LGBT News Anti-Gay Activist: Gay Soldiers Have To Wear Diapers

WTF?! :roflmao:

 

I dunno, women in porn are worn smooth and they don't seem to have incontinence, nor do anti-gay activists assume so. So, even assuming gay men have anal sex enough to be smooth, no. But that's not even the point. How is it that assumptions made by straight people who are hateful towards gays are accepted as fact?

Judging by the way people think we have sex, male or female, anti-gay assholes have pretty sick minds. This is based off various crap people have said.

 

Hahaha I think I laughed myself so silly that I have to change myself
Get it??? Hahahahahahahahah :lol: :lol: oh that was a great video thanks for sharing

 

You know that snipers have to wear diapers.

 

I've never even experienced that type of sex..........but I'm Bi,
I've always been sure I wouldn't like it, but some times I wonder.

Any way:
I think this is just a bunch of hateful straight peoples way of showing us how ignorant they are of a culture they fear and loathe.
Of course not all straight people are like them, but the ones who are make a huge incontinent ass out of themselves.

 

I think this idiot inadvertently brought up a problem that needs to be addressed in our military. That problem is Military Chaplains. As a secular country, we should not allow religious leaders to intermingle with our secular military. It opens up a whole unnecessary can of worms, and would certainly prove to be divisive if a staunch atheist such as myself were to be a member of the military. I wouldn't want to hear about or be exposed to their religion at all, and quite frankly I don't think an atheist who wants to serve our country should be exposed to people like this... even people of other faiths or denominations of Christianity could end up being harassed by people attempting to convert them.

Issues surrounding faith in the military, and how some members of the military try to push it onto others crop up all the time. The best policy should be a complete divorce between faith and the military. Want to be religious? Fine. Do it at home and keep it to yourself while in uniform.

Many of these same people would be singing a different tune if Muslim's started joining the military in record numbers, and there was a sharp rise in Muslim Chaplin's. Especially if they started acting exactly like the Christian evangelicals in the military, attempting to spread their faith throughout the entire institution. The moment that happens is the moment you'll see all these little Christian groups crying and begging for a total secularization of our military.

 

He 's been watching too much bad santa



[youtube]sT5WYSwET28[/youtube]

 

This isn't just a horrible idea, it's rather disgusting. First off, it is forbidden to proselytize to other personnel. If it's being done anyway, either the local commander or JAG is negligent or it isn't being reported. If you are pushing religion on somebody, you are committing a violation of the UCMJ, and that needs to be dealt with. Secondly, nobody has to visit a chaplain, and we try to get chaplains of all faiths.That isn't practical because some religions have comparatively few members in uniform and fewer who want to be officers or chaplains, but the military does the best it can.

In the military, it is often very hard to get to a civilian church, especially when deployed. A lot of personnel feel regular attendance is mandatory, or find that it helps them deal with the stress of military life. Remember, there are a lot of religious people in uniform. Why should they be forbidden from having their services because personnel who will not be attending said services dislike them? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but Christians do have the right to exercise their religion in the US, and taking their god away will make them downright miserable, which is unfair. Religious freedom goes both ways, not just one.

Also, military life fucking sucks. Doesn't matter if you never see combat. The constant time away from home and frequent inability to contact whoever is where is enough to make it rough. Add in the iron discipline and constant vigilance over everything down to the string on your shirt that is about to earn you a major ass reaming, and it gets even more stressful. Military personnel are human, and they want to speak about these problems. Those of religious bent very often prefer to do so with a priest, because that makes them feel comfortable. Take that away from them, and you remove a major source of support from their lives.

Now let's get to the killing. For most personnel, killing people is a horrible experience. For those who's religions practice confession, they likely want to do so at this point. Again, it is a source of comfort for those people. The same situation applies when you watch a comrade or civilian wounded or killed. Should we really tell a soldier who just watched a friend's face split open after an IED explosion that they can't to talk to a priest about what happened? That's unconscionable. Then we have those who are severely injured and religious, and would feel comfortable with a priest present, or who are dying and in need of last rights (religion is marked on your dog tags, so chaplains can be summoned only for those who are religious, not for everyone who is wounded or dying). I will abide by no suggestion of denying that to them.

