CreateDebate


Debate Info

72
24
There's no problem with it! There's a problem with it!
Debate Score:96
Arguments:62
Total Votes:113
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 There's no problem with it! (44)
 
 There's a problem with it! (17)

Debate Creator

ScorpioLady1(99) pic



Homosexuals being in the Military

Tell me what the problem is about gays joining the military! I don't think it's a problem because they are fighting for the country and especially what the believe in so what is the reason that gays shouldn't have a chance to be in the Military.

There's no problem with it!

Side Score: 72
VS.

There's a problem with it!

Side Score: 24
4 points

okay i think i'm at the best position to speak here. i'm a gay, and i'm not afraid or ashamed of admitting this. and my darling has served in the army before.

some nuts say we are feminine and not strong enough to protect our country. are you IDIOTS? do you know us? many homosexuals're very muscular and we are healthy! why cant we serve the country?

okay lemme be serious here i do think that all americans deserve the right and duty to serve our country. we gay people are a part of the US! we are americans! we deserve such right and duty! why the hell some nuts have to exclude us from the military!

and what is a soldier all about? protection. so long as he can protect our country well who the hell cares about who he is what he is. does sexual orientation even matter? does it weaken our ability to fight? is that even relevant? as long as we gay people are capable of protecting the US why cant we be part of the army!

ThePyg mentioned a report suggesting 70% of military men and women are perfectly okay with gays in the military. so when most of the americans are okay with us, what the fuck are those foolish guys complaning about huh?

Side: There's no problem with it!

Openly serving in the military should be a right; if you want to fight for your country, so be it. It doesn't matter what your sexual orientation is, you're a patriot and that's a blessing.

Side: There's no problem with it!
garry77777(1796) Disputed
3 points

The word patriot is meant to represent a person that defends their country, i struglle to find example's of US military actions that were in defense of the US. I not even going to get into what it actually means to be patriot but lets just say i don;t beleive it to be a good thing.

Mark Twain: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel"

Side: There's a problem with it!
2 points

A patriot is someone who supports and defends their nation's freedom. In most American military campaigns in the past, war has been fought for our freedom.

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

I would suggest that whether the military is performing patriotic acts is a different debate than who is allow to serve in the military.

Side: There's no problem with it!
2 points

There may or may not be a problem with it, the question is on whether the cons outweigh the pros.

I have not heard of any evidence to suggest that our military will do poorly if gays are allowed to be open in the military.

Even so, I did hear of a report saying that 70% of military men and women are okay with gays in the military. Is that last 30% going to make such a big fuss that we would not be able to keep a powerful fighting force? I find it farfetch'd to say so.

Side: There's no problem with it!
garry77777(1796) Disputed
0 points

have you ever ehard Bill Hick's opinion on Gays on the military, i think its fairly relevant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np6_b-72H3E

Side: There's a problem with it!
ThePyg(6738) Disputed
1 point

I don't see how this is a dispute to what i said.

---------------

Side: There's no problem with it!
2 points

Meh? I guess that anyone that loves their country enough to be willing to put their life on the line, we should let them.

Side: There's no problem with it!
garry77777(1796) Disputed
1 point

Ya i more or less agree with that, except my qualification isn't "anyone that loves their country enough" its the following:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np6_b-72H3E

Side: There's a problem with it!
Hellno(17753) Disputed
1 point

Imagine that... Garry disputes something I say. If I said the moon was gray you'd find a way to dispute it and blame the United States.

As for your video... I actually watched it for a change... I was unimpressed to say the least.

Maybe if anyone cared enough about Ireland to try to take it down and murder your fellow citizens you'd understand what it means to put your life on the line to defend your country.

And, I mean no disrespect for Ireland to say the least... If the apocalypse does come and it's the west versus the east, Ireland will side with us and you will be a minority in your country.

Side: There's no problem with it!
2 points

I don't see the point of discrimination against the gay. From my view point it looks like they're the new African Americans. Why should America always discriminate.

Side: There's no problem with it!

Because humans need someone to look down on. It's absolutely ridiculous, but we need to feel better than someone. DX

Side: There's no problem with it!
2 points

Personally, I don't see the problem with it at all. If someone is brave enough to go out, and protect their country, then they should be able to, regardless of their sexual orientation.

Side: There's no problem with it!
2 points

People in the Military don't need to be straight, they just need to know how to shoot straight

Side: There's no problem with it!
2 points

I don't understand why this was ever a problem. A person's sexual orientation has nothing to do with their ability to defend their country.

