should we - Page 2 - United Bimmer Community

**CroCop>** · 07-31-2007, 01:03 PM

I couldnt agree more with drz, this thread and all the political ones in this group are BULLSHIT. you ask why? I say becasue this isnt capitol hill or the senate, its fucking UNITED BIMMER!!
LETS TALK ABOUT BIMMERS!!! YAY BIMMER!

**bimmersunited** · 07-31-2007, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drz

What kind of a question is this? Why the hell are you trying to wreak havoc?

First of all: as a leader -- albeit appointed, and not elected -- of this board, how come you don't man up and offer your opinion first?

Second: Why is "pubilcly" the key?

Third: My answer to your first question (I am assuming it was a question because of the way it was worded, even though there is no question mark at the end) is yes.

Fourth: My answer to your most recent question (about my morale being affected, etc., etc.) is no.

Please remove the Politics and War subforum.

As a moderator, I'm not a leader.

I just try to prevent forest fires, nothing more.

I "moderate" - offering advice on resolving a situation. I'm not a super mod, nor am I an admin thems your leaders right there

Publicly is the key because we have a tendency in all things to act differently in private than we do in public. this is an anonymous public forum however so it's a 3rd take on the discussion, would you serve with someone that was openly a/b/c on a public forum but you'd never know who they were if yous served with them?

Said another way, would you serve with someone that was a closet a/b/c, an anonymous publicly a/b/c, or a public open a/b/c ?

So you would serve? yes.

personally, I've never been in that position, although I've been around lots of a/b/c living where I do and it doesn't bother me one way or the other whether it's open/closed/or semi anonymous.

affecting morale is however open for debate don't you think? from people that ARE in the armed forces?

**bimmersunited** · 07-31-2007, 01:24 PM

as an add, i'm posting to spark debate, but not to spark forest fires.
i like to see how people think but don't think it has to degrade into a word war.

drz · 07-31-2007, 01:37 PM

It's nice to know that UB has turned into a place where one of our mods does not consider him/herself a leader.

**c1apton** · 07-31-2007, 01:41 PM

I'm waiting for 2 minutes in the penalty box myself...

**scooter** · 07-31-2007, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drz

It's nice to know that UB has turned into a place where one of our mods does not consider him/herself a leader.

the real leaders of the forum are you, the long standing members who have been here and posting from the start, mods are members just like you and are in no way shape or form meant to lead you anywhere, they are here to watch over and deal with problems if they arise.

it is up to you guys to lead the forum, if you dont like an area of the forum then avoide it trying to impose your will on others is not the right thing to do. i am passionate about cars and politics, i dont want to leave here to discuss certain aspects on other forums, i can share more then my love for cars with members.

i could care less for a stereo sub forum or a comedy one, but for the benefit of the group as a whole i will leave it open.
catch my drift?

**MTurboPower3** · 07-31-2007, 02:23 PM

CroCop your right lets talk bimmers not political bullshit

nick_318is · 08-01-2007, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scooter

the real leaders of the forum are you, the long standing members who have been here and posting from the start, mods are members just like you and are in no way shape or form meant to lead you anywhere, they are here to watch over and deal with problems if they arise.

Well stop acting like assholes and let people post their thoughts, notice the leaders, the active people that are on the forum, are posting their thoughts, this subforum is stupid and a waste of time and has no place in our UB.c community. We are here to talk about UNITED BIMMERS NOT UNITED STATES, or any other politics.

**Rooz** · 08-01-2007, 09:39 PM

I though you couldn't be gay (like publicly) and be in the armed forces

**94bmw325i** · 08-01-2007, 09:48 PM

I dont believe so either. It seems like more attention is being focused on this war and politics section, than the rest of this place which I think is a BMW forum? I'm not too sure though..

**Chris** · 08-02-2007, 12:34 AM

Hmmm.... "maybe" the issue isn't their presence of their service in the military... its the logisitcal and legal nightmare of screening for authenticity, and then providing for separate accomodations for said minorities. In some forward deployed locations, its hard enough to provide proper accomodations. let alone accomodations for sexual minorities. and then how do you prevent intercourse in said accomodations?

.... and sodomy is punishable by the UCMJ and is defined as any form for sexual pleasure derived from any form of intercourse other than penile-vaginal sex. Which provides for other issues that would need worked out.

not taking a side, just pointing out a different side of the argument that should be taken into account by both sides.

**scooter** · 08-02-2007, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisdoesntknow

Hmmm.... "maybe" the issue isn't their presence of their service in the military... its the logisitcal and legal nightmare of screening for authenticity, and then providing for separate accomodations for said minorities. In some forward deployed locations, its hard enough to provide proper accomodations. let alone accomodations for sexual minorities. and then how do you prevent intercourse in said accomodations?

.... and sodomy is punishable by the UCMJ and is defined as any form for sexual pleasure derived from any form of intercourse other than penile-vaginal sex. Which provides for other issues that would need worked out.

not taking a side, just pointing out a different side of the argument that should be taken into account by both sides.

why not take a side? debate can be fun...

**Chris** · 08-02-2007, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scooter

why not take a side? debate can be fun...

maybe i don't want to get into it.... maybe i do

but more than likely, i just don't know.

The way i liken the situation is that if they're public about it, where do you put them? a male homosexual in a male barracks is like putitng a straight male in female barracks. there's no guarrantee that someone will get raped, but its still a possibility. With the current policy of DADT, the military has plausible deniability, which leaves the burden of doing (or not doing) the right thing on the individual (where the burden should be all along).

**scooter** · 08-02-2007, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisdoesntknow

maybe i don't want to get into it.... maybe i do

but more than likely, i just don't know.

The way i liken the situation is that if they're public about it, where do you put them? a male homosexual in a male barracks is like putitng a straight male in female barracks. there's no guarrantee that someone will get raped, but its still a possibility. With the current policy of DADT, the military has plausible deniability, which leaves the burden of doing (or not doing) the right thing on the individual (where the burden should be all along).

i think i agree with that, the burden should be on the individual, what if he feels that he is compromising his unit though, what then? who does he go to?
BTW, you cant hide either...

craig · 08-05-2007, 04:40 AM

as long as they can fight, it dosnt botherr me any. but then again, i wouldnt exacly be comfortable taking a shower with a gay guy.