It's official: gay men are a geater threat than terrorists

[Bereta_Eder]

Nah go ahead

[MichaeltheGreat]

Why is the Greek army the best to serve in during battle?

They never leave their buddies behind.

[Gangerolf]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
IIRC, at least one NATO country allows gays in the military, possibly more.

I'd imagine the only countries that doesn't are the US and Turkey.

[Gangerolf]

I remember seeing a documentary about a ultra-gay conscript in the norwegian army. He was open about his preferences and nevertheless insisted on completing his service. On nights off, while his room-mates would play poker or go out for a beer, he would put on make-up and dress up in womens clothes. no problem

[Viking Berserk]

I know alot of people who would say they were gay if they were gonna be drafted by the greek military service...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
I'd imagine the only countries that doesn't are the US and Turkey.

That's correct. All other NATO countries allow gays to serve. Also, Japan and Israel allow gays to serve. None of these countries has experienced any significant adverse effects in allowing gays to serve.

Also, studies of the American fire and police forces that have non-discrimination policies against gays have also shown no decline in morale or effectiveness.

All those who've actially been in a combat unit, raise your hand. OK. Keep your hand raised those of you who think that at the present time that gays interfere with unit morale. OK, all of you.

Actually, the most valid opinion would be that of someone who has actually been in combat with a soldier he knew was gay. I could direct you to my grandfather there, and plenty of others, who say that it didn't make a damn bit of difference.

All of these arguments were made before in the 1940s before Truman made his order to integrate blacks. It was the same lame excuses--it would lower morale, reduce effectiveness, etc. And it didn't, not a bit. So once again I have to ask, why are we coddling homophobic bigots in this regard?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Greece doesn't.

Actually you just have to say you're gay and you're off the hook. (of conscription)

That wouldn't be the case any longer. All EU countries must have non-discrimination policies in regards to homosexuals serving. That's why the UK dropped their ban, the EU court ruled against them.

Turkey would also have to change its policy were it to join the EU.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Why is the Greek army the best to serve in during battle?

They never leave their buddies behind.

Even I have to laugh at that one.
Paiktis, you DID ask for that.

For the rest of this thread...well..anything I would have said about anti-gay policies has already been said, and Boddington has already been chastised and warned for his comment.

[Boris Godunov]

That won't deter Bodds, he will always pop up with such inanities. He's like a whack-a-mole.

"whack-a-nazi"

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
That won't deter Bodds, he will always pop up with such inanities. He's like a whack-a-mole.

"whack-a-nazi"

Keep in mind that when Ming, Rah, or any of the other Mods play that game, it has the tendancy to make the mole/Nazi stay 'whacked' for a while...what, two weeks minimum at a time?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Also, studies of the American fire and police forces that have non-discrimination policies against gays have also shown no decline in morale or effectiveness.

That's nice, but irrelevant, since police and fire department personnel are drawn from the local communities in which they work. As such they pretty much reflect the opinions of the communities in which they work.

They also don't live together in barracks, hotbunk on subs, or get deployed to places with Sharia, etc.

All of these arguments were made before in the 1940s before Truman made his order to integrate blacks. It was the same lame excuses--it would lower morale, reduce effectiveness, etc. And it didn't, not a bit.

There were a fair number of issues and problems in Vietnam. Why don't you check out Wallace Terry's "Bloods" for example.

So once again I have to ask, why are we coddling homophobic bigots in this regard?

(a) Gays aren't excluded per se.

(b) All sorts of things that rock the boat can get you booted out of the military. If you want a mainstream religious case, see Parker v. Levy (1986) which is a SCOTUS First Amendment decision involving religious practice in a military setting.

(c) the real issue is conduct - these guys outing themselves was in all likelihood a settlement of an investigation in lieu of a court-martial for something that came under the UCMJ "General Article" (Sections 124 or 125)

(d) The homophobic bigots went through the roof when Clinton changed the policy to "don't ask, don't tell" - some of them still have their agendas, but as Tandeetaylor said (and Connorkimbro could confirm, since he graduated DLI while she was there for less time, there are known gays in the military. If you want to know the homophobic bigot stance on the issue, check out Melissa Wells-Petry. I don't know if she's still in the Army, but in the 80's she was the lead JAG pit bull, and she's a fundie Christian type, who was the darling of Christian Coalition and others. If you check out The Army Lawyer magazine from the 80's and early 90's, she wrote several articles on the whole issue from the prosecutor's legal standpoint. She did an awful lot of off base speaking and TV appearances, etc., which is kind of interesting, since O-4's usually don't have that much free time.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


That wouldn't be the case any longer. All EU countries must have non-discrimination policies in regards to homosexuals serving. That's why the UK dropped their ban, the EU court ruled against them.

Turkey would also have to change its policy were it to join the EU.

The EU can't interfere in matters of national security.
You have your facts wrong or the brits screwed up one more time.

[Bereta_Eder]

Rest assured that there is none of discussion on that issue and that most european countries do not allow gays in the army.

go ahead and search.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by paiktis22
The EU can't interfere in matters of national security.
You have your facts wrong or the brits screwed up one more time.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_mili.htm

"Great Britain: The Amsterdam Treaty grants the EU "the power to take appropriate action to combat discrimination. The possible grounds of intervention are discrimination based on sex, race or ethnic origin, religion, belief, disability, age or sexual orientation." 1 This treaty applies to the UK, which is a member state of the EU. Great Britain was found guilty by the European Court of Human Rights on 1999-SEP-27 for violating the human rights of four military personnel. They had been dismissed because of their sexual orientation. The ruling said, in part: "Those negative attitudes could not, of themselves, justify the interferences in question any more than similar negative attitudes towards those of a different race, origin or colour." The UK now permits gays and lesbians to serve freely."

http://www.worldpolicy.org/americas/treaties/globe&mail-000127.html

This Greek source says that gays are only prohibited from being officers and exempted from compulsory service, not banned:

http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/011300/new_0113000041.shtml

[Bereta_Eder]

Mistake #1.

European court of human rights has no authority to impose anything.

you have it confused with the european court of justice.

so whatever the brits did, they did it of their own will.



EU cannot interfere in matters of national security.

Mistake #2: what you wrote about Greece is all its army.

officers are permanents conscipts are temporary.

both permanent and temorary make up the whole army.


in other words no gays.