I get where you are coming with when it comes to proselytizing and abusing non-religious personnel, and that shit needs to stop. People have every right to be in uniform without being religious and feel no pressure to become religious or negative repercussions for their beliefs or lack thereof. On the same token, though, those who are religious have the right to practice those beliefs. Those beliefs are very important to them, and allowing their exercise is essential to morale and an element of basic respect. The military isn't an environment where you can just not mention religion at work, then go home at night and go to whatever place of worship you want. Unless you are stateside, you rarely have access to such facilities. When something is very important to a lot of personnel, the military tries to accommodate it. I think we can do that without trying to force-convert people.

 

Necromancer -

I don't disagree with everything you wrote. However, I would point out that the majority of what you wrote about are only issues faced by individuals who are actively deployed and would otherwise struggle to get access to religious services. Certainly, I believe in the freedom of religion. I believe that religious people, even though I may disagree with them, have the right to practice their faith even while in uniform.

Yet, there is a line - a balance - that is broken repeatedly. I don't know if you've actually spoken to non-believers in the military. I have. The majority that I have listened to would widely disagree with your assessment of how the military handles religion. You write as if there is a strong secular military that has firm and rigid rules that are strictly enforced when broken. This is just false.

Historically speaking, religion and the military are deeply intertwined. It wasn't until 1972 that the practice of forcing all active duty military to attend religious services weekly ended. It should be noted that only Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish worship services were available.

Even as recently as 2011 the military required soldiers to take surveys that measured their "spiritual fitness", and told soldiers who had failed that: "improving your spiritual fitness should be an important goal."

You'll often see mental health used as a front to promote religion in the military. Just last year there was a Marine training document published that instructed active duty commanders to look for "potential risk indicators" for mental health problems. One of the "potential risk indicators" was a "lack of spiritual faith". This may seem like a small thing, but then you listen to non-believers in the military, and you hear stories about how they are discriminated against, stigmatized, or face pressure to become religious.

Also just last year Rob Andrews (D-N.J.) tried and failed to amend the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act so that non-theist chaplains could be part of the military. That's right. If you're a humanist, atheist, or some other non-believer you can't become a Chaplin in the military. So, guess what? The whole issue you have with religious people not being able to reach out for support when they 'kill or wound a civilian' or "watch a friend's face split open after an IED explosion" is something non-believers already face in the military. It is apparently acceptable for them, and sets up a situation where they ONLY have a RELIGIOUS Chaplin to turn too (not an accident there, really).

It's only fair to ask why the religious deserve special treatment, or why non-believers aren't receiving equal and fair treatment.

...and the answer to that, is usually because the game is rigged. The Christian right has worked hard to entrench themselves into the military. This is why the guy in the video posted didn't feel he needed to sugar coat the fact that he didn't like that Chaplin's aren't really allowed to go around and say "God Hates Fags" anymore.

Just as an example of the influence the Christian right has over the military, just look at the situation currently going down at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) in Colorado Springs. They hired "Doctor" Mike Rosebush to head up their "character and leadership coaching" at the academy. Of course, Rosebush is the former VP of the notorious anti-gay Christian hate group called "Focus On The Family" - who has strategically located their headquarters right down the street from the Academy.

Does anyone honestly believe that Rosebush doesn't - even if not overtly - push his religion onto the members of the Academy who he coaches in "character and leadership"? One can't help but wonder how Rosebush would label an openly gay atheist cadet who went through his little "character and leadership" course. Would he give him high marks, or would he display discrimination toward him? I think we all know the answer to that question.

And that is the problem. If there were strict rules which made the secularization of the military abundantly clear, and actively protected non-believers from discrimination and stigmatization then there wouldn't be a problem. If the military actively and aggressively worked to expunge all vestiges of religion from its culture, and ensured that it remained a personal decision and choice - while actively protecting those who didn't want to be involved without stigmatizing them as having mental problems, then there wouldn't be a problem. But there is a problem, because these things aren't true.

I don't care if there is a Wiccan in the military who feels they need to cast funky spells before entering combat. Fuck, if that makes you happy - go right ahead. If you practice Voodoo and you want to make a little doll of a terrorist and stick pins in it - go ahead. I don't give a fuck. If you're a Scientologist and you need your dianetics before you enter combat to ensure that you're in tip-top shape, go for it. I'll give you two thumbs up. If you're a Catholic and you need to practice your ritual cannibalism, then go ahead. I have no interest in stopping you. If you're a Pentecostal and you need to summon the Holy Spirit which will allow you to speak in tongues, do whatever it is you need to do. Fuck, if you're a Muslim and you want everyone to stop five times per day so that you can pray - then yes, everyone should be forced to stop five times a day so you can pray.

