[Doc Holliday]

Is the percentage of humans born LGBTQRST+%&, increasing? Is a similar increase in the rest of the animal kingdom occurring?

No one was ever 'born gay'.

NO BABY, in the entire history of babies, ever popped out and reached for Daddys weewee....EVER.

 

[Glock Commander]

As a USMC vet this makes me want to puke. We will never win another war with the woke clowns in charge.

Did you reenlist? Vet and Veteran just like Marine is always capitalized my friend.

Semper Fi

 

[Glock Commander]

USMC 1968. Maybe they want to keep the bams happy. War is not pretty.

So how many enlistments did you do my friend.

Semper Fi

 

[Glock Commander]

Cool story, bro. If you do not agree, then change it. Yes, if you currently serve, you are supporting an illegitimate, Communist regime.

Bro, did you serve?

 

[GigG]

OMG, that Tweet is likely to trigger everyone on both sides of every argument.

 

[Glock Commander]

I’m not in anymore. And they did disagree, and they did change it. If you’re upset about it, you should’ve tried harder than they did. My point is, gays have died for this country also. You’re a ****ing disgrace.

True point.

Now if a Veteran can not except gays have always been in the military and died for this country they need to check your 'moral courage' compass.

 

[Glock Commander]

No one was ever 'born gay'.

NO BABY, in the entire history of babies, ever popped out and reached for Daddys weewee....EVER.

So was it because of the creepy uncle pedophile dude?

Seriously people did not talk about the relative who had six fingers, a club foot, mentally slow so why 100s of years ago would you talk about a 'gay' relative.

 

[No Quarter]

I’m not saying I agree with it all, but it’s a societal change. I’ve seen a single gay marine trash a platoons cohesion, while there are other platoons that are tighter than most, with gays in it. And no, I wasn’t admin, I was amphib assault. I definitely think it’s getting too soft and too loose, and discipline is degraded. But it comes down to the individual people, not a stereotype that is being exacerbated.

Stereotypes exist for a reason. They are not created out of thin air. We are talking about Marine lives and combat effectiveness. There is no room for such experimentation within the USMC. This is a politically motivated agenda being executed by flawed senior leadership.

I feel the exact same way about women in ground combat units.

The Marines work as intended. Keep the forced tolerance and diversity nonsense in the civilian world, where the snowflakes can all huddle together in their safe spaces.

 

[mikemyr]

Stereotypes exist for a reason. They are not created out of thin air. We are talking about Marine lives and combat effectiveness. There is no room for such experimentation within the USMC. This is a politically motivated agenda being executed by flawed senior leadership.

I feel the exact same way about women in ground combat units.

The Marines work as intended. Keep the forced tolerance, diversity, and equality nonsense in the civilian world, where the snowflakes can all huddle together in their safe spaces.

Look, the integrated task force set out to assess the combat effectiveness of a gender diverse unit… it failed miserably. A gender diverse unit had zero advantage, and didn’t perform better than an exclusive male unit in any event. Yet, the department of defense brushed the research off, and said do it anyways… that’s where we’re at. So most combat units developed and integrated some sort of a relative to the mos, physical fitness standard. It weeded out more men than prospective women… I’ve met and served with women who could bang out more pull ups than me, who are faster than me, who can perform and who I would trust more than most men o served with. They exist. Yes I agree the stereotypes gotta come from somewhere, but it’s not objective as it doesn’t account for all of them, let alone most of them.

And the fact is, they’re here, and they aren’t going anywhere. It doesn’t fall on them as incompetent, it falls on the leadership to find a way to effectively work with what they have. Kick out all the women and lbgtq members? You aren’t going to have people to replace them with, you’re simply going to be short bodies. Yes, sometimes being short a guy is the better alternative. But it shows your incompetence to effectively lead, achieve objectives, and complete the mission.

There are also gays and what ever else they may identify as that out perform many “men” that chose to enlist. It comes down to the individual. What you guys are doing is discriminating. It’s something that would get you relieved of your duties, and separated today as it highlights your deficiency, failure to adapt, and overall incompetency.

 

[wuzfuzz]

No one was ever 'born gay'.

NO BABY, in the entire history of babies, ever popped out and reached for Daddys weewee....EVER.

No one was ever 'born gay'.

NO BABY, in the entire history of babies, ever popped out and reached for Daddys weewee....EVER.

I don't care about how gays live their lives, but they don't need to be constantly in our faces with it. And, it makes absolutely no sense for the military and other government institutions to impose regulations and restrictions adversely affecting others in order to mollify less than 3% of the population.

 

[wuzfuzz]

Stereotypes exist for a reason. They are not created out of thin air. We are talking about Marine lives and combat effectiveness. There is no room for such experimentation within the USMC. This is a politically motivated agenda being executed by flawed senior leadership.

I feel the exact same way about women in ground combat units.

The Marines work as intended. Keep the forced tolerance and diversity nonsense in the civilian world, where the snowflakes can all huddle together in their safe spaces.

Right on!

