Would You Shower With A Homosexual?

Funny ain’t it, how this is what the homosexuals in the military question boils down to. Now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell has been struck down by the Obama government (helped by a number of RINOs) homosexuals can openly behave in the military as homosexuals. Men kissing men etc. Woman kissing woman etc. Before the repeal of DADT, they were expelled from the forces if they failed to exercise discretion. Now they cannot be.

So if you are a heterosexual private in the US Army, would you be happy showering in the company of someone who openly advocates their sexual identity as male homosexual? My answer to that question would be a very emphatic no. In fact, it would be about as emphatic a “no” as I am able to make. Should soldiers be forced to shower in the company of queers? I don’t damn think so. Queer US Representative (Democrat) Barney Frank of course, doesn’t think its a problem. He wouldn’t would he?

Frank told CNSNews.com. “What do you think happens in gyms all over America? What do you think happens in the House of Representatives? Of course people shower with homosexuals. What a silly issue. What do you think goes wrong with showering with homosexuals? Do you think the spray makes it catching? I mean people shower with homosexuals in college dormitories, in gyms where people play sports; in gyms elsewhere. It is a complete non-issue. ”

CNSNews.com then asked Frank why he thinks it is a non-issue. “To accept the principle that homosexuals can’t shower with other people is a degree of discrimination that goes far beyond this. We don’t get ourselves dry cleaned. We tend to take showers when we go to the gym; when we play sports,” he responded.

Frank was also asked if he thinks male and female military personnel should be able to shower together. “No that would disrupt people,” he said.

Really, Frank and other queers can’t have it both damn ways. A male homosexual showering with hetrosexual man isn’t disruptive? Bullshit..!! This is just one example of the foolishness of this policy, and the muddled thinking of the left. It’s going to have wide and destructive repercussions in the military that the left, like Barney Frank, refuse to admit. As usual, its Progressive doctrine over practicality. Just the usual damn idiocy of the left.

18 thoughts on “Would You Shower With A Homosexual?

  1. Yeah, I don’t mind showering with sodomites … provided if they start openly playing the queer card I also have the right to give them a sound beating.

    I agree with you, Red – this is only going to cause destructive repercussions and lack of unity in the US military. No matter how much ‘they’ try and ‘normalise’ homosexuality the majority of society will never accept it as normal.

    Like

  2. I’m not with you on this one. I just can’t see how it would be a problem.

    Do you think homosexual males are interested in you? Do you think that they going to shove it up your bum when you bend over to pick up the soap? Get real.

    Would you shower with a whole lot of women? Go to Europe and you might just have to in some places. In fact it is happening in some of the hostels in our Uni’s. I have and don’t mind.

    It is just like the hysteria about homosexual men teaching kids. They are attracted to other homosexual men, not kiddies. Just as heterosexual men are attracted to women and not girls. The others are paedophiles (or Catholic priests).

    As for having PDA’s between either hetero- or homosexual couples in the military….it is just not professional either way. I certainly would not do it to my wife whilst at work, why would you suddenly expect homosexuals to do it?

    Sure there are the screaming queens but they are hardly the type to join the military anyway.

    I think DADT was good policy because I am not really concerned about another persons sexuality, and repealing it has created more problems than it’ll solve. I wonder what the average homosexual male who is quietly serving on the front line thinks about its repeal? He’ll probably just quietly keep on doing what he has done in the past and nobody will know.

    Like

  3. “Do you think homosexual males are interested in you?”

    On a sexual identification basis, that is the same as asking a woman if she thinks males are interested in her.

    “Do you think that they going to shove it up your bum when you bend over to pick up the soap?”

    I was just asked that very same question by a raving fag on Kiwiblog. I think its completely off target. Why do you think a collection of women might object to having a male in the shower with them? Not because they think they might be subject to rape, but because they object to being subjected to voyeurism.

    If you’re happy to be in the shower with a raving poof then fine. As for the collection of women, I’d say a married man might have a different view on that and so might his wife.

    Enjoy your right to see it differently. After all, nudist clubs have existed for a long time so I guess there are plenty out there who might agree with you.

    There’s no way I ever will. 🙂

    And according to Wikipedia, 40 to 60 percent of personnel in the Marine Corps and combat specialties said that repealing the ban would be negative.

    “Sure there are the screaming queens but they are hardly the type to join the military anyway.”

