Vegeta wrote:
Let me know when you see an active duty member of the armed forces doing any of the stereotypical stuff listed above, not out of satire, & this little argument of yours may hold some weight. Until that point, it's just another of your "gay-fear" fueled fantasies.
Just like dudes wanting to peak at your junk in the shower.
You mean like every butch female that is "obviously" a lesbian?
That's the point of DADT. Just because you refuse to accept the fact that your understanding of the military was wrong, that isn't my problem.
Vegeta wrote:
DADT has been repealed, so what has changed since it's repeal that makes you now have a problem with homosexuals serving?
You asked me what is my reason for homosexuals not to serve. I replied that I have no reason, that's why I support DADT. DADT makes it possible for homosexuals to serve. I've answered your question.
Olorinus wrote:
What the hell are you even talking about? I am not upset that homosexuals are being given the same basic rights to acknowledge their sexuality that all other service members are. If you really think "being treated the same" is equal to being discriminated against, you are even moronic than I originally thought possible.
So answer me this. Where does "everyone must be clean shaven, unless you prescribe to a certain religion" fit in your definition of discrimination?