YOUR COMMENTS

The voices of UnionLeader.com readers: To join UnionLeader.com's discussion of the news, use the form below.

NOTE: If you have read this article before, you may not be seeing the newest comments. Press F5. Or click "Refresh" or "Reload" at the top of this page while holding down Ctrl. All approved postings will appear. (Another option for Firefox users is the Clear Cache add-on.)

Somebody tell [Jim, Manchester, Ward 9] that he's not alone in his readiness to go to war for his religion.

We are fighting people who think like that in Afghanistan and Iraq. Religious warriors compromise most of the world's terrorists. Real problem children!
- Charles Beamont, Manchester

Jim, Manchester, Ward 9 is. "Ready to go to war," ha ha ha ha!

Well there Jim, it would be you against the US Government, and if you make it, maybe you can wind up in a maxi cell just with Ed Browne! I'm sure you two would have endless happy conversations:)
- David, Manchester

I personally have nothing against the gay lifestyle, BUT, there is no way I would want to serve with gays in the military. (Yes, before all you Libs call me a chickenhawk, bigot or any other silly names, I did serve, in combat in Vietnam, but that was a long time ago)

In this day and age, we continue to see groups of these PC and protected species suddenly protected by the constitution and operating under equality and all that blather.

How long will it be before we see all the media attention to the lack of promotions to gays, and how many gays are KIA in comparison to the percentage of gays in the population? And then we also have the possibility of gay groups forming and hampering discipline as we did during my time with drug addicts and radical members of racial groups. Those problems were eventually solved with proper leadership, discipline and plenty of courtsmartial and discharges, but they seriously hampered the operation of the military.

Yes, I saw the long list of pansy countries that allow gays to serve. Big deal. As one poster already wrote, we have the most efficient, effective and hard fighting military in the world....why change it for the purpose of satisfying the far left radical
gay fringe?

And as Tom wrote, gays can serve already, they just need to keep their lifestyle to themselves.

If it happens we can deal with it, I personally just don't think it's a smart move, unless of course you are looking to cash in on some of that radical gay fringe campaign cash.
- Melvin, Keene

Cindy in Milford, You need to get over yourself, there was nothing that deb wrote that was bigoted. The man in the bar should have kept his sex life to himself, but instead he felt the need to tell the world about his proclivities.

Just because Deb doesn't hold your point of view doesn't make her a bigot, but it seems that you have a fascists bent where as everybody should agree with you.
- Ron, Manchester

Tina, Merrimack, do you have anything to contribute to this dialogue, or are you one of the many who simply lurk around these boards to try to impress readers with your superior wit and intelligence? The two gentlemen I addressed appeared to believe that repeal of DADT would make life just wonderful for homosexual servicemembers when just the opposite is true. Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

And Tina, go suck an egg.
- Whitey, Strafford

Whitey

I realize Congress needs to change the law.


I mentioned that Congress has the power "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces"


Congress and NOT the President has the final say dealing with homosexuals serving in the United States military.


If our country wants more people to want to be soldiers, we need to treat our soldiers and veterans well.

Our soldiers have often received lousy health care at military hospitals.

Our veterans have often received lousy health care at VA Hospitals. I have known about veterans often receiving lousy health care at VA Hospitals for more than 12 years.

People should read about how the federal government has forced soldiers to serve after their contracts have expired.

People should read about living conditions on military bases in our country.

Soldiers and veterans should receive better health care and better health insurance than members of Congress. Soldiers and veterans should be able to get their health care at any health clinics and hospitals they want.

Soldiers should not be forced to serve after their contracts have expired.

Living conditions on military bases need to be improved.



Jim, Manchester, Ward 9

Recruitment standards might have not been lowered if qualified homosexuals had been allowed to serve in the United States military openly starting after our Marines were murdered in Lebanon.

Many homosexuals have died for our Republic. It angers me that our country show contempt for their sacrifice by discriminating against homosexuals.

I am a heterosexual who has homosexual friends.
- Ken Stremsky, Manchester, NH

T Jellison in Dover,
Every society and religion that has ever embraced homosexuality has gone extinct. In that light, wow can you call gay marriage progress? Would you call incestuous marriage or polygamous marriage progress? What's the difference?

