Gay recruitment drive by RAF
ABIW,
OK, so I was wrong!
Now, as to "inside information" I think Billy Whizz could help you there!
OK, so I was wrong!
Now, as to "inside information" I think Billy Whizz could help you there!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been away for too long! Gay thread on PPRuNe! WOOHOO! Light the blue touch paper and stand well back!
My stock comments: not a matter of choice, I'm good at my job, don't bring sexuality into the workplace, I'm gay and Christian, Bliar's a tw@t, Daily Mail readers are closet gay crackwhores, etc.
Seriously, how many gay personnel have mounted 'pink crusades' as feared following the lifting of the shirt (sorry, ban)? Has unit cohesion ever been demonstrably upset by an openly gay serviceman/woman? As far as I'm aware, the change in policy proved to be a sensible option as demonstrated by the near lack of negative consequences.
There are far, far bigger things to be worried about at the moment.
My stock comments: not a matter of choice, I'm good at my job, don't bring sexuality into the workplace, I'm gay and Christian, Bliar's a tw@t, Daily Mail readers are closet gay crackwhores, etc.
Seriously, how many gay personnel have mounted 'pink crusades' as feared following the lifting of the shirt (sorry, ban)? Has unit cohesion ever been demonstrably upset by an openly gay serviceman/woman? As far as I'm aware, the change in policy proved to be a sensible option as demonstrated by the near lack of negative consequences.
There are far, far bigger things to be worried about at the moment.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that I've had an opportunity to read through at least a handful of the foregoing 179 posts...
From time to time in this thread, the concept of choice has been raised. I would like to make it absolutely clear that I did not choose to be gay - it's just how I am. I don't know why I am, but I am.
Now, some people ascribe this to genetics, others to upbringing or education. The concept that homosexuality can be promoted, much like a favourite football club or (God forbid) Pokémon is, to my mind, fairly silly.
As a Christian, I find equally offensive the vitriolic attacks on "the church" and the claims that my religion automatically condemns me for something over which I have no influence.
Many of the supposed prejudices are more prevalent in the Roman Catholic Church than in the Anglican Churches, for example, and even within the Anglican Church there are differing theological opinions in the USA, UK, Canada and Africa. And that's without even considering the Greek and Russion Orthodox Churches, the state-sponsored Chinese Church, Baptists, the Church of the Holy Trinity... I'm an Anglican, and although I'm unhappy with my church's stance on civil partnerships I'm happy with its overall acceptance that gay people are not automatically damned (viz Baptists).
Turning to the Bible: what about the many and varied statements on such subjects as consuming shellfish, treating women as second-class citizens, support for slavery, the death penalty for blasphemy, the sin of usury (Biblically, charging any rate of interest when lending money), gambling, et al? When will these all be condemned as great evils or unnatural things that should only be conducted behind closed doors? I'm an oyster-lover, and I'm proud to be able to munch my fish in public. Okay, that sounded a little suspect, but I think it makes my point. And the sooner my bank manager is being parboiled by Old Nick, the better for everyone!
The statements on homosexuality themselves are, to say the least, ambiguous, and more so when translation and transliteration are considered. The story of Sodom, for example, has been studied as a parable about homosexuality (famously), but other interpretations see it as a story about rape or a story about the rejection of God's messengers. In the Epistles to the Romans, homosexuality is condemned because it was, at the time, illegal. The same epistles make reference to long-forgotten wars. Should we take up arms against Philistine because the Bible says it's an evil nation? Should we cut off interfaith dialoge with Hindus because they worship graven images? Should we shout that Muslims are condemned to hell because they reject the divinity of Christ? Because they're all in there as well.
Goodness me - RELIGION IN ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATIONS SHOCKAH!!!!
Anyway, I work hard, I look after my troops and I try to be a good officer. My sexuality has absolutely nothing to do with any of that. Apart from a good bit of banter in the Mess after work, of course!
From time to time in this thread, the concept of choice has been raised. I would like to make it absolutely clear that I did not choose to be gay - it's just how I am. I don't know why I am, but I am.
Now, some people ascribe this to genetics, others to upbringing or education. The concept that homosexuality can be promoted, much like a favourite football club or (God forbid) Pokémon is, to my mind, fairly silly.
