The zogby poll showed only 26% specifically "agreed" with serving with gays....Is that survey flawed as well. Leaving 74% in the "other" category.

I'm amused at your C@P...
1652 Because of the possibility of Indian attack, a Massachusetts law required all blacks, Scotsmen, and Native Americans who lived with or were servants of English settlers to participate in military training.


They use the slaves and any other fodder when their asses were being threatened. LOL. But anyway. I never said I agreed with keeping the blacks out of the military, just asked "why", which you have yet to address. And it seems keeping them out was fluid. Homosexual activity has always been specifically excluded. Laws against Sodomy is almost worldwide, racism against blacks is a relatively isolated phenomena.

You have only pointed out 1 anecdotal story....Where is the link? Is it this guy? Who was called back by error but ended up getting the boot under DADT anyway? As a previous member of the military you should know how the hand sometimes doesn't know what the brain is doing.
Gay Military Times 070522knight

But there are still hundreds of soldiers being put out. The number has fluctuated since the policy was instituted. And here's a link that gives a history of homosexuality in the military....
Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Historical Context
"Throughout U.S. history, campaigns have purged military units of persons suspected of engaging in homosexual acts."

And it goes on from there.

There is a defect. And the medical communities only say that homosexuals aren't crazy and that homosexuality isn't pathogenic. I agree. The condition of being attracted to your own gender is not gonna kill anyone. But then again, this doesn't mean that there is nothing at all wrong with homosexual urges. The lack of pathology doesn't mean the lack of disorder. And if you seriously think there nothing aberrant about homosexuality, then your denial is seriously out of hand.

And again, I ask "why" would a majority be against blacks serving in the military. They may have a good reason. I have given MY reasons "why" I think DADT should remain. Your still farting the same bull**** I've asked you to substantiate since we started this exchange.

"Why"? There are many races. And there is NOTHING that one race can do that another can't. There is no reason for it to deemed Definition of aberrant - Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
"Why" do you say that?

Really? "Why"? Foot licking might be fun. Not my thing, but whatever. Wanting to smear feces and urine on each other is aberrant as well. But to each his or her own. But I doubt you'll find any of those in a "traditional marriage" manual.

I disagree. You're just making up stuff and making up your own argument. I don't know what you are arguing with yourself about. But homosexuality isn't aberrant because it is rare, it is aberrant because a human loving their own gender is...I've been here so many times I'm getting tired of typing it. You know why homosexuality is "f"d up.

Last I checked, a black guy and a racist won't have an issue with one of them being attracted to the other. The feelings involved are not comparable and that renders your analogy broken. A black person and a racist will be able to work out their differences which are based on an attitude that is false and as unsubstantiated as your many analogies. But a gay person will always like their own gender and that will always be an "f"'d up condition.
Homosexuality has been messed up a lot longer than blacks and whites came together in the U.S.

Actually that list isn't that long. And while it may work for them, our military has a different mission and demographic than other militaries.

No it seems the gays who are in denial about their obvious problem that are bigotted AND deluded into thinking that someone who finds homosexuality an abnormal human behavior that are the problem. Nearly the entire human race finds homosexuality "off". Even those fighting for "gay rights".
Hell even I would fight for "gay rights" but "marriage" ain't one of them.

It's funny the king of mundane calling my response mundane....The army again has many rules that are there to promote discipline. If a majority of the current servicemembers would rather not serve with openly gay comrades, the military must take that into consideration. They have to find out the "why's". In the case of black soldiers, well they are always "out" and the only reason I can think of not wanting to serve next to a black person would be because they are black... Sounds good, but not quite good enough for exclusion. But if you have servicemembers that don't want to shower with gay members, share bunks with gay servicemembers, or work in close quarters with gay servicemembers because they feel that the obvious defect of homosexuality and homosexual sodomy is something they don't want to be involved with, then you have to take that into consideration.

How does not wanting to be around gays make one a bigot. I say that trying to force society to accept the obvious defect of homosexuality as "normal" when it isn't makes many homosexuals bigots.

Nope. I can discuss it in the same terms that gives men and women separate accommodations in most units. But then homosexuals would scream that "separate but equal" bull****. WTF ever.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

well, no wonder fxashun can't get along with anybody in these discussions - he (quite obviously) doesn't know the definition of the word 'bigot.'