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

Agreed! I don't understand why it is such "an issue"? This is what iI have been trying to tell people

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

There have been mANY, many successful military men who were gay. i think one of them may be known by some historians. his name was Alexander the Great. One of the greatest commanders in military history! It is ashame that people who want to defend their country (* a country btw that supports their right to be gay) and they have to hide who they are in fear of being beaten, ostricised etc. when it does not hamper their abilty to shoot a gun or kill an enemy!

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

Principally gays feel artistic way. It`s necessary to ask him what hi like more: military or the art. If hi like more military, go ahead to be a militar!

Side: There's no problem with it!

Who cares? If he can shoot a gun right, why the hell should it matter? I'm sorry if it makes you uncomfortable, but unless you get raped suck it up. This should never have been an issue in the first place. >.<

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

Personally, I take a neutral position on homosexuality. As for their ability to join the military, I am perfectly fine with an American citizen fighting for our rights. That being said, I do not think that they should necessarily go around revealing that they are in fact gay. An important element of the military's success is a feeling of unity, and we are still at a point in this country where finding out that a soldier is gay could cause resentment within the unit. If a soldier isn't going to give his 100% to save a fellow American (due to homophobia), it weakens the unit overall. Each soldier needs to feel that he or she will give their 100% to protect each and every member of their unit, and making a statement about one's sexuality that could cause strain is just asking for trouble IMO. I still stand by my POV that they should be welcome in the military, however.

Side: There's no problem with it!

Gays have every right to be in the military as anyone else.

Side: There's no problem with it!
0 points

They're hired murderers. It doesn't matter if they're black, white, gay, straight, asexual, whatever. If they want to run around murdering people under the guise that they're being 'patriots', let them. I say let women fight too, even out the idiot factor.

Side: There's no problem with it!
3 points

There isn't a problem with it, but the idea that you should announce to the world that you are gay and military isn't necessary. Sexual orientation shouldn't really matter at all. However, it shouldn't be about that; one's first identity should simply be an American soldier, not a homosexual American soldier.

Also, announcing your homosexuality may induce violence and discrimination. This shouldn't happen, but it does. It may even be in a person's own good to simply keep this information to themselves, because most likely there isn't going to be a lot of gay sex happening in the army anyway.

Side: There's a problem with it!
imrigone(761) Disputed
1 point

There isn't a problem with it, but the idea that you should announce to the world that you are gay and military isn't necessary

I don't think anyone is arguing that they should walk into the barracks with a pink feathered robe and announce "Hey! I'm gay!"

The argument is whether or not they should be expelled if and when their sexuality becomes a topic of conversation.

Sexual orientation shouldn't really matter at all.

I fully concur.

However, it shouldn't be about that; one's first identity should simply be an American soldier, not a homosexual American soldier.

Well, yeah! THAT is their argument. Here's the thing: a heterosexual can hang pin-ups in their locker, talk about the hot chicks they banged on leave, tell stories about their girlfriends and wives, and not worry about losing their ability to serve their country with honor. Under DADT, homosexuals couldn't do any of tha in regards to the men they liked. When they are firing a bullet into the head of a terrorist, they are a soldier. But they are also comprised of everything that adds up to their whole, including who they find attractive.

Also, announcing your homosexuality may induce violence and discrimination.

You think they don't know that? In my opinion, one who willingly walks in to a scenario where they might be killed before they even SET FOOT IN ENEMY SOIL is one brave individual. And we need courage in our ranks, especially these days. ALSO, they AREN'T BEING REQUIRED TO ANNOUNCE THEIR SEXUALITY THROUGH A BULLHORN. All that's being asked is that if others discover that they are gay, that it doesn't affect their service record.

It may even be in a person's own good to simply keep this information to themselves, because most likely there isn't going to be a lot of gay sex happening in the army anyway.

Ummm, chances are, if a homosexual enters the armed forces, it is because they want to serve their country, not get laid....much like heterosexuals who enlist...

Side: There's no problem with it!
Troy8(2433) Disputed
2 points

Sex has no place in the military. It only distracts from the real duty soldiers are meant to serve.

Side: There's a problem with it!
1 point

"There isn't a problem with it"

"Sexual orientation shouldn't really matter at all"

"most likely there isn't going to be a lot of gay sex happening in the army anyway"

All arguments for the other side of the debate.

"There isn't a problem with it"

Tagged As: There's a problem with it!

Notice anything...?

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

I don't think gay should be allowed in the military. If gays were allowed in the military it would cause problems. I mean I don't have a problem if your gay. But I hate it when your flamboyant about it and many people in the military would be too and if your not flamboyant then why does it matter anyway? And lets be honest here, how many times do you think a gay person will be bullied in the military.

