NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/rushlim/12434

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-30 | 3.7 KB

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12434 alt.politics.clinton:19200 alt.politics.bush:15018 alt.politics.homosexuality:8522 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10849
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ennews!anasaz!john
From: [e-mail] (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Showering in the Military (Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about: )
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Arizona USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 04:30:11 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet News)
Lines: 65

Keywords:

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fritz Sands) writes:
]In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
]|
]| 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;
]
]First, why *isn't* coercion enough?

Because coercion does not make people like or respect each other - both
of which are important in the maintenance of unit cohesion.
]
]Second -- the same arguement was used in opposition to integrating blacks
]into the military, and is now used in opposition to fully integrating
]women into the military.  It could be used in opposition to fully
]integrating people from different ethnic groups (say, people of Greek
]and Turkish descent), or from different religions.

Yes, it could, except that gayness is a behavioral trait, which is
directly related to interpersonal relationships, while the other issues
you raise are not.

]Purportedly, the military trains young men and women to be responsible
]enough to fight, kill, and die together; to use weapons of awesome power;
]to survive brutality and torture if captured.  I think that, in all of
]this character-building, the military could sort of figure out how to
]drill in a little tolerance.

Oh my, another social engineer. The military doesn't just train young men
and women to be responsible - it selects those who are and hands them
the responsibility. While training may have some effect on people's
attitudes and behavior, it doesn't allow one to mold behavior to one's
desire. The military exploits characteristics already present in people -
it doesn't completely rebuild personalities (although it tries). Many
well meaning attempts to teach sensitivity and tolerance backfire, because
we do not know enough to control human behavior (thank goodness!).

]|  furthermore,
]| that (unlike the case with blacks), it is NOT important to the united
]| states to integrate gays at that expense.
]
]Please tell me why one is important and the other isn't?
Number of blacks; the fact that there is no significant difference
in behavior between blacks and whites.
]
]|  Other arguments, such as
]| violation of privacy of hets also exist.
]
]If I am required to shower with a bunch of other men, how is it different
]if some number of them are gay?  How is my privacy more violated?

If you are required to shower with a bunch of people, how is it different
that some are of a different sex? It IS different.

]There are, now, quite a few gays in the military.  Is the privacy of a
]het more violated if sie knows that other people in the shower are gay?

Yes.

--
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
[e-mail] ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz![e-mail]
 - - Support ALL ...erk  glugh   mmpph.... Memory fault (core dumped)