    I think there are thousands who were chucked out for failing to comply with DADT. (just looked it up- 13300)

    Like

  4. I’d say a married man might have a different view on that and so might his wife.

    I think my wife would not object as long as I behaved appropriately. OTOH I might be surprised, but since we got married I haven’t been in a shower full of other women.

    WRT voyerism – Europeans are raised with nudity being a non-issue and initially I was dumbfounded by how little notice they took of it.

    Like

  5. RB,

    I think the key phrase is “behave openly as homosexuals”. So, while men may go to gyms and inadvertently shower with those who are surreptitiously checking them out, what this change in the US military seems to indicate is that open checking out will be allowed to occur.

    This is obviously different than a gym situation, where if a person starts to feel uncomfortable because of certain people, they have far more ability to avoid them. I doubt that same level of freedom is afforded to a man or woman in the military. And therein lies the main problem.

    Like

  6. If gays aren’t going to be mature they’ll be treated very immaturely.

    They’ve had long years of practice already. They not just going to pop up all of a sudden cause a law changes. Ludicrous.

    Like

  7. This law is going to be licence for men to pick on lesser physically built males as an excuse to accuse them of being gay. Americans are very ignorant on a lot of issues. They just can’t accept difference hence the huge racial issues over there.

    Like

  8. Shit the Islamic nut jobs will make hay out of something like this. Can just see the front line now, towel heads with signs, “yanks take it up the arse”, “poofs, queers”, “unclean devil worshipers”. Yeah I don’t think we have heard the end of it yet.

    Like

  9. Hell the soap bill will break the military budget in the first year. Yanks are casualty averse in any close quarters situation. No one will bend over to pick it up if they drop it unless a medic is standing by with a bottle of lubricant to relieve the wound before it happens.

    Like

  10. Men kissing men etc. Woman kissing woman etc. Before the repeal of DADT, they were expelled from the forces if they failed to exercise discretion. Now they cannot be.

    Come off it, Red. There are still regulations pertaining to behaviour. Whatever would be inappropriate between a man and a woman (I am not the best-versed of people in the regulations of the U.S. military, but I suspect public displays of affection while on-duty would be some kind of infraction) will still be just as inappropriate between two people of the same sex. The difference is, now (or a few months from now, at least), if a woman mentions during a friendly chat with her fellow service members that she has a girlfriend, nobody will be able to get her discharged by reporting this comment to her superiors.

    The “discretion” homosexuals were required to exercise previously was being forced to lie when somebody asked them if they had a sweetheart waiting back home, or else risk getting kicked out.

    Should soldiers be forced to shower in the company of queers?

    Good thing it’s a volunteer military, then, eh?

    Like

  11. “Except for most, the rules have been changed in the middle of the game.”

    I realise the marginalised are cannon fodder but are you saying a draft is imminent?

    Like

  12. No, he’s saying that when the current generation of service members joined the military, DADT was still in effect, so now they are getting something they did not sign up for.

    However, I think if they didn’t consider the possibility that they might be ordered to do something that they do not wish to do (tolerate the presence of people who are openly homosexual, for example), they shouldn’t have joined an organisation that requires them to follow orders.

    Like

  13. Wikiriwhi [December 22, 2010] at 20:05,

    They’ve had long years of practice already. They not just going to pop up all of a sudden cause a law changes. Ludicrous.

    You are joking, I presume.
    So you’re saying that since the 1986 Homosexual Law Reform in NZ there has been no increase in homosexuals within NZ society? Are you really that naive?

    This is the WHOLE argument of those of us who viewed such a law change as nothing less than the NORMALISATION of homosexuality. If you ‘normalise’ something, and promote it a such, then of course there is going to be a portion of society who will “try it” to see if they like it. And who otherwise would not.

    The same argument could be put for legalising marijuana. Why, exactly, do you think we have laws in the first place? I really struggle to believe there are people out there who are this naive – or perhaps it’s more a case of willful ignorance?!

    Like

  14. derp de derp [December 23, 2010 at] 00:25,

    Good thing it’s a volunteer military, then, eh?

    Typical Leftard reasoning and excuse making.
    Why should someone “normal” who signs up with the military now have to tolerate openly queer fellow personnel? And how many “normal” people will this now put off taking up a military career?

    As I said in my earlier comment, this is only going to cause destructive repercussions and lack of unity in the US military. And, of course, this plays right into the hand of the socialist elite who want nothing less than to see the demise of the US military.

    Like

Comments are closed.