Dave in Sandwich,
You are a religious bigot. Putting the shoe on the other foot solves nothing. Why do hate God?
- Jim, Manchester, Ward 9

Deb,

Maybe you should learn about a place before you go there since Ogunquit is the gayest place north of Cape Cod. I served honorablly in the military for 9 years and left as a Captian. The reason why I left was because I was outed and command thought I was unfit to lead because I was gay. Never mind the 2 purple hearts I have from serving in Iraq or the various medals I have earned. I never flaunted my sexuality and knowing other gay soliders, we hide our sexuality as much as possible so that we can continue the job that we love while the straight ones try and flaunt how "straight" they are. We don't go into the military to find guys, we have no problem doing that in our personal lives, we join the miltary to protect and defend that nation that we love. It's bigiots like you Deb that causes divides in this country. Let us serve with honor and dignity as we so wish to do.
- Josh, Manchester NH

Bernie in Lowell says the right to freeedom of sexual orientation trumps the right to freedom of religion. Over my dead body Bernie. I will go to war with you and your ilk before I leave this country. You ready to rumble?
- Jim, Manchester, Ward 9

Cindy in Milford,
Your comment at Luke in Bristol is 10 times more hateful than anything Deb in Derry said. If you think gays are not way, way too pushy with their agenda sometimes you are off your rocker.
- Jim, Manchester, Ward 9

What about voluntary, partial segregation? Have soldiers register primary, secondary, and tertiary preference for unit type (male hetero only, gay men only, mixed men, hetero female only, lesbians only, mixed female, hetero mixed gender, homosexual mixed gender, and un-segregated) then try, but don't guarantee, placement in the preferred unit types (larger MO's like infantry being more likely to have preferred placement, specialized MO's less likely to have segregated units).

Just a thought...
- Jim, Manchester, Ward 9

Whitey, Strafford Duh thanks for that one, you have a marvelous grasp of the obvious.
- Tina, Merrimack

A Constitutional amendment preventing any state from disallowing gays to marry is next. It is being worked on in Federal Courts in California as I write, by the two lawyers who were on opposite sides in Bush vs Gore. Two of the best legal minds in America.

Sorry rednecks, sorry Deb, sorry Spike, your type can monkey wrench our politics, but you people will not stop progress.
- T. Jellison, Dover

Haven't the ridiculous attitudes of bigots been shoved in our faces long enough?
I am just sick of hearing them cry about how they hate this person or that person.
You live in America, so just shut up and let your neighbor be.
You must deal with the fact that there are and always will be people who don't like bigots and no amount of laws is going to make them like you or for them to stop expressing their views towards you.
- Dave, Sandwich

When I was in the military, they gave me a medal for killing two men, and a discharge for loving one. - Leonard Matlovich, a gay Vietnam Veteran (1943-1988)
- Kidzo, Manchester

The prejudiced don't seem to understand: The age of bigotry is ending!

That means if you can't tolerate your fellow man no matter his sexual behavior, we don't want you in the services so get out! And for that matter, we really don't want you in the USA!

I hope certain religious types are listening.
- Bernie, Lowell

Deb in Derry is exactly the kind of bigot that Roger alerts us to in the first post.

She is lost in her own little limited world and invents ugly visions of people she does not know or understand. Ignorance is a sad thing when it makes you become hateful of others.

I have to laugh though, she's in Ogunquit, the gayest town North of Cape Cod, and surrounded on all sides by gays, and the only one she is aware of is one tipsy patron, probably trying to hit on her husband. Lol!

Luke in Bristol you not worth comment, you just need to go away.
- Cindy, Milford

Mike, Concord and Ken Stremsky, Manchester (and anyone else here who favors the repeal of DADT), I hope you realize that if the president repeals DADT, it will make life more difficult for openly homosexual servicemembers. Under DADT, if a member is found to be homosexual, he/she is simply separated. If, however, DADT is repealed, that same servicemember could be prosecuted under existing federal and military laws with punishments up to and including Bad Conduct or Dishonorable Discharge, fines and imprisonment.

You might want to re-think both your position and your preference for remedial action. The only way you can get what you are advocating is for Congress to change the law.
- Whitey, Strafford

If someone suggests a sexual encounter, you can simply say no or yes. It all depends on your own inclination.

I suspect that the people complaining about rights for gays aren't sure of their own sexuality.

