I am not a big proponent of heterosexuals openly serving in the military.
Hey DaBlade, don't you mean that you are not a proponent of homosexuals in the military?
The purpose of the military is to kill our nation's enemies and to blow sh*& up, and I just feel that this activity is "asexual" in nature. I would think that any public displays of affection between a man and a woman gets in the way of this mission.
That said, I recognize that "war is hell", and our ladies and gentlemen serving us honorably occasionally need a little "R&R". "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy", right? I just think that "Hotlips and Frank" should take "it" to the supply closet. If they don't tell, I sure the hell ain't askin'.
I would also be in favor of this same policy to be in place with respect to homosexuals in the military. I don't really care if Hawkeye has a willing Radar bent over in the latrene, I just don't see the need for this "serving openly" caveat. What does that mean anyways? I guess I just don't understand how putting up chiffon and lace curtains in the barracks will help in our war efforts.
This repeal of DADT, with amnesty for illegal future democrat voters next up - illustrates the priorities of Obama, Reid, Pelosi and company. With the economy in tatters and joblessness and hopelessness on the rise, they choose to spend their time on this crap.
The lame duck dems continue to ignore the message in November elections by perpetrating mass policy rape against us by jamming through - or attempting to jam through - all of their twisted "holiday tree" ornaments.
Post a Comment