From: pbowden@missing.kludge.com (Pete Bowden)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexual
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 10:24:04 PST
Organization: The Missing Link BBS, Santa Maria, CA  805-925-1129

fogarty@sir-c.jpl.nasa.gov (Tim Fogarty) writes:

> 
> In article <1992Dec29.004539.5683@anasazi.com>, john@anasazi.com (John R. Moo
> |>The argument (actually, the part of it germain to your comment) is
> |>that integrating gays into the military would adversely affect military
> |>unit cohesion, and that coercion is not enough to fix that; furthermore,
> |>that (unlike the case with blacks), it is NOT important to the united
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> |>participate in the military), and thus it doesn't justify facing
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> |>all of these problems
> 
> Since there is no RIGHT to participate in the military, why was it important
> to integrate blacks into the military in the 50s and not important to 
> integrate gays into the military in the 90s ?
> 
> And how many times must it be said ?  There are ALREADY 10s or 100s of 
> thousands of gays in the military.  Changing the rules so that these soldiers

I think the REAL argument which people are poking at but not saying is
that there is a BIG difference between having people in the military who
are gay and *HAVE TO* keep quiet about it, and having gay people in the
military who are known to be gay and perhaps even flaunting it.  Knowing
that homosexuals are not permitted in the military  provides a certain
amount of safety to the heterosexual males.  First, as long as that
ruling exists the likelyhood that you are confronted or knowledgable
about who is gay is somewhat negligible.  It does keep gays in line, if
you wish to call it that.  As long as people are not KNOWN to be gay then
people in the showers, barracks, and wherever else will not be self-
conscious.

I have many friends who are gay, but I would feel harassed if I was
forced to undressed in front of them.  Knowing a group of people who are
publicly gay (and believe me, as soon as it is permitted those that are
gay will flaunt it--or at least the majority will) to me would be a form
of sexual harassment, imposed on my by the military.  There are going to
be people in the military who are heterosexual who joined the military
knowing that there was a certain level of 'protection' from this form of
sexual harassment by the fact that gays are not allowed in the military.
They basically signed a contract (as did everyone else who entered)
stating that they are not gay--now they'll be in the locker rooms and
everywhere else publicizing the fact.

> wont have to worry about being kicked out will not adversely affect military
> unit cohesion.  Fear is not what is keeping these soldiers in line.  A good
> soldier is a good soldier, whether he/she is gay or straight.

Looks like we'll find out about this one...  well, maybe we'll find out.
It's not going to be easy to show how it will be effected.  I wonder what
will happen once the next president gets in...  is this going to be a
bounce back and forth type thing...  are they going to go after the 
people who lied on their applications?  Is the fact that they lied on
their applications going to affect their future advancements?  Breaking
the law isn't excused just because you think it's a bad law.



--
pbowden@missing.kludge.com  (Pete Bowden)
The Missing Link BBS, Santa Maria, CA  805-925-1129
Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12093 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10580 alt.politics.clinton:19011 alt.politics.bush:14841 alt.politics.homosexuality:8307