For what it is worth, I served on active duty from 1961 to 1969 and I encountered gays in the military, then. As long as they did their job I didn't care what race, color, creed or sexual orientation they had.
- Cliff, Manchester

Hasn't the deviant behavior of homosexuals been shoved in our faces enough?
I am just sick of hearing them cry how they have no rights.
You are already in the military, so just shut up and serve.
You are not there for sex.
You must deal with the fact that there are and always will be people who don't like gays and no amount of laws is going to make them like you or for them to stop expressing their views towards you.
- Luke, Bristol

@ - Tom, Campton...you're kidding right. They are not WELCOME as you say...they get kicked out if the truth about their sexuality is known. And @ - Deb, Derry...they wanna talk about it because they want to be accepted for who they are; have you ever come across a heterosexual couple that felt unaccepted because of their sexuality? Not likely; that's why you don't here them speak about it the same way.
- cheryl, Derry

Great Editorial Ms.Parker, Great followup post Vince Milano (sorry don't know your rank)!

Mr Stremsky in Manchester,
I don't beleive that we have enough information yet to know if a change like the President has discussed would postively or negatively affect recruitment rates and recruit quality. Recruit quailifaction standards were lowered to get more troops for the war, not because of gays gays.

Deb in Derry,
I appreciate your point. My answer to that question is that there is difference between sex and sexual orientation. Sex is private and personnal. Orientation is not.

Lastly,
I hope DOD recommends that the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns of the War on Terror be wrapped up before any replacement policy for DADT is implemented - the war theater is no place to test new social engineering policies. The guys overthere are under enough stress with the rules of engagement and don't need comrades 'coming out.' Also, that gives more time for re-education of the younger generation of recruits to be more tolerant and respectful of others.
- Jim, Manchester, Ward 9

Mike, Concord - Thanks for writing.


People may do the following search on google - have military standards been reduced to reach enlistment goals.

I think most soldiers are qualified to be in the United States military.

I think enlistment standards have been reduced because qualified homosexuals are being discriminated against.


Allowing qualified homosexuals to serve in the military increases the odds that more people will want to join the United States military reducing the probability that enlistment standards will be reduced anymore.


Most people in the military are good people. Some people in the military are not good people.

If heterosexuals do things they should not do in the United States military, punish them.


If homosexuals do things they should not do in the United States military, punish them.

You may read about rape and other problems that take place in the United States military.


Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives Congress the power to decide if married homosexuals and other homosexuals are allowed to serve in the United States military because Congress has the power

"To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces"


Do you want our country to be better able to get more qualified people to join the United States military?

Do you want to reduce the probability of a military draft?

I think the military draft is a very bad idea.
- Ken Stremsky, Manchester, NH

" If you feel that a gay service member has crossed what ever line of personal comfort you have file an E.O. Complaint of sexual harassment. Remember your classes on this, "it is not what you do or say but the way the other person feels about it". Use the PC system set up by the same people pushing this against them.
- Vince Milano, Epping NH"

Hey Vince, I would go a step further. All of you female service members heed Vince's advice. Any time a male soldier crosses that personal line, like asks you out and it makes you uncomfortable...file a complaint. Any time a male soldier says or does anything that makes you uncomfortable in any way, file a complaint. A joke or a reference to the SI Swimsuit issue? File a complaint. Lets use the infrastructure in place to ensure an environment of equality. Same with male soldiers. Lets have equality, lets just not go out of our way to file complaints against gay soldiers -- unless there is a real issue. Lets not "use the system" to get rid of people because we disagree with a policy. Any soldier who hits on anyone and makes that person uncomfortable...thats an issue. Mix up gays and straight people in there all you want. And Vince if you think that certain "people" are going to get promoted undeserdedly then I suggest you speak with your commanding officers. I did not do 22 like you, but while I may have a seen a few promotions I might not have agreed with, I did not see a pattern of promotion of "certain" people.

Countries that do not allow gay people to serve openly:
Cuba
China
Egypt
Greece
Iran
Jamaica
North Korea
Pakistan
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Serbia
Singapore
South Korea
Syria
Turkey
Venezuela
Yemen
United States – Don't ask, don't tell

Lets join the other list of countries that do:

Argentina
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Bermuda
Brazil
Canada
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Lithuania
Luxembourg
The Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Peru
Philippines
Romania
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay
- Mike, Concord

To expand on my earlier post, here is some additional data provided in the other paper's forum:

U.S. Code: Title 10 Subtitle A Part II Chapter 37 § 654
Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces

Some excerpts:

(2) There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces.

