some, in fact, have been exemplary soldiers. But that does not mean that we need to make a social science project out of the military.

But I guess it's too late for that as due to insane political correctness we have young women now being deployed for extended cruises on Naval surface ships and some have even been deployed on submarines. The incidence of rape of these women is upsetting. The disturbance of rape courts martials is detrimental to performance. The problems with pregnant sailors are legion. The problems with officers having affairs with enlisted females are legion. The problems with onboard jealousies resulting in assaults and even murders are legion. Yet we have to keep women aboard ship to prove some damnable social point that has not one goddam thing to do with the mission of the Navy.

So it will inevitably be the same with gays that we'll put gays in the military and allow them to marry, parade, and cause social disturbances and to hell the consequences because it's more important to prove how f*cking liberal and open minded we are than to worry about trivial things like winning wars and keeping our casualty rates down.

I'm glad I won't have to deal with this idiocy.

[sandorski]

Tough.

[stokes]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Yeah, I'm going to be called a bigot but whatever.

There are some good reasons why gays are discouraged from military service in the USA.

#1 in practical matters is that homosexuals are statistically more likely to experience PTSD as many of them enter the service with existing emotional problems that are exacerbated by combat experiences. No, this kind of thing is not politically correct so you're not going to find the Pentagon publishing this kind of info outside of closed committee hearings so don't ask me for links.

#2 again, as a practical matter, homosexuals are statistically prevalent among those people who are either blackmailed into betraying military secrets or among those who freely betray military secrets.

#3 Unit cohesion studies (again, not politically correct) show degraded performance in units where soldiers have been indicated as homosexual.

#4 The US volunteer military predominantly and disproportionately recruits from Mid-Western and Southern states and among these volunteers who stay in the military for 8+ years those professing a devout Christian faith predominate. Recruiting studies indicate that this source of new recruits will decline if homosexuals are allowed to openly join the military.

Now of course I will allow that not all queers make for bad soldiers and I'm sure that some, in fact, have been exemplary soldiers. But that does not mean that we need to make a social science project out of the military.

But I guess it's too late for that as due to insane political correctness we have young women now being deployed for extended cruises on Naval surface ships and some have even been deployed on submarines. The incidence of rape of these women is upsetting. The disturbance of rape courts martials is detrimental to performance. The problems with pregnant sailors are legion. The problems with officers having affairs with enlisted females are legion. The problems with onboard jealousies resulting in assaults and even murders are legion. Yet we have to keep women aboard ship to prove some damnable social point that has not one goddam thing to do with the mission of the Navy.

So it will inevitably be the same with gays that we'll put gays in the military and allow them to marry, parade, and cause social disturbances and to hell the consequences because it's more important to prove how f*cking liberal and open minded we are than to worry about trivial things like winning wars and keeping our casualty rates down.

I'm glad I won't have to deal with this idiocy.

Why are you moving to a more right-wing country?

(I dont care if you give me negative rep points again either!!)

[martin14]

uhhh, those boys are straight, cause they can't dance for shit

[llama66]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Yeah, I'm going to be called a bigot but whatever.

There are some good reasons why gays are discouraged from military service in the USA.

#1 in practical matters is that homosexuals are statistically more likely to experience PTSD as many of them enter the service with existing emotional problems that are exacerbated by combat experiences. No, this kind of thing is not politically correct so you're not going to find the Pentagon publishing this kind of info outside of closed committee hearings so don't ask me for links.

#2 again, as a practical matter, homosexuals are statistically prevalent among those people who are either blackmailed into betraying military secrets or among those who freely betray military secrets.

#3 Unit cohesion studies (again, not politically correct) show degraded performance in units where soldiers have been indicated as homosexual.

#4 The US volunteer military predominantly and disproportionately recruits from Mid-Western and Southern states and among these volunteers who stay in the military for 8+ years those professing a devout Christian faith predominate. Recruiting studies indicate that this source of new recruits will decline if homosexuals are allowed to openly join the military.

Now of course I will allow that not all queers make for bad soldiers and I'm sure that some, in fact, have been exemplary soldiers. But that does not mean that we need to make a social science project out of the military.

But I guess it's too late for that as due to insane political correctness we have young women now being deployed for extended cruises on Naval surface ships and some have even been deployed on submarines. The incidence of rape of these women is upsetting. The disturbance of rape courts martials is detrimental to performance. The problems with pregnant sailors are legion. The problems with officers having affairs with enlisted females are legion. The problems with onboard jealousies resulting in assaults and even murders are legion. Yet we have to keep women aboard ship to prove some damnable social point that has not one goddam thing to do with the mission of the Navy.

So it will inevitably be the same with gays that we'll put gays in the military and allow them to marry, parade, and cause social disturbances and to hell the consequences because it's more important to prove how f*cking liberal and open minded we are than to worry about trivial things like winning wars and keeping our casualty rates down.

I'm glad I won't have to deal with this idiocy.

wow.
So its fine to serve your country, unless your "queer" or a girl.
can minorities serve? how about the blacks?
we don't wan't any progression in society, that would be scary.

[llama66]

martin14 martin14:

uhhh, those boys are straight, cause they can't dance for shit

umm... yeah. they are pretty terrible (I know terrible, I'm terrible)

[BartSimpson]

llama66 llama66:

wow.
So its fine to serve your country, unless your "queer" or a girl.

Women can serve but they don't need to be on board ship where they are NOT contributing to the mission in net.

llama66 llama66:

we don't wan't any progression in society, that would be scary.

Why do you assume that this kind of thing constitutes 'progress'?

[BartSimpson]

stokes stokes:

Why are you moving to a more right-wing country?

Huh?