All of these things are perfectly acceptable. All that is asked in return is the following: 1. You don't discriminate against or stigmatize those who aren't interested in joining in. 2. That you accept "no" for an answer. 3. That you don't share your faith with those not interested in hearing about it. 4. That you don't look for ways to institutionalize your faith within the military culture, and accept the military as a secular organization that has no religious affiliation.

I don't consider these four things very difficult, but if you put them to a lot of the religious folk (overwhelmingly Right Wing Christians), they'd have a problem with them in a big way. One would have to ask why, and I believe the answer to that question is obvious. That is the problem.

 

I'm a pretty hardcore atheist. And I agree with Necromancer completely on all points.

I have friends who are or were in the military as well as friends who are religious (and some friends who are both). I've had Buddhist, Hindu, and Muslim friends when I've lived other places. I don't agree with their beliefs, but as long as they respect my lack of belief, what they believe is generally not my problem.

I am a firm believer in the principle that if your beliefs are so weak that they cannot tolerate the existence and presence of competing beliefs...then they're a pretty useless belief system. And that includes atheism.

Final thought: a rule that required military members to totally hide their religion while doing their jobs would pretty much be DADT with a different paint job. Do we really want to go thru all that again? No? I didn't think so.

Todd

 

I don't see in my last post where I suggested anything of the sort. In fact, I clearly said that I think it's perfectly acceptable for the military to be forced to stop five times a day so a Muslim could pray, and listed a whole host of other religious activities that would be perfectly acceptable.

I also outlined, clearly, the issue facing the military and how certain groups (specifically the Christian Right) has worked to institutionalize itself in military culture. As well as the history the military has had with religion in the past.

I think Necromancer brings up valid points when it comes to deployments, but completely ignores the discrimination and stigmatization of those who are non-religious. And additionally, every single point Necromancer made can equally be attributed to why the military should have atheists, humanists, and other non-believers as Chaplin's. Yet, the military does not. Where is the uproar about that? There is none, and the Christian Right will actively work to ensure that there will be none for obvious reasons.

 

Lol! I just noticed the "Dr. Chaps" thing in the vid!

 

"What the fuck is wrong with this guy?" My thoughts exactly. :bang:

I think Chaplains are necessary in the military. People who are religious should have access to a spiritual leader, someone they can talk to about religious, personal or interpersonal matters without, for the latter, having to involve the chain of command.

Personally, I think that there is too heavy a Christian/religious bias in the military. Things like spiritual fitness tests and mental health being equated with faith, as Aldrick said, need to be dealt with. It would be great if they didn’t happen, but they do, and that’s a problem.

As for Christianity being entrenched in the military? Yeah, it is. It’s entrenched throughout our society, and the military being a more conservative reflection of that makes it a given. At this point, the only chaplain an Atheist, Humanist, Pagan, Agnostic, etc might go to if they wanted someone even vaguely non-prejudiced would be a Unitarian Universalist chaplain, and good luck finding them.

Aldrick, I think that third thing is a little iffy – it’s too easy to turn 'That you don't share your faith with those not interested in hearing about it' into ‘You can’t mention your beliefs at all’ and that’s just… no. Another DADT waiting to happen, like Todd said. The other three are fantastic, simple, and common sense. Thus why they aren't implemented, unfortunately.

 

That took me forever to read, but I'm crazy enough to open every article linked xD

I completely agree with what you said here. The military does discriminate against the non-religious. I'm not really surprised by it, and I hope that at some point someone puts their boot firmly up the military's rear-end for their sketchy way of handling things when it comes to 'religion'

I also think people misunderstand what you mean as they all keep coming back to DADT. So you all know he's not talking about telling people they aren't allowed to have religious faith or even express it. What he means is that the military should not be allowed to put hardships in the way of non-believers, cut off their support systems, or place any extra pressures on them simply for not believing.

