Originally Posted by Sidd Finch
Still, though, I can see the guy's point. I mean, I live in San Francisco so I know a lot of gay people. And all they ever think about is butt-sex. All day long, it's butt-sex, butt-sex, butt-sex. And I'm 100% certain that if I were in a foxhole with a gay man and taking heavy fire from a Taliban position, he would be thinking about butt-sex. Not about returning fire, not whether we could call in an air or artillery strike, not about how we could get to a better position, but butt-sex, butt-sex, butt-sex.
As a result, I would be distracted by butt-sex. Or, more accurately, about how to avoid butt-sex. Because the potential for him inflicting butt-sex on me is much more worrisome than the Taliban bullets. Hence, I could get wounded or even killed, and all because of the repeal of DADT.
Obviously, under DADT, I would not know if my foxhole-mate were gay. Whereas, without DADT, I would know with 100% certainty -- since gay people who are not subject to DADT, say in normal civilian life, are always 100% out with their colleagues all the time, particularly when they work in places like the US Marine Corps. So, with DADT, I would not know my foxhole-mate was gay and constantly thinking of butt-sex, and since I would not know it would not bother me and I would not be distracted.
|
