V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
dak is trolling, there's no way someone who says he's so "enlightened" can say some of these things 


So you're now comparing requirements and standards in fitness, history of drug use, intelligence (which is important, yet subjective), and criminal background to sexual preference!?!?!?
Tell me something genius, how does sexual preference compare to the previous 4 that YOU mentioned? How can you do that?
WHEN BEING GAY IS NOT COMPARABLE TO A CRIME, DRUG USE OR YOUR INTELLECT.
Why not all? Because there are those things which affect performance and those that don't...you're being stupid about this.
drug use = if you are a regular drug user, you might become a liability, or be engaging in illegal actions while in uniform, or while you're supposed to be doing shit
in shape/athletic = you should know that this rule exists because you need to be fucking physically fit to do things that involve being fucking physically fit, derp
intelligence = we don't want you holding a gun if you're a goddamned retard
criminal background = you could be joining the armed forced to escape the law, so this rule exists. notice there are reasons for all these things.
#1. Drug User. It's already a violation of civil rights making drugs illegal. The military doesn't discriminate against alchohol users, and alcohol can and does cause just as many problems as illegal drugs do.
#2. Fitness/Age: There are many many many jobs in the military that do not require the ability to run several miles and lift ones own body weight. So why discriminate against obese people or the elderly? Age cannot be helped (just like supposedly sexual orientation can't), so why discriminate against a 60 year old who wants to help as he can?
#3. Intelligence: There are many many many jobs in the military that don't involve the handling of weapons (in fact, most don't).
#4: Criminal background. You can get in the military with a criminal background, but good luck getting a occupational specialty requiring a security clearance. Why not let bygones be bygones?
Bottom line, in each case civil rights are being violated.
Repealing DADT was not on the basis that the policy was hurting the effectiveness of the military, it was repealed because it violated civil rights. Therefore, since civil rights are more important than system effectiveness, why are all of the discriminatory standards not removed? Edit: Hint: All standards are discriminatory by nature.
I don't know why that is so hard to understand. I am not crying about my brother not being a trooper, my point was that there is discrimination everywhere no one cares about (including myself). So why the big fanfare for gays?
Blah blah blah,
Because it is horrifyingly embarrassing that we (up until now) let dark-ages, draconian shit like not allowing perfectly healthy, intelligent, rational people who happen to like other mens' buttholes serve in our military to be perpetrated in a civil society, often claiming to be the best country in the world? I dunno, something about that, probably, and how absolutely stupid as fuck it was. Same reason we made a big fanfare for black people when they got allowed into the military, same reason we made a big fanfare for women when they got allowed into the military.
Because marijuana use is fucking illegal, dude. You're dumb. Do you want me to call the wahmbulance for you because your brother did something illegal and then wasn't allowed to join the armed forces? He should've known it was illegal. It isn't a "civil right" to be able to join the armed forces after doing something illegal. Jesus.
If any of you are naive enough to think of Bill Maher as an independent thinker, let alone a libertarian you don't know shit about ANYTHING.
Bullshit. Dogshit. PoGoStickFuck.
As I posted on another forum:
I have watched many of his shows; Politically Incorrect AND "REAL" TIME alike.
-He is indeed a political pundit. Anyone who has senators and congressmen on his show regularly either in person or via simulcast is not doing a comedy show, however much trying for laughs illicits.
-He does not retain his composure throughout his panel discussions. If you steal his thunder for even a second; he will turn on you like the spineless, sniveling, zionist, liberal weasel that he is. I have observed this countless times.
-He is not funny. Occasionally(and pretty rare) he comes up with a funny no doubt written by someone less smarmy and full of shit. So to call it a comedy show is indeed more resembling of a funny joke than anything from Billy Boy. The only exception is when he's had actual COMEDIANS on, like George Carlin.
-He used to call himself a Libertarian and I was embarrassed for the Libertarian Party. Bill Maher was and is the furthest thing from a libertarian.
He is as anti-capitalist as many of you cats and he's anti-2nd Amendment. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
He later stopped saying he was Libertarian once people started knowing who libertarians were and realizing that he would be called out on his shit.
I remember when he had Harry Browne on his show in 2000 and one woman brought up their differences on guns and he shut the fuck up and changed the subject.
-He was shitcanned from ABC for his remarks because we were trumatized as a nation. Now I am against ANY form of censorship; but the reasons were not as political as usual. We were all having very primal and raw feelings at that time, our blood boiled, and we were more united than we have been in my lifetime(albeit for a very brief moment).
-He is probably the biggest hypocrite in the media and I could give countless examples. But let's start with this one:
If he likes to segue into bashing religion(which is fine by me), why not attack Obama(since he won't attack him as a fuckin' socialist) on his very devout religious beliefs???
Oh and sidenote: He picked some really retarded people for his film and as a result really isn't anything special.
Fuck Bill Maher. He IS a liberal puppet and a cartoon of himself. That is, he IS a cartoon. And a painfully unfunny one at that.
I don't agree with Dak's views on gays in the military, but you need to stop acting like a dweeb.
First, it really is not a matter of civil rights that anyone can be barred from military service. That was my main point. Military service and civil rights don't have a single thing to do with each other.
As far as a major fanfare for women being in the military, there is a perfect example of how idiots triumphed over reason. I saw first hand on a daily basis for 5 years why women shouldn't be in the military. I only met two women out of probably a couple hundred the entire time I was in that I wouldn't have minded "going into combat with", and that was in the Marines. I am sure the ratio in the other services would be far worse.
Again, military service is not a civil right.
China is outmaneuvering the West economically, militarily, and geopolitically. They also maintain a policy of no gays in their military as well as very, very limited roles for women. Wonder why that is? Maybe because they care about winning as opposed to making sure every whining special interest group is appeased.
Is the regime oppressive with a poor track record of human rights etc etc etc? Sure. But my forte is military so I am going to focus on that for this particular issue, and China doesn't allow gays and women to serve for a reason, and that reason is because it is a tactical disadvantage.