In article <slrn3vsbgo5q5.b485.kybyrd@no-spam>, kybyrd@no-spam
(Karen Y Byrd) writes:
>On 08 Jul 2003 15:43:29 GMT, John H. Fisher <taxservice@no-spam>
>wrote:
>>In article <slrn3vsbglgj7.2e2k.kybyrd@no-spam>,
>kybyrd@no-spam
>>(Karen Y Byrd) writes:
>>
>>>
>>>On 07 Jul 2003 22:56:36 GMT, SouthPhila <southphila@no-spam> wrote:
>>>>Wasn't Clinton more supportive of Gay rights than any other person
>>>>who became president???
>>>
>>>He reneged and backed down from his initial support of open
>>>gays in the military. I will never forget that and that's a huge
>>>reason why I decided I would never vote for him again.
>>
>>That's still far more than any other president would've/could've
>>done without insuring unelectibility.
>
>But he broke his word, John, that's my point. Why even say it
>in the first place if you have no forethought, or courage or
>stamina to bring it to fruition? He went into it clueless, apparently,
>and we came out with, "Don't Ask. Don't Tell", which hasn't worked.
>
>A brave person, which Clinton isn't, wouldn't have cared about
>electability.
****Wise leaders realize that without the power they cannot lead!!!
Two steps forward, and one step back, in more in the norm of
making progress than just jumping in head first.
>> That would have benefited
>>no one. Progess is quite slow, at times, and we take what we
>>can get when we can get it. Suicide is a long term solution to
>>a short time problem (no matter how long the problem exists)!!!=(:
>>(MVHO)
>
>When Truman decreed that the military should be racially de-segregated
>he didn't waffle because right-wing factions and the military
>would be upset
>about it. Obviously that transition wasn't easy. It's still
>a work in progress. But Truman did it because black people
>had served with honor over and over again and it was the right
>thing to do.
>
>There are thousands of gay veterans, thousands serving right now.
>Let them do so as they are. Openly.
I agree!!! However, I perceive a difference between "Openly" and
"Flam"boy"antly"!!! Or, should I say "Flamgalantly"???=:) Many
thoughts come to mine - sex change, serving in drag, and other
incidentals where a certain military discipline would be difficult, or
impossible, to achieve.
>>>It's funny how people forget that fact and now he's some kind
>>>of savior to gay people.
>>
>>I cannot separate (in my mind) gay people from the rest of the
>>population.
>
>As long as gay people are discriminated against, which continues, they
>live with 2nd class citizenship.
Forget the gay people, in the military, there are other elements of
discrimination which have to do with rank, color, nationality!!!! Sometimes,
the only time those things are forgotten is when push comes to shove 'n'
bullets are flying overhead, or right at one, and the will to live becomes more
important than all of our prejudices!!=(:
>> It would be nice to have "All for one, and one for
>>all"!!!=:) It hasn't been that way since before Adam and Eve.
>>Even the Lord had fallen angels!!!=:) I still feel that more people
>>have/had a chance at freedom, and advancement, under Clinton,
>>than might have been the case (past and present) than many other
>>would be leaders in any of the parties.
>
>But, John, he did it by sleath and not in a high profile way.
>And he signed the "marriage is for straight people only" act.
>Something else I will never forgive him for either.
>
>>>> Although Clinton is quite liberal, in many
>>>>areas, he was more conservative than many republicans. Fiscal
>>>>responsibility, preservation of rights, prosperity of the individual, and
>>>>peace efforts, were highlighted by his administration.
>>>
>>>I wasn't sleeping for the 8 years he was in office. But his
>>>back-pedaling for the reasons I cite above isn't a small issue.
>>>It was one involving resolve and courage.
>>
>>??????????? I see it as a difference between "resolve and courage"
>>and an act of suicide!!!=:)
>
>John, someone with courage, has to say, sooner or later, "Look, this
>isn't fair!" Gay people have given their lives for this country.
>So let's let serve in an open fashion.
I believe that was Clinton's perception,as well!!! I believe he went as far
as he felt he could at the time. It would be nice to have the law changed
so that he could run again!!! Perhaps then he would come across for you.
Barring that, there could be hope in Hillary!!!!=:)
>>>>I'd be surprised to find many gay people who would be shocked about
>>>>the places in which people may have indulged in the BJ bit. I'd be
>>>>shocked if many of them would admit their practices to their own parents.
>>>>I'd expect lying to be the norm for those who indulge in many practices
>>>>which some of society has always frowned upon. The lie is likely a noble
>>>>one, in view of those who might be hurt by the truth. There was a time
>>>>when guilt by association was not uncommon. In the military service, it
>>>>could have resulted in ones dismissal.
>>>
>>>It still does! "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has been a dismal failure.
>>>
>>The only instances where I am aware of "failure" is where the rules were
>>challenged.
>
>More gay people are being booted out of the military now because
>they are *looking* for every excuse to boot them out. Any
>degree of "off" behavior.
***So I hear, in today's news, there was an interview with a gay
discharge Lt. Colonel who (IMVHO) was unjustly put out of the
service because of faulty military justice. I never lived under that
rule so I can offer no expert opinion. I've watched the numbers.
The intent of a law is one thing. Implementation, and Catch-22's
are others. 'tis the Catch 22's that bring about a result, such as
the theft of the Presidency in 2000, which cause much distress.
I really don't think there will be any kind of remedy with the SORRY
which now has the most control over our backward destiny!!!=(:
>> The "don't ask, don't tell" policy was the best available move
>>at the time. It remains that way for the individual indulgences of gay, bi,
>>and heterosexuals. (JSMOMVHO)
>
>Americans should just GROW UP and deal with gays in the military
>who want to BE IN the military.
>
>If the British can manage it why can't we?
>
****Heck, the British are older than us!! I wasn't aware of their policy but
I'll try to find the time to do some research!!! Is it a recent
development???
How did it come about???
"Too soon old 'n' too late smart!"
"Jack" - John H. Fisher - TaxService@no-spam
Philadelphia, Pa - Atlantic City, NJ - West Wildwood, NJ
My Newsgroups & Boards at: http://members.aol.com/TaxService/index.html
Where Ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise!=:)
On 09 Jul 2003 17:03:55 GMT,
John H. Fisher <taxservice@no-spam> wrote:
>>There are thousands of gay veterans, thousands serving right now.
>>Let them do so as they are. Openly.
>
>I agree!!! However, I perceive a difference between "Openly" and
>"Flam"boy"antly"!!! Or, should I say "Flamgalantly"???=:) Many
>thoughts come to mine - sex change, serving in drag, and other
>incidentals where a certain military discipline would be difficult, or
>impossible, to achieve.
This is just another excuse.
Come on. Drag queens are not likely candidates to volunteer
for military service. The gay people who are likely to
join are similar to straight people who join. Pretty conservative.
Pretty patriotic. Wanting to serve their country because they
love their country. Most people who join the military, I daresay,
have a pretty good idea of the dicipline required no matter
what their sexual orientation is!
What you've said above does a disservice to the honor shown
by those gay veterans who have, either made the ultimate sacrifice
by dying in combat or on active duty, or those who
have committed time and and energy toward the defense of this
country.
As a sexual minority I really take offense at what you imply
above.
>>If the British can manage it why can't we?
>>
>****Heck, the British are older than us!! I wasn't aware of their policy but
>I'll try to find the time to do some research!!! Is it a recent
>development???
>How did it come about???
It's very recent. Possibly the policy was changed in the last year
or so. I don't know the details about how it came to pass.
KByrd