[lit-ideas] Permission to speak?
- From: Torgeir Fjeld <torgeir_fjeld@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 22:04:45 +0000 (GMT)
Well written... and a-change is underway:
"The US House of Representatives approved yesterday the proposal to overturn
the law banning openly LGB people serving in the military.
The House vote, which came through at 234-194, reflects a strength of feeling
among members of Congress that the 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" law brought in
under President Clinton has to go, and that the US was ready for a military in
which soldiers can be open about their sexuality."
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/05/28/us-house-delivers-victory-on-proposal-to-overturn-gay-military-ban/
Best etc etc
-t
In a message dated 5/29/2010 11:28:38 P.M., molleo1@xxxxxxxxxxx
> writes:
> I sent two letters a few days ago, both of which
> appeared in my sent items
> box. But they never appeared in my Inbox, which
> I like to check for
> accuracy in case I missed something when I
> proof read it. I know one got
> through because Mr. Speranza sent a response.
> The other one referred to
> Congressman Patrick Murphy. I would appreciate
> it if you received that one if you
> let me know. About once a month I have to
> resubscibe to fix one thing or
> another. It had same subject line as this one.
> Thanks.
> Veronica Caley,
> Milford, MI
>
> ----
>
> Veronica. I have just used the search-engine at the
> lit-ideas files, and
> indeed, the post where you referred to me as the 'Grice
> expert' ALSO included
> the bit about the P. Murphy. I skipped that because I was
> so excited you
> were quoting me that I made my point without going
> through the details of
> your post.
>
> I LOVE R. Maddow. I think she is GREAT. She is NOT a
> journalist, of
> course! More of a showwoman! So I can imagine the
> interview.
>
> The point was about sexual orientation, etc. (She is a
> lesbian, Rachel, no?
> She is never seen in tabloids going out with different
> men! Just joking).
> Anyway...
>
> So, Murphy qua war veteran (be careful there, because once
> a VETERAN, no
> longer a soldier -- really) says that he would support the
> 'don't ask don't
> tell' because what
>
> "a man does in his bed" or closet is irrelevant for his job
> done, etc.
>
> ---- I share the feeling! But surely it's more complex than
> that! I DON'T
> THINK the issue should arise in that no reason should be
> given!
> But I recall Maddow also interviewing the same army member
> who DID come
> out, and there was a debate as to whether he could REMAIN
> in the army.
>
> The 'don't ask don't tell' sounds like hypocrysy, and this
> soldier who DID
> tell even if nobody ASKED him also raises a Gricean point.
>
> The 'justification' by Murphy seems simplistic. There is a
> LOT written
> about male bonding, etc. and there are arguments against
> and for it.
>
> But basically, the main argument is that a bed is a bed is
> a bed. But in
> the barracks, a bed is a bed is a bed IN THE BARRACKS. Not
> to forget the
> SHOWERS! So, knowing MALES, a lot of sniggering, abuse,
> discrimination SHOULD
> ensue if somone self-airs, "I'm homosexual".
>
> Not that words fail THERE. "Don't ask, don't tell". Tell
> WHAT? It seems
> that ALL words labelling 'sexuality' are sort of wrong.
> "I'm straight". "I
> never asked you". Note that 'straight' sounds even
> gross when it comes to
> FEMALES! Or not!
>
> J. L. Speranza
> Bordighera, etc.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
