NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/fan/rushlim/9042

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-23 | 4.5 KB

Xref: sparky alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:9042 alt.rush-limbaugh:10286 alt.politics.bush:14012
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!bradley.bradley.edu!camelot!grendel
From: [e-mail] (Alyosha Bourgea)
Subject: Re: Democratic Whiners Can't Take It
Message-ID: <grendel.722541307@camelot>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Bradley University
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:55:07 GMT
Lines: 63

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ted Krueger) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Tom Perigrin) writes:

>>I remember the broo-ha-ha that surround the racial integration of the Armed
>>Services...   Lotta good-ol-boys were sure that "niggras" weren't capable
>>of serving next to "white folx".  Predicted that this was the biggest
>>screw up since the abolition of slavery.   Some of them were pretty subtle
>>about it too... didn't talk about the ability of the black servicemen - they
>>talked about the ability of the white majority to trust and serve with the
>>blacks.   "Nothin against dem black folx... it's just that it would prevent
>>the military from working together right."
>>
>>Well, we've seen how our integrated service did in recent action.
>>How much better could you have expected them to perform in Desert Storm
>>if it had been all white and all black companies?  I doubt the army
>>has been hurt through racial integration, in spite of the old racisms
>>expressed in the mid '50s.
>>
>>Seems like I hear a lot of this tired old bullshit nowadays...   some people
>>say "Gays can't cut it".  Others say "It would decrease the efficiency of
>>the hetero guys if they had to run from foxhole to foxhole with one hand
>>covering thier tuckus".   But it's still the same old song...   hate the one
>>who is different so as to make yourself feel better.
>>
>There is one very, extremely big difference between the two cases.  Blacks,
>do not, as a function of their being black, wish to have sex with men.
>Homosexuals, however, generally wish to have sex with other men.  In the
>military, troops are forced, without their consent, to be in quite, if I
>may state it in a delicate way, compromising situations.  And before you
>ask, no I do not think that homosexuals have any different sex drive than
>heterosexuals, but...answer this question: How would the normal, heterosexual
>male react to a shower full of nude women?  I expect that the normal,
>homosexual male would react in the same manner in response to a shower full
>of nude men.  I have yet to hear any homosexuals-in-the-army advocate address
>this point.

Well, actually, it has been addressed, and by a homosexual.  He stated that
having been forced to shower communally in public school wasn't a sexually
arousing experience, and stated, if I remember correctly, that "a shower is
just a shower unless it's with my lover."  Now, I'm not sure what you mean
by your delicate statement about "compromising situations", but I can't
think of any offhand other than the shower where soldiers are required to
be naked in front of each other.  AND EVEN IF homosexuals couldn't stand
to shower with other men without screwing one of them, what's the big deal?
It's not that difficult to have a separate shower, or to shower at different
times.

I think the analogy of black soldiers is an excellent one.  The argument back
then went that black soldiers would destroy morale, cause racial tension
among the troops, and bring white soldiers down to their level of incompetence.
The argument today is the same; just substitute gay for black, sexual for
racial, and straight for white.  Of course, today we know the argument against
black soldiers holds no water.  Why then does the argument against gays?
Black soldiers have shown their capability and cooperation within a troop,
and there is almost never any serious racial tension.  Gay soldiers have
gotten along fine with their fellow soldiers for a long time; the only
difference was, they had to suppress their gayness.  How will we know if
gay soldiers are a problem unless we allow them to be openly gay within
the military?  Are there any _examples_ of gay soldiers causing problems
within the military?  No.