As a Christian, I find equally offensive the vitriolic attacks on "the church" and the claims that my religion automatically condemns me for something over which I have no influence.
Many of the supposed prejudices are more prevalent in the Roman Catholic Church than in the Anglican Churches, for example, and even within the Anglican Church there are differing theological opinions in the USA, UK, Canada and Africa. And that's without even considering the Greek and Russion Orthodox Churches, the state-sponsored Chinese Church, Baptists, the Church of the Holy Trinity... I'm an Anglican, and although I'm unhappy with my church's stance on civil partnerships I'm happy with its overall acceptance that gay people are not automatically damned (viz Baptists).
Turning to the Bible: what about the many and varied statements on such subjects as consuming shellfish, treating women as second-class citizens, support for slavery, the death penalty for blasphemy, the sin of usury (Biblically, charging any rate of interest when lending money), gambling, et al? When will these all be condemned as great evils or unnatural things that should only be conducted behind closed doors? I'm an oyster-lover, and I'm proud to be able to munch my fish in public. Okay, that sounded a little suspect, but I think it makes my point. And the sooner my bank manager is being parboiled by Old Nick, the better for everyone!
The statements on homosexuality themselves are, to say the least, ambiguous, and more so when translation and transliteration are considered. The story of Sodom, for example, has been studied as a parable about homosexuality (famously), but other interpretations see it as a story about rape or a story about the rejection of God's messengers. In the Epistles to the Romans, homosexuality is condemned because it was, at the time, illegal. The same epistles make reference to long-forgotten wars. Should we take up arms against Philistine because the Bible says it's an evil nation? Should we cut off interfaith dialoge with Hindus because they worship graven images? Should we shout that Muslims are condemned to hell because they reject the divinity of Christ? Because they're all in there as well.
Goodness me - RELIGION IN ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATIONS SHOCKAH!!!!
Anyway, I work hard, I look after my troops and I try to be a good officer. My sexuality has absolutely nothing to do with any of that. Apart from a good bit of banter in the Mess after work, of course!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Dark Side
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A recent press article describes how, in the US, scientists have pinpointed the area of a sheep's (ram) brain that controls its sexuality. By injecting the area with hormones they have managed to turn some previously queer rams straight - there's hope yet!
GAGS
E86
GAGS
E86
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not so much the fact that you're Gay that worries me, it's the fact that I believe you are openly a FC and therefore lead a debauched subterranean lifestyle, and have no more right to live on God’s clean earth than a weasel, you also openly encourage bright vulnerable young men and women to follow the same path......disgusting
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been perfectly legal to be a FC for some time now - get with the programme. What I choose to do with consenting scopies behind closed blast doors is my business.
eagle86 - it is, perhaps, the ultimate irony that the links next to your name just now read:
gay teens
gay church
gay bible
gay school
And I look forward to seeing the enormous societal problem of homosexual sheep alleviated with the ground-breaking, completely necessary, non-sinister animal experimentation you mentioned. Truly man has tamed nature. IIRC the article is in the current New Scientist.
eagle86 - it is, perhaps, the ultimate irony that the links next to your name just now read:
gay teens
gay church
gay bible
gay school
And I look forward to seeing the enormous societal problem of homosexual sheep alleviated with the ground-breaking, completely necessary, non-sinister animal experimentation you mentioned. Truly man has tamed nature. IIRC the article is in the current New Scientist.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It helps to maintain the context of the paragraph you're quoting from. I'm happy with my church's general stance. I wouldn't do anything as grandoise as claim that I represent all gay people's views. I couldn't give a damn whether the Baptists like me or not, to be quite frank!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, this is what I (and most of my fellow homos) find so offensive about the various branches of the Church - the implication that we'd even care what they think, but that they still try to insist that they should be able to exercise political influence with our government, even though in terms of numbers there are more queers than church-goers. It's complete madness.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Back in civilisation
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wouldn't it be crazy if there was the kind of recruiting policy that gave the job to the best person for it may they be black, brown, yelow, white,gay or lesbian or blue like myself (scottish tan).
It is getting beyond a joke when good people are not getting jobs due to positive discrimination. The whole idea of it is ludicrus brought about by some complete politically correct w****rs. An example of this, a freind is a retained fireman, he went for fulltime post, post given to lesbian. She then goes through training arrives at station and gets sacked for being dangerous. The reason being when she went through training the goal posts were constantly moved for her. I kid you not.
