***Official*** CNN/YouTube GOP debate

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
They should just remove don't ask don't tell. If someone joins up and they show up to a military event with a male partner or they talk about having relations with another man just get used to it.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
They should just remove don't ask don't tell. If someone joins up and they show up to a military event with a male partner or they talk about having relations with another man just get used to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think its just that simple?

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
They should just remove don't ask don't tell. If someone joins up and they show up to a military event with a male partner or they talk about having relations with another man just get used to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think its just that simple?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the gays who enter the military will be harassed and it will be a big issue and people will throw a hissy fit about everything. The military will be pissed about it and so will a lot of other people. A lot of gay people who are open will be take serious harassment and it won't be easy for anyone.

[mjkidd]

[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, worked for the Spartans...

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, worked for the Spartans...

[/ QUOTE ]

Michigan State has a gay only line?

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
They should just remove don't ask don't tell. If someone joins up and they show up to a military event with a male partner or they talk about having relations with another man just get used to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think its just that simple?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the gays who enter the military will be harassed and it will be a big issue and people will throw a hissy fit about everything. The military will be pissed about it and so will a lot of other people. A lot of gay people who are open will be take serious harassment and it won't be easy for anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]


CC,

You ever been in the military? If you have you know that for singles who live on base, you usually have a roommate. Naturally they now assign you one of your same sex. So is the military just supposed to say tough [censored] to the joe who gets assigned a gay roomie of the same sex but violently objects to same? Or should they also assign housing by sexual preference, in which case one gay man might object to being assigned with a certain other, when there really aren't any other available choices. And what of family housing? An unmarried gay guy supposed to get a house instead of a barracks billet with his significant other when same isn't offered (assuming still the case) to unmarried straights?

This is a lot more complicated that you are making it out to be even aside from other problems.

[JackWhite]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sort of wondering why it matters what the political affiliation of the questioners is? I agree its pretty lame that CNN claims not know. But



[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to hijack this debate about homosexuality, but since this is the debate thread, I thought I'd give more info on some of the questioners. It wasn't only the gay General who endorsed Hillary, we are finding out that a bunch of the YouTube questioners have endorsed Democratic candidates or currently or formerly worked for Democrats.

1. The Gay General Kerr endorsed Hillary
2. The guy who asked the qustion about blacks and the GOP supports Edwards.
3. Adam Florzak asked a question about social security. He works for Democratic Senator Durbin of Illinois.
4. Mark Strauss who asked if Ron Paul would run as an independent has endorsed Democrat Bill Richardson
5. Ted Faturos who asked about corn subsidies used to work for Democratic Congresswoman Jane Harman
6. The woman who asked the abortion question has endorsed John Edwards (she has several YouTube videos proclaiming her support of Edwards).
7. David Cerone, who asked the Log Cabin Republican question has endorsed Obama.
8. The woman who asked about lead in Chinese toys supports Edwards.

When CNN re-aired the debate, they edited out the General Kerr question because they were apparently embarrassed that a Democratic plant was allowed to ask a question. If they continue that policy, they will have to edit out 1/3 of the debate.

All CNN had to do was watch some of these questioners other YouTube videos (where they declared there political allegiance), or done a quick google search to discover this info. I'm not saying that these questions weren't legit, but don't you think that the audience deserved to be told that a bunch of the people asking the questions are Democrats? After all, this is a Republican debate. While we're at it, did CNN allow a host of questioners who have endorsed Republicans to ask questions on the Democratic YouTube debate?

[mjkidd]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
They should just remove don't ask don't tell. If someone joins up and they show up to a military event with a male partner or they talk about having relations with another man just get used to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think its just that simple?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the gays who enter the military will be harassed and it will be a big issue and people will throw a hissy fit about everything. The military will be pissed about it and so will a lot of other people. A lot of gay people who are open will be take serious harassment and it won't be easy for anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]


CC,

You ever been in the military? If you have you know that for singles who live on base, you usually have a roommate. Naturally they now assign you one of your same sex. So is the military just supposed to say tough [censored] to the joe who gets assigned a gay roomie of the same sex but violently objects to same? Or should they also assign housing by sexual preference, in which case one gay man might object to being assigned with a certain other, when there really aren't any other available choices. And what of family housing? An unmarried gay guy supposed to get a house instead of a barracks billet with his significant other when same isn't offered (assuming still the case) to unmarried straights?

This is a lot more complicated that you are making it out to be even aside from other problems.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is it any more complicated than if you substitute "black" for "gay" and 1950 for present day?

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
They should just remove don't ask don't tell. If someone joins up and they show up to a military event with a male partner or they talk about having relations with another man just get used to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You honestly think its just that simple?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the gays who enter the military will be harassed and it will be a big issue and people will throw a hissy fit about everything. The military will be pissed about it and so will a lot of other people. A lot of gay people who are open will be take serious harassment and it won't be easy for anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, you admit that there will be a high level of disruption, but you want to introduce that into military units (especially combat units)? How would deal with sort of disruption as a Unit Commanding Officer? For instance, do you allow openly gay military members use open showers for instance? If so, will you allow male and female service members to use open showers together as well?

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So should we create whole units of personnel that are only homosexuals? Is that the integration you are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, worked for the Spartans...

[/ QUOTE ]

Michigan State has a gay only line?

[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, I laughed very hard at this. NH Copernicus.