Let's see if the murder rates go up within the military ranks now that they or out.....or will the individuals hold to the dont ask dont tell policies anyways out of fear of hate crimes against them.

Or . . . let's see if the suicide rates go down within the military ranks now that they are out. Are we actively looking for hypothetical reasons for why this might be a bad thing? Do we really care that much about murders in the military, or are we still just looking for reasons to repress gay people? LGBT people are adult and willing to take responsibility for any risk they may perceive in coming out.

those are policies and procedures that should be addressed....not whether someone is openly gay or not.....really some people

Seems to me that these policies and procedures have been getting addressed for some years now. This is how America wants it. I think it's a great thing. "A couple of my best friends", I guess there's a point there . . . Nobody is demanding that anybody out themselves. Those who want the right to live openly and honestly now have that right. They can decide for themselves whether they want to risk being the victim of a hate crime. Afro-Americans don't really have that choice, but they do now have that right. I think they're the better for it. Whether or not someone is openly gay or not is the entire point of it.

It seems to work fine for the militaries of a whole bunch of countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_military_service
I counted 41. Hopefully, America isn't so "exceptional" that what works for much of the rest of the world won't work here.

The point was I hear some of their worries about being victims at some point....or have been at some point.....and the point was it doesn't really matter if the military allows openness or not what needs to be addressed in the ranks is bullying period towards them whether they are open suspected or otherwise.....because that is what causes the suicide rate amongst them that so obviously pointed out......I don't believe this rule whether enacted or taken away will affect the suicide rates within the ranks of the military one whit

Yep. RIP Don't ask, don't tell.

Hey that must mean it is time to Ask and Tell!!

Or . . . let's see if the suicide rates go down within the military ranks now that they are out. Are we actively looking for hypothetical reasons for why this might be a bad thing? Do we really care that much about murders in the military, or are we still just looking for reasons to repress gay people? LGBT people are adult and willing to take responsibility for any risk they may perceive in coming out.

many of those have militaries that can hardly be compared to the US military,, others have CONDITIONS,,,

but my only objection is forcing people to shower with others with potential attraction towards them

if they have a 'shower alone' option, as they do in Germany,,, available for those who are uncomfortable showering with someone who may be 'being aroused' at their site,,,that would be GREAT(of course, in Germany, only the homosexual has that option, not the heterosexual...but oh well)

Israel's military cant be compaired to the US military? Since when?

Military officials in Canada, Germany, Israel, and Sweden said that the presence of homosexuals has not created problems in the military because homosexuality is not an issue in the military or in society at large. We were told that a key reason the presence of homosexuals is not an issue in these countries’ militaries is that few homosexual military personnel openly identify their sexual orientation, as discussed earlier. For example, a 1984 report on homosexuality by Sweden’s Parliament stated that “the silence surrounding homosexuals and homosexuality is virtually total.” Swedish military personnel at all levels agreed that this silence is pervasive in the military.
Military officials from each country said that, on the basis of their experience, the inclusion of homosexuals in their militaries has not adversely affected unit readiness, effectiveness, cohesion, or morale. For example, Israeli officials said that homosexuals have performed as well as heterosexuals and have served successfully in all branches of the military since 1948. In Canada, where problems in these areas were predicted, military officials said none had materialized since the revocation of the policy banning homosexuals. They attributed the lack of problems to the military leadership’s support of the new policy and the military’s ability to keep a low profile on the issue. German military officials said that their policies prevent problems because they allow for flexibility in dealing with homosexual individuals, and their service is restricted if necessary.

so your thinking Israel would have a chance against the US? the only country that might give us a good fight would be China...

Israel's military cant be compaired to the US military? Since when?

While this is nice and all as those that serve don't have to be ashamed of who they are anymore, I think it's a smokescreen for the real problem here. That is to say why we're even fighting to start with. THAT is what needs addressing more than any of this other stuff.

i thought repealing datd was a mistake. not because i don't want to see gays equally treated in this country, hell i'm all for gay marriage, but because of the unique situtation that exists in our military which i'm not about to get into again. but the fact is, dadt is gone, history, kaput. time to put it and all talk about gay inequality in the past. anybody who's served in the military, especially as an officer, learned early on that you present your argument until the commander makes his decision at which point the arguing ends and the mission begins as the commander decided. my guess is the troops salute, say 'yes sir' and otherwise will do a better job of this than many folks here.

I just cant get the image of two hott female soldiers out there in the desert in the shower together lathering eachother up........

There were so many problems with former Sen. Rick Santorum's bumbling response to a question on the military's newly erstwhile "don't ask, don't tell" policy, so many angles from which to start an attack on the spectacle, that it's impossible to pick a place to begin. Express dismay over Republican audiences' bizarre hootin' and hollerin' of late? Been there, done that. Note how the GOP candidates insist on doubling down on a position increasingly out of step with broader public opinion? Check.

Anyway, here's what happened, according to a transcript:

QUESTION via YouTube from Stephen Hill, a soldier who's currently serving in Iraq: In 2010, when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was, because I'm a gay soldier and I didn't want to lose my job.

My question is, under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress that's been made for gay and lesbian soldiers in the military?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BOOING)

SANTORUM: Yeah, I — I would say any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military. And the fact that they're making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to -- to -- and removing "don't ask/don’t tell" I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military's job is to do one thing, and that is to defend our country.

We need to give the military, which is all-volunteer, the ability to do so in a way that is most efficient at protecting our men and women in uniform.

(APPLAUSE)

And I believe this undermines that ability.

(APPLAUSE)


MEGYN KELLY of Fox News: So what -- what -- what would you do with soldiers like Stephen Hill? I mean, he's — now he's out. He's — you know, you saw his face on camera. When he first submitted this video to us, it was without his face on camera. Now he's out. So what would you do as president?

SANTORUM: I think it's -- it's -- it's -- look, what we're doing is playing social experimentation with -- with our military right now. And that's tragic.

I would -- I would just say that, going forward, we would -- we would reinstitute that policy, if Rick Santorum was president, period.

That policy would be reinstituted. And as far as people who are in -- in -- I would not throw them out, because that would be unfair to them because of the policy of this administration, but we would move forward in -- in conformity with what was happening in the past, which was, sex is not an issue. It is -- it should not be an issue. Leave it alone, keep it -- keep it to yourself, whether you’re a heterosexual or a homosexual.

That a Republican endorsed "don't ask, don't tell" isn't surprising. But there was something especially crass about Santorum's reply. His remark that "any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military" completely misses the point and continues his bizarre refocusing of the gay-rights debate on sex.

And he doesn't know how profoundly insulting it is to gays and lesbians to call requiring the military to afford them basic respect a "social experiment." (Besides, which is the more dubious social experiment: sexually cleansing our armed forces, or having them reflect society's inexorable march toward fully accepting gay men and women?)

Worst, watching Santorum and other Republicans stand stoically while a handful of debate-goers shout their disgust with a homosexual soldier leaves the impression that the GOP candidates have more outwardly embraced anti-gay prejudice to win over conservative voters. This kind of behavior makes it difficult to take social conservatives at their word when they insist that their opposition to, say, same-sex marriage is rooted respect for a longstanding institution instead of prejudice.

As for Santorum, it looks as though his Google problem isn't going anywhere soon.

Apparently, Rick Santorum has the same problem with gay men. From last night's GOP debate:

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/09/gop-debate-rick-santorum-dont-ask-dont-tell.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+OpinionLa+%28L.A.+Times+-+Opinion+Blog%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

He apparently believes that the repeal of DADT gives soldiers the right to have torrid sex affairs while on duty.