There's a saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it, and I think that it applies here. If your gay and you want to join the military then just join, if want to yell out your gay and your proud of it then you just look stupid. No one should need to know and why would you need to tell anyone else you are? When your in the military you should only be thinking of one thing and that is the mission at hand and if your waiting on base then do whatever you want.

Side: There's a problem with it!
imrigone(761) Disputed
2 points

If gays were allowed in the military it would cause problems.

Dozens of countries now allow homosexuals to serve in the military. To best of my knowledge, none of them have reported any problems with effectiveness or morale. Israel is well known to have one of the most active and successful armed forces in the world. They allow gays to serve openly and it hasn't hampered their success in any detectable way.

and if your not flamboyant then why does it matter anyway?

It isn't about being flamboyant. It is about the fact that if someone gets outed, they loose their job. This means they have to spend the whole time they are in the military hiding something that is a central part of their lives, whereas heterosexuals can go around talking about their wives or past sexual conquests without worrying about their legal ability to serve their country.

And lets be honest here, how many times do you think a gay person will be bullied in the military.

They know this. If they want to serve their country despite of this, that is their decision to make, and shows considerable bravery and patriotism on their part.

There's a saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it, and I think that it applies here.

Here's some ways in which DADT was broken: it caused many perfectly capable men and women to lose their jobs over a factor that has nothing to do with their ability to serve. It caused many people to choose not to serve. It created distractions to gay servicemen who had to constantly watch what they do and say, even when they are on leave or at base. It created possibility for blackmail.

No one should need to know and why would you need to tell anyone else you are?

Then, do you think that all servicemen should be prohibited from mentioning any reference to their sexuality, including all off-duty conversations about sex or romance, or even the fact they are married or have girlfriends? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

When your in the military you should only be thinking of one thing and that is the mission at hand

And why would gay men and women be incapable of this?

and if your waiting on base then do whatever you want.

Which is the problem, because the homosexuals in the military CAN'T do what they want on base. Hell, even if they are home on leave they have to watch their step, or what they post on Facebook, etc.

Side: There's no problem with it!
KDTO(17) Disputed
1 point

there's a saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it I think the fact that the USA and it's military are finally making changes to move forward is a good thing. The military is a broken system what with the way vets are treated when they return from combat or the very low enrollment numbers. If there is a brave enough soul who wishes to stand up for his or her country, they should be allowed to do so without having to hide who they are. Your argument is like going back in time and saying that someone with a different colour skin CAN join in- they just have to cover their face.

Side: There's no problem with it!
bburkhalter1(3) Disputed
1 point

It doesn't matter if they get bullied or not! They should have the right to be who they are and not be forced to pretend they are someone other than who they really are. America was founded on the idea of being able to be who you are with being persecuted or punished for it! It's not right and it needs to be fixed period. You wouldn't say that if your black in the military you should have to wear a mask and skin coverings similar to that of a caucasian persons would you?

Side: There's no problem with it!
1 point

The uniform code of military justice states the following:

Article 125—Sodomy (a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall by punished as a court-martial may direct.

Because of this, the military law has always stated that anyone who commits an act of sodomy, whether it be anal or oral sex, with their wife or husband is subject of arrest and dismissal from the United States military. Either this law will have to change or the military will have to continue to exclude homosexuals who are clearly admitting outright they are breaking military law.

Also, adultery and fornication have traditionally been punishable offenses that sometimes result in dishonorable discharge. Acceptance of homosexuals does not bode well for a military that has traditionally been Biblical in its enforcement of sexual morality.

Side: There's a problem with it!
Bohemian(3860) Disputed
1 point

The uniform code of military justice states the following

You will find the question isn't over what UCMJ currently states, but rather if it is justified in such codes of conduct. There is still a lot of discussion between military legal scholars whether article 125 should also be repealed. A similar law within Texas was struck down as being unconstitutional, legal precedence would but this article on the chopping block.

The sexual activities between consenting adults behind closed doors is not for the Federal government to intrude upon.

Because of this,

The Uniform Code Of Military Justice, did not exist prior to 1950

the military law has always stated that anyone who commits an act of sodomy, whether it be anal or oral sex, with their wife or husband is subject of arrest and dismissal from the United States military

Your argument effectively amounts to "It's always been done that way, therefore we should continue to do it that way".

It's a tautology, that tradition is justified because it is tradition. If we followed this line of reasoning no social or political progress would have been made ever. We would still have slavery, and women would still not be allowed to vote, if we had followed tradition for the sake of following tradition.

This mantra is neither intellectually nor socially fruitful.

Side: There's no problem with it!