 

Hm. We seem to have run afoul of cross posting here. My post was in response to your initial post and Necromancer's response to it. I initially saw it while reading EC in bed on my iPad this AM. I also generated my post using the iPad, which can take longer than with a conventional keyboard. In the time it took me to read the thread and respond, you posted your reply to Necromancer. As such, my reply to your initial post arrived after your clarified post and appeared to be a response to it.

I have much less (possibly no) issue with the issues raised in your clarification post and would agree that all belief systems should ideally be accommodated within the structure of the military as much as possible.

Since I'm on my lunch break at work and still on my iPad, I'll save any additional thoughts for when I'm home and back on a real keyboard.

Sorry for the confusion,

Todd

 

There should be Chaplin's of each belief or lack of belief system, so that each persons individual needs could be meet. I mean historically their usually Christian, but they should employ a system to have clergy or a Representative of each belief system there for people to talk to.

I am anti-Organized-Religion, and an Christian-Esoteric-Spiritualist, who doesn't fit in main-stream Christianity so if I was in the military I would not want a Protestant or Catholic Chaplin, I would rather have an Open Minded Agnostic to talk to, or a Hindu or Jew, Confucian, Taoist, or Buddhist. I just don't care much for main-stream Christianity, since most of the Fundamentalist think I am a Heretic teaching falsehoods. If I where alive in the witch burning days, they most certainly would have burned me alive for not agreeing with them just because a book says so. Luckily in today's society we have more rules and laws protecting us.

I am glad Don't ask don't Tell no longer is a part of the military,
and I hope that the military will become more tolerant of people with various beliefs,
it was once a common practice by drill Sargent's to force new recruits to say the lords prayer even if they didn't want to. Or at least that's a rumor I heard.

The U.S. Government and Military has historically seemed to push Christianity at times, not all people in those groups but some of them have.
Some Atheists want to take prayer out of school, and don't want their children to learn about religions, they just want to keep their children ignorant of other cultures that they they can misjudge and stereotype them all. I don't think teachers should organize prayer meetings or ask their students to pray, but if a group of children with similar beliefs begin to pray among themselves it should be allowed not punished, just because some people hate religion doesn't mean they should try to keep people who don't like it from bonding because of it, we have to have a balance where all our freedoms are protected and where no one is being infringed upon by any one else. For example, if a person asks if they can talk to be about "Jesus" and I say no and they press the issue or pester me, then I should have the right to take legal action, if however I say no and they no longer bug me that's fine. So many people in today's culture have lost touch with what it means to be polite and to let others be, I already have my own views about Christ and I don't really want LDS members trying to convert me, I politely asked the first and last two LDS members who did come to my home to tell the church not to bug me with house visits or emails and ever since I told them that I have never heard a peep from them. Not even spam mail. And for that the LDS church has my deepest respect, however I get hate-mail and harassing emails from Christian Fundamentalist groups mostly Catholic or Protestant and they do not relent when I politely ask them to stop, I believe their should be laws that would allow me to take legal action against such persons who seem it is necessary to harass people by email simply because they don't share your beliefs, how some of these people get my email I don't even know. Just the other day I got Hate-mail from Wesboro Baptist church, bashing non-straight people and metal musicians.

Sorry for the long rant. lol

 

No. That's absolutely not true, and I'm tired of hearing this. -.-'

Atheists don't want religion mandated in school. If students want to pray on their own time at school that's absolutely fine. The teachers, the faculty, and any other adults in charge at the school cannot mandate prayer or religious teachings. There is a huge difference.

In fact if a student wanted they could bring their own personal bible from home and read it if they wished. There is no rule against that, the teachers can't make students read from the bible though.

Also good luck getting any Christian to sign off on a Muslim studies class for their children. Seriously, go try to make that happen. You think Atheists are about pushing things on people...go try and make that happen.

So until every religion ( and non-religion ) can be fairly represented in a classroom you cannot just pick and choose which religion gets priority. So us atheists say leave the churches, synagogues, and mosques to handle religious teachings and let the school do it's job of teaching relevant information.

 

Back to the diapers.

I think it might be a good idea for everyone in the military to wear diapers, 'cause it can be hard to find a place to go in the midst of combat, not to mention, leaving you vulnerable. That's why the Scots wore kilts with nothing underneath in battle: If they had to go, it was easier than getting out of those fancy British uniforms.

I know one thing: I'd be scared shitless, with people shooting at me!