 

[FAL 7.62]

 

[mikemyr]

I think you guys are forgetting that just 13 years ago, gays were getting separated just for being gay… they didn’t need an “incident” or anything to occur, just the simple knowledge that they were gay… being gay doesn’t make somebody bad at their job or less of a human being.

 

[crkckr]

Clearly you care very much🤣 that small percentage is growing.

Mike, in this case you're wrong. There may be more gay Marines (and other branches as well) but the population of gays is not increasing but holding where it's always been, about 10%. The problem, as I see it, is that those 10% are making a lot more than their share of the noise! The military is not the place where anyone should be making some "gender stand." Everyone should be "in the closet" with their sexuality in the military (I know they aren't but they should be). And if you're gay and just have to rub that info into everyone's nose, then you should expect to gets yours bloodied once in a while. Beyond that, if the military wants to get woke, I say have at it! It's stupid but trying to stop politicians (where all this idiocy is coming from) from being stupid is a lot like trying to find lips on a chicken!
Cheers,
crkckr

 

[mikemyr]

I don’t disagree with the point your making. Whether the actual portion is growing your not, it’s at the least, appearing to grow, as less people have to hide it, more people feel comfortable, etc. I think everybody should can their ****… but it’s just not the way it is. Personally I don’t want to hear marines (or any other servicemembers) talking about the fat trashy piece they got…, nor the gay ones stories… but I feel like saying gays can’t be acknowledged is on par with saying blacks, Hispanics, or Asians can’t be acknowledged for their race… it’s the same realm man… just let them have there five minutes… who knows, maybe they’ll perform better after being in a better mental state…

 

[crkckr]

It could be, Mike, but you won't see me holding my breath!
The gay guy that proves himself to the rest of the squad and is accepted by them as a warrier isn't going to be the one bragging about the last a'hole he put his dingus in! Those that feel the need to shout to the world about their "gayness" (if that's not a word, well, it is now!) are not the kind of people you want to go to war with. I think people like that are going to be the last ones to reliably cover your six!
Cheers,
crkckr

 

[nrajeff]

I think you guys are forgetting that just 13 years ago, gays were getting separated just for being gay… they didn’t need an “incident” or anything to occur, just the simple knowledge that they were gay… being gay doesn’t make somebody bad at their job or less of a human being.

The intelligence community agency where I worked considered gay people bad at their job of "not being a security risk," if their "lifestyle choice" made them likely to be vulnerable to being blackmailed. Apparently, employees with a clearance for intel that was critical to national security, had been threatened with being outed to family members, their employer, etc. unless they handed over classified info. That applied not only to (closeted) gay people, but also to closeted drug addicts, etc., etc.

 

[nrajeff]

Look, the integrated task force set out to assess the combat effectiveness of a gender diverse unit… it failed miserably.

Then what if they set out to assess the combat effectiveness of a REALLY sexually diverse unit---one made up of every letter of the LGBTQ rainbow universe, including people attracted to farm animals, small children/infants, and corpses? We mustn't discriminate against ANY person based on that person's "orientation," lest we be guilty of "something that would get you relieved of your duties, and separated today as it highlights your deficiency, failure to adapt, and overall incompetency." Right?

So, if they assessed the REALLY diverse unit, what kind of combat effectiveness score would that unit get, and why?

 

[mikemyr]

It could be, Mike, but you won't see me holding my breath!
The gay guy that proves himself to the rest of the squad and is accepted by them as a warrier isn't going to be the one bragging about the last a'hole he put his dingus in! Those that feel the need to shout to the world about their "gayness" (if that's not a word, well, it is now!) are not the kind of people you want to go to war with. I think people like that are going to be the last ones to reliably cover your six!
Cheers,
crkckr

Agreed, but there’s a lot more straight dudes like that than gay dudes. At least in my experience… so where’s the discipline really drop off? I’m just saying I think this is a stupid thing to argue about. Let them have their acknowledgement. It’s wasting more of everybody else’s time…

Then what if they set out to assess the combat effectiveness of a REALLY sexually diverse unit---one made up of every letter of the LGBTQ rainbow universe, including people attracted to farm animals, small children/infants, and corpses? We mustn't discriminate against ANY person based on that person's "orientation," lest we be guilty of "something that would get you relieved of your duties, and separated today as it highlights your deficiency, failure to adapt, and overall incompetency." Right?

So, if they assessed the REALLY diverse unit, what kind of combat effectiveness score would that unit get, and why?

obviously you’re pushing the context to an extreme and becoming less relevant…

 

[mikemyr]

The intelligence community agency where I worked considered gay people bad at their job of "not being a security risk," if their "lifestyle choice" made them likely to be vulnerable to being blackmailed. Apparently, employees with a clearance for intel that was critical to national security, had been threatened with being outed to family members, their employer, etc. unless they handed over classified info. That applied not only to (closeted) gay people, but also to closeted drug addicts, etc., etc.

You’re ability to write and express a clear thought is atrocious. The first half of your post makes no sense. Sounds like they were bad at their jobs to begin with if they let random people find out they worked in such a classified area/department/whatever to exploit them like that.