(3) ... it lies within the discretion of the Congress to establish qualifications for and conditions of service in the armed forces.

(8) Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life in that ... the military society is characterized by its own laws, rules, customs, and traditions, including numerous restrictions on personal behavior, that would not be acceptable in civilian society.

(12) The worldwide deployment of United States military forces, the international responsibilities of the United States, and the potential for involvement of the armed forces in actual combat routinely make it necessary for members of the armed forces involuntarily to accept living conditions and working conditions that are often spartan, primitive, and characterized by forced intimacy with little or no privacy.

(13) The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service.

(14) The armed forces must maintain personnel policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk to the armed forces’ high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.

(15) The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability
- Whitey, Strafford

Roger in Rochester and all the rest who think that way. I am a long time Veteran of the infantry and it always amazes me how people will spout these views with no knowledge of the actual situations. It is like you going to a mechanic and hanging over him and telling him the right way to use his tools and fix your car. Doesn't work well. You people have no idea the issues and or problems that exist now and will increase. Is a recruit failed because he is gay or because he can't make the standard? I KNOW for a fact that substandard recruits are passed despite objections because of certain statuses. So we can have the DOD rife with legal complaints and cases taking up the time. Very Nice. Will promotions be based on this factor? " I was promoted because I am--- ( Fill in the Blank)" is already rife in the military. And anyone who say's different is lying. It will just be more of this. And having trained thousands of 17-25 year old recruits with "raging hormones" sex will be a problem. Perhaps not with every gay recruit but put a group of normal young men in close quarters with a group of young in shape women and some of them will not be able to control themselves. Bad enough when you have to deal with this, but you know what will happen when a gay recruit makes a move on a straight one? Trouble, that's what. Don't say gays don't do it. I have filed the reports on these incidents many times. And in today's PC military it will be the straight soldier that get's in trouble. And what about unit functions? It is mandatory to go to a dining in, so do we all have to go with our spouses, etc. Bad enough that you have to party with people you may not like personally like drunks and so on but now you will have this forced down your gullet. And none of this is by choice it is required. Yes yes call me what you want " Fill in the Blank -a-phob", I just don't care anymore. I have served for 22 years and know that this will cause more problems than can be thought of in a day. And I recommend to all Service Members who are against this to use the system should it go in place. If you feel that a gay service member has crossed what ever line of personal comfort you have file an E.O. Complaint of sexual harassment. Remember your classes on this, "it is not what you do or say but the way the other person feels about it". Use the PC system set up by the same people pushing this against them.
- Vince Milano, Epping NH

"Repealing "Don't ask, don't tell" may be the right thing to do, but there's only one reason to do it: military effectiveness."

More proof that even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then.

And so DADT should NOT be repealed - it is working splendidly. Our military is the finest in the world. You don't fix what isn't broken, particularly when we know the "fix" would damage the military.

Polling shows a strong majority of active military do not want DADT repealed. Repealing DADT will harm morale, recruiting, and operational readiness. Ergo, DADT should not be repealed.

Simple.

Homosexuals are already very welcome in the military. Just keep your personal lives to yourselves, please.