Don't get me wrong i would be quite happy for the next guy/girl to be gay if they were the best person for the job. I have seen the system twisted by a cetain helicopter navigator with whom i was on IOT with. He was due to get chopped at shawbury, decided to come out when the worst was going to happen now he is a front line helo nav. BRILLIANT!!!
This is not the kind of person that the air force needs be he straght or gay.
I think the money that is being used could really be better used, if a gay person wants to join the forces i think they would be the kind of person who would notice the normal advertising/recruitment.
Rant over.
It is getting beyond a joke when good people are not getting jobs due to positive discrimination. The whole idea of it is ludicrus brought about by some complete politically correct w****rs. An example of this, a freind is a retained fireman, he went for fulltime post, post given to lesbian. She then goes through training arrives at station and gets sacked for being dangerous. The reason being when she went through training the goal posts were constantly moved for her. I kid you not.
Don't get me wrong i would be quite happy for the next guy/girl to be gay if they were the best person for the job. I have seen the system twisted by a cetain helicopter navigator with whom i was on IOT with. He was due to get chopped at shawbury, decided to come out when the worst was going to happen now he is a front line helo nav. BRILLIANT!!!
This is not the kind of person that the air force needs be he straght or gay.
I think the money that is being used could really be better used, if a gay person wants to join the forces i think they would be the kind of person who would notice the normal advertising/recruitment.
Rant over.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had Enough 77, don't be silly!
Brick - er roughly - usual rules of Googling apply
According to the CIA in Jul 06 there were 6,525,170,264 people on the planet
Of that 33% are nominally Christian (2,039,000,000)
of that approx are 1,098,366,00 RC (2004)
Others approx 940,634,000 are Other, mainly Protestant (2004)
Depending on how many are active church goers 10-70%
Anything from 652,517,026 to oh I don't know, er lots
Depending on whether you go for the 3%, 5% or 10% figures for homosexuality you've got 195,755,107, 326,258,510 or 652,517,020 ladies in comfortable shoes and gentlemen of impeccable taste and grooming
So as far as I can see those of the Left-foot persuasion (RC) do indeed outnumber those who are acquainted with the love that dare not speak it’s name
But if you are a Proddy dog (Protestant), because of its lack of hetogenio, homog, er, central control you are outnumbered! Not only that, as an unknown percentage of God botherers ahhm, ‘bat for the opposition’ the odds are even worse!
'course I may be talking Bolox
Brick - er roughly - usual rules of Googling apply
According to the CIA in Jul 06 there were 6,525,170,264 people on the planet
Of that 33% are nominally Christian (2,039,000,000)
of that approx are 1,098,366,00 RC (2004)
Others approx 940,634,000 are Other, mainly Protestant (2004)
Depending on how many are active church goers 10-70%
Anything from 652,517,026 to oh I don't know, er lots
Depending on whether you go for the 3%, 5% or 10% figures for homosexuality you've got 195,755,107, 326,258,510 or 652,517,020 ladies in comfortable shoes and gentlemen of impeccable taste and grooming
So as far as I can see those of the Left-foot persuasion (RC) do indeed outnumber those who are acquainted with the love that dare not speak it’s name
But if you are a Proddy dog (Protestant), because of its lack of hetogenio, homog, er, central control you are outnumbered! Not only that, as an unknown percentage of God botherers ahhm, ‘bat for the opposition’ the odds are even worse!
'course I may be talking Bolox
Guest
Posts: n/a
edited to add: As usual, someone was both quicker and presented it better than I. Thanks, Maple01!
Let's see, the world has some 6.4 billion folks scrabbling around
http://education.yahoo.com/reference...xx/popula.html
roughly 2.1 billion of them are Christians of various denominations, http://www.christianpost.com/article/20060106/22515.htm
around 1.6 billion Muslims, http://www.islamicpopulation.com/world_general.html,
and I'll not bother to post Hindu, Sikh, and many other religions estimated adherents but well over half of the world's population seems to belong to some sort of religion. Granted not all of them attend 'church,' but let's say 30% do (I think the percentage is much higher, but just for this point, let's go on the low side).
That's nearly a billion church-goers. Are there more than that who consider themselves gay/lesbian?
