“Statistically” there were a number of secretly gay men who served with honor in every American-involved conflict probably ever. That is a good enough statistical analysis for me. The thinking is “letting gays openly serve will open the door for flamboyantly ‘Bruno’ style homos to sashay around the battlefield trying to butt-bang their buddy in a fox hole instead of fighting the enemy” that Occams is proposing is patently ri-gorram-diculous. 99.99999% of anyone volunteering to serve in the US Armed Forces is doing so out of a sense of duty and patriotism, not as a fashion show, single’s bar, or road-side rest. I’m positive that 99.9999% of any gays allowed to serve openly would do so as they’ve always done — with honor.
RE: No sir? by LordDilly :: NR6 :: Show
“Statistically” there were a number of secretly gay men who served with honor in every American-involved conflict probably ever. That is a good enough statistical analysis for me. The thinking is “letting gays openly serve will open the door for flamboyantly ‘Bruno’ style homos to sashay around the battlefield trying to butt-bang their buddy in a fox hole instead of fighting the enemy” that Occams is proposing is patently ri-gorram-diculous. 99.99999% of anyone volunteering to serve in the US Armed Forces is doing so out of a sense of duty and patriotism, not as a fashion show, single’s bar, or road-side rest. I’m positive that 99.9999% of any gays allowed to serve openly would do so as they’ve always done — with honor.