Almalieque wrote:
Since you're so willing to explain everything else, why wont you break it down for me as why that is such?
It's as simple as "I type for my own benefit". Humoring your asinine question didn't amuse me but pointing out how asinine it was did. Anyway, I already did answer it and you haven't yet explained how my answer was inadequate to the situation at hand.
Quote:
If you accept the fact that double standards exist, as you are stating above, then you must actually argue something more than "it's discrimination or it's not fair"
Not at all. "It's discrimination" is an excellent reason to stop something all by itself. The question is, can the other side come up with a defense for that discrimination to justify it? In the case of women serving in the infantry, most people agree that there reason justifies the discrimination. In the case of DADT, they didn't think the defense was good enough.