Belkira the Tulip wrote:
For an argument that has nothing to do with who showers with who, there is an awful lot of talk about who showers with who in this argument.
Just sayin'.
That's because that was the focus. Someone asked what's the difference? I explained the difference and since then people went back on to say "it's all about someone seeing you in the showers!!"
The claim was that the base of the argument was that I was afraid of someone seeing my junk. My statement was THAT wasn't part of the argument because I don't shower with other people. You all just refuse to accept that and can't understand how there could be any other reason against DADT
So I proceeded to explain how their shower argument was wrong anyway. As I begin to prove them wrong, now they want to drop the shower argument as opposed to just admitting that they are wrong. I'm not dropping it, because I want them to accept the fact that they are wrong in that arena as well.
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
Quote:
So you think men would get away with raping women in a military shower?
Get away with? No. Would it be much more likely than a man on man rape in a military shower? Absolutely.
Soooooooo... you believe that it would happen more often and that alone is enough to justify the segregation?
Omega wrote:
See post #385. Some of it is coherent, some of it is not, & none of it explains why YOU feel the way YOU do about teh gheys.
Wow.. I filled out your madlib to say refer to post 206 and you reply with post 385? This is exactly why you don't "understand", because you don't read or pay attention.
Secondly, you didn't tell me exactly what made sense, what didn't make sense and what lead you to your conclusion. You simply stating that some made sense and some didn't doesn't do anything for me. I'm not going to repeat anything until you give me details from post 206.
Omega wrote:
No more shower talk: Girls shower with girls & boys shower with boys because boys have *****' & girls have vaginas
You haven't given an explanation on why we are separated by sex. The fact that men have penises and women have vaginas IS THE SEPARATION OF SEX. If that weren't the case, then it wouldn't be separated by sex. I'm asking you to provide a logical explanation on why we are separated by sex (that means, people who have penises go into one place, the people who have vaginas go in another place) that supports building two of everything?
So, men shouldn't work along side women because women have vaginas and men have penises? What's the difference? You guys pretend that our body parts go away in the office? What's the difference? How come we aren't segregated everywhere else in life?
Omega wrote:
The repeal of DADT doesn't change that. Could some hypothetical straight man, whom isn't Alma, be uncomfortable now showering with Bob that just came out to him? Sure. Does that mean DADT shouldn't have been repealed & Bob should not be able to come out if he wants too? NO.
Read post 206 again for the reasons why DADT SHOULD be in effect. I'm merely trying to get you to stop pretending that there's a difference between a woman not wanting to shower with a man and a man not wanting to shower with a ****.
Omega wrote:
Fill out the madlib. I don't care about the hypothetical situations that you think could arise because of DADT repeal. I don't care about your false equivalencies, because everyone besides yourself knows they're illogical. I care only about WHY it is that YOU feel the way that YOU do about Homosexuals to be so anti-SSM & anti DADT repeal & how it is that these issues effect YOU, PERSONALLY.
Excuse me for being a person who thinks before he acts. If you don't think about how a change in the law may or may not affect future operations, then you fail as a leader and shouldn't be making any decisions whatsoever.
The military addressed most of my concerns in that military briefing that was presented by Bijou (I believe) a while ago, so obviously you're in the wrong. If they addressed the very same issues that not only I brought up, but others brought up, then you're just living in denial.
Omega wrote:
Once again, in all of your posts, the only bit of information I've read from you that touches on this at all is that you would be uncomfortable if a gay dude looked at your junk.
This is why I called you ignorant, but now I'm just calling you stupid. I ask again, if I'm never in that situation, how can that be the base of my argument? That doesn't make sense. You're purposely ignoring every other statement made just so you can focus on showers in attempt to make it seem about fear of being seen naked. Which in any case, I played along to show you that's the same exact reasoning why women are separated in the first place. They are identical. So, instead of admitting that fact, you're trying to dance in circles around the subject by saying "We're separated by sex because we are two different sexes". No &#@ Sherlock, the question is WHY?!?!
Omega wrote:
If you don't want DADT repealed because you would rather not know that Bob was gay so you could shower comfortably then that is fine. It's not a good enough reason to re-instate DADT, mind you, but it would at least tell us why it is that YOU feel the way that YOU do about it.
And it's all stated on post 206. If you decide to ignore everything and focus on a scenario that doesn't occur, then so be it.