Definition of bigot - Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
I am aware. Never said I hated gay people. Never said they shouldn't have ANY legal recognition of their union. Never said they should be rounded up and hauled off.
So again, what part of my thinking there is no logical purpose to consider homosexuality a normal part of humanity and therefore disordered is bigoted?

But if avoiding being called a bigot means you have to become an idiot and believe any BS you are told...then yup, I'm a bigot and proud of it. Cause as far as THIS subject, until someone can separate homosexuality from the "other" sexual deviations using strictly physiological and biologic terms, legal and "social" aren't gonna cut it. Cause "legal" and "social" are far too malleable.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

these "separations" have been given to you many times.

you ignore them and repeat your same inane bigotry

very few are interested in playing your sophomoric word games and engage in your circular arguments...been there - done that

why would anybody who is sane expect you to respond any differently - we're not crazy - and that is one of the main symptoms of insanity - repeating yourself and expecting a different result

nobody is interested (except foundit who is always patient enough to point up idiocies and repetitions).

you have compared gays to people who have sex with animals, children and dead people - and mentally retarded people. Why is that NOT bigotry - but if we compare black people to animals, it IS bigotry? And bigotry IS hate.

No they haven't. Not without using consent and legal. And they've never been done here. I'm curious how you can do it. A simple link would suffice. Do you have one of the posts? I honestly don't recall seeing it.

First we have to verify that it IS bigotry and not just you having your feelings hurt by a truthful observation. If a person is born without a leg, is it bigoted to call it a defect, or is it just telling the truth?

You never have Tris. I can't recall ever seeing a post to me that wasn't a personal attack, whining, or as you are doing here, referring to arguments that don't even exist.

What is there to say differently about homosexuality. The science is out, it's been around forever, and it's still abnormal. Any argument is gonna be repetitive...From both sides. Your point?

Somehow I think Foundit just likes to type. His posts are an adventure.

Calling something bigotry doesn't make it so. I can clearly show why I feel homosexuality is similar to other sexual deviations using the same arguments used to justify homosexuality. Now I have avoided doing that here on this site since I said I would, but if you can't let it go, that seems to be your problem. I still have yet to see where being honest and telling how you feel based on factual information is bigotry though...Especially by the definition that I linked to.
So again, I ask you, assuming I simply feel that homosexuality is just a gestational aberration that creates a human with an abnormal sexual deviation that urges their natural instinct to partner in a direction that is unsupported by our bodies and biology and therefore should not be allowed to call the homosexual union a "marriage"...How is that bigoted? I'll wait.

If you feel black people are similar to animals, I'd be curious to read that. And I'd like to see how you do that and separate other races from black people as well. There are many races and mixtures of them. That would make for some interesting reading. It might be best to do it in a new thread though. It's kinda off topic here.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

I don't feel that way

but there are certainly many people who do believe that

I believe comes about because statistically blacks are more prone to violence and crime and are not prone to working at a job steadily, preferring to take what they need to sustain themselves rather than work for it.

My last post on this subject...But that doesn't make sense. Animals HAVE to work to survive. And since crime and violence are pretty much limited to "humans", I don't see how that supports the comparison of calling black people "animals" as a race...

But "homosexual" describes a human that is attracted to his/her own gender. You can make observations that accurately describe them as a group. All black people aren't criminals, but if you don't have an attraction to your own gender, you ain't a homosexual. But if you do.....

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

semantics games again?

violence is strictly a human thing?
I thought that violence and attacking other animals for what they need is exactly HOW animals eat.
And I guess I should have written "indiscriminate" crime - just as all animals will attack another animal 'just because.'
True not all black people are criminals - but since the majority are, it would seem that it would be sort of like how most animals attack others to eat, yet there are SOME animals that are vegetarians and which DON'T attack other animals.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)

We have PM's and the Shoutbox to "get along". The purpose of "debate" is to express your ideas and thoughts. No point of having a "debate site" if everyone is just gonna agree. If you don't like a person's position, express "why" you disagree instead of calling someone a homophobe, bigot, hypocrite, ahole, etc.

Name calling and foot stomping and saying someone is wrecking the website is childish.

__________________
Even if you hold the minority opinion, stick to your guns and go against the flow if that's what you truly believe. (CnRedd)