"Interesting" would be in the eye of the reader, no?
http://education.yahoo.com/reference...xx/popula.html
roughly 2.1 billion of them are Christians of various denominations, http://www.christianpost.com/article/20060106/22515.htm
around 1.6 billion Muslims, http://www.islamicpopulation.com/world_general.html,
and I'll not bother to post Hindu, Sikh, and many other religions estimated adherents but well over half of the world's population seems to belong to some sort of religion. Granted not all of them attend 'church,' but let's say 30% do (I think the percentage is much higher, but just for this point, let's go on the low side).
That's nearly a billion church-goers. Are there more than that who consider themselves gay/lesbian?
"Interesting" would be in the eye of the reader, no?
Last edited by brickhistory; 8th Jan 2007 at 14:13.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maple - God you must be bored! However, thanks for attempting to disappear up your own fundament in statistics in order to enlighten us! Perhaps if Tim had restricted his comparison to the largely non-church-going UK we would have avoided this. The position is, of course, completely different in the US. However, at least the US had the good sense to keep the bishops out of the legislature.
HE77 - Of course you're being silly . Common sense (treat your gay chaps and chapesses the same as everyone else) costs nothing, therefore it cannot be demonstrated in the annual accounts that snr officers have been tackling a 'problem' if they haven't spent any money on it.
Tablet - Welcome to the fray, young bean. We've had all the input from the crusty old farts (polomint excepted). Perhaps, as a young thrusting (oo-er missus) officer who happens to be gay, you'd care to enlighten us with an opinion on the actual questions at hand?
Should the RAF be doling out the Defence Vote to pressure groups?
What benefits or detriments might accrue to young, serving gay folk?
As far as I could see, the only tangible benefit in the Telegraph article was survivor pensions which will have to be done anyway to comply with non-discrimination legislation.
Are our senior officers so thick that they cannot see for themselves the benefits of non-discrimination?
What might you learn from Stonewall that IOT and Staff College can't teach you about leadership?
What will a staff group actually talk about? Should the Defence Vote be used for sponsoring pi55-ups for minority groups?
HE77 - Of course you're being silly
. Common sense (treat your gay chaps and chapesses the same as everyone else) costs nothing, therefore it cannot be demonstrated in the annual accounts that snr officers have been tackling a 'problem' if they haven't spent any money on it.Tablet - Welcome to the fray, young bean. We've had all the input from the crusty old farts (polomint excepted). Perhaps, as a young thrusting (oo-er missus) officer who happens to be gay, you'd care to enlighten us with an opinion on the actual questions at hand?
Should the RAF be doling out the Defence Vote to pressure groups?
What benefits or detriments might accrue to young, serving gay folk?
As far as I could see, the only tangible benefit in the Telegraph article was survivor pensions which will have to be done anyway to comply with non-discrimination legislation.
Senior RAF officers will also receive a training package "designed to educate employers and their staff about the benefits of building an inclusive workplace environment for lesbian and gay staff".
Stonewall will offer RAF personnel the chance to attend its intensive two-day professional development training exercise for "rising- lesbian and gay professionals in the workplace".
creating an LGB staff group and sponsoring events such as the annual Gay Pride festival.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The US Forces have got it just about right:
Don't ask and don't tell.
Who cares what colour, religion or sexual orientation a person is so long as he or she does his or her job?
Not me. The Brit Forces have served alongside homosexuals for centuries quite successfully - only until recently, they didn't know it.
It's POSITIVE discrimination that gets up the noses of people in this country...
Don't ask and don't tell.
Who cares what colour, religion or sexual orientation a person is so long as he or she does his or her job?
Not me. The Brit Forces have served alongside homosexuals for centuries quite successfully - only until recently, they didn't know it.
It's POSITIVE discrimination that gets up the noses of people in this country...
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The US Forces have got it just about right: Don't ask and don't tell.
John M. Shalikashvili: It's time to ask: Should they tell?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although it is becoming increasingly tedious to even waste my time replying to you Brickhistory, I think (if you bother to actually read it) you'll find that in my original comment, I was referring to the numbers of gay people versus the number of chuch-goers in the UK, and how our church leaders still try to cling to political power here in the UK despite there being considerably more gay people than church-goers. Ironic by anybody's standards. Naturally, I couldn't give a toss what lunacy might occur overseas!