Now move on.
- Tom, Campton

If people were not outed and discharged from the military under DADT your argument might hold more water. It has happened, it happens, and when I served I saw it happen. These were soldiers who did not tell, were not asked, but were still outed and kicked out. There are hundreds of stories like this, and people need ot realize this. YOu are right, the military is not a democratic enviroment, but if leadership sets the tone and enforces equal treatment, as they do with race relations, then it will become less and less of an issue over time. I can honestly tell you that the last thing a gay soldier is going to do is stare ant or hit on another soldier in a shower. The military accepts felons, and actually has most of the major criminal gangs represented among the ranks. That is more of a threat to unit cohesion than who someone sleeps with on the weekend. I saw it, I lived it. I served with honor and hid my sexual orientation. I wanted to serve. However had I been career, more than the six years I served, it would have been hell under DADT. 6 years was bad enough. My commanders and my service record and commendations tell the story of my service, not my sexuality. For 95% of soldiers, repealing DADT is relief from the fear of being outed and kicked out. Period. They will not likely advertise their sexual orientation, the military is not an accepting environment, and we know that going in. Repealing DADT for me would have changed nothing, except it would have removed the fear and made me feel even that much more partiotic and loyal (if possible) for serving in a military that at least acknowledged that I was a good soldier, end of story. Removing gay soldiers who are good soldiers just because they are gay hampers military effectiveness. Letting felons and gangsters in hampers military effectiveness. I thank you for the opportunity to serve, and I hope that others can do so without the fear of getting kicked out because of who they love. And you are right, homosexuals are not slaves to their libidos any more than heterosexuals are. Nor are we on a crusade to conver straight people. Nor do we want to stare at you in the shower. We just want to serve without fear.
- Mike, Concord

It is notable that, a week after five top military and National Security officials testified before the Senate that a new al-Qaeda attempt on the US in the next 3 to 6 months is "certain," the President's main posture regarding the military is to transform it to become a more welcoming place for homosexuals. Will it take a new attack for people to see how unserious this is?

Roger of Rochester displays the ongoing tendencies of gay activists: Name-calling and cloaking themselves in the aura of Negro slavery. To be clear, activists do not just want equal rights; they want official government endorsement.
- Spike, Brentwood NH

"Moreover, gays and lesbians already have served honorably and valiantly, so what, one might ask, is the big deal? Why make people pretend they're not who they are?"

That is the part I never really understand. I doubt the military is a place for anyone straight or gay to be flouting their sexuality. It is not a social club it’s a gathering for people to learn to be soldiers and to train together and work together when needed.

Once while vacationing in Ogunquit Maine my spouse and I went into a small bar at an inn. For some odd reason the gay guy sitting next to us felt the need to tell us about his sexual preferences as if he was trying to push our buttons. Honestly we did not care one way or the other and knew he and his partner were gay without the need for the conversation. We simply liked the inn and wanted to have a few drinks at a quaint quiet bar and enjoy ourselves. Honestly I can never remember a time when a straight couple ever felt the need to talk about their sexuality to anyone but gays seem hell bent on considering it their right to do to anyone at any time. I found the guy annoying more than anything else and that is not what we need taking place in the military. Go get a room like other normal people and keep it to yourself.
- Deb, Derry

I read the following on another paper's comment site:

"Congress, alone, makes the laws. It is Congress's decision as to whether Gays will be allowed to serve in the military or not. At the moment, Gays are still prohibited from serving by Federal law: U.S. Code: Title 10 Subtitle A Part II Chapter 37 § 654

That law has NEVER been repealed. DADT (also enacted into law by Congress, though proposed by Clinton) Only forbids the military from asking someone's sexual orientation. It still requires that anyone who self-identifies as gay be separated from the military."

So you see, if the president repeals DADT, any servicemenber declaring their homosexuality can still be charged under U.S. Code and the UCMJ. Only Congress can change the law.
- Whitey, Strafford

Moreover, gays and lesbians already have served honorably and valiantly, so what, one might ask, is the big deal? Why make people pretend they're not who they are?
- Deb, Derry

Yes, they need to die for their country just like the normal people do.
While they are out there waving their rainbow colored flags and claiming another victory for "civil rights", my friends who serve will be cringing at the thought of serving with them.
- Pauline, Franklin

The best column by Ms. Parker that I have read. DADT should be decided upon by military experts with an agenda of maintaining a fierce fighting machine, not by civilian social engineers with a different agenda all their own. If that decision is to allow gays to serve openly, very good. If not, then so be it. Just let the experts decide.
- Greg, Londonderry

The right thing to do is the right thing to do, period. One more bright article from Ms Parker! (The first national writer to tell it like it was on Caribou Barbie during the election.)

People who disdain people for their private sex lives are simply ignorant bigots. The religious beliefs and traditions they generally invoke include bigotry in them, and justify nothing.

What the troops think does not matter, they work for us. The ones who do not like it can get out.

Gay people aside, this is great for all Americans who are sick of ignorance hiding as tradition. I hope the fringe right chokes hard on this one, their efforts to take America backward are not appreciated.
- Roger, Rochester