I was actually enjoying the (mature) discussion we were having until your last (and very vague) post. I would like to hear what you have to say/believe, but to be totally honest, I don't follow what references specifically you are referring to. All I got out of it was I should serve the straights and go 17 years without having sex whatsoever while you enjoy dinner with your wife and family, post pics of your family on your desk at work. After reading your post it makes me feel your views are that gays can serve as long as they are slaves to the straights, which I KNOW wasn't your intended meaning, or at least, I hope not.

The problem is that when you spend 3-4 years with an individual or a 6 month deployment in close proximity with an individual, you will find out their orientation be it by them admitting or their failure to "play along" and come up with lies to hide their orientation. Not hitting on opposite sex, not wearing a ring, not talking about who they hooked up with or their wife/girlfriend back home.

"Proper" adaptation would allow them to be in the service as long as no one found out and if so they would be discharged but people will, in time, assume or find out. Once people start assuming it becomes a game to prove (indirectly), and then the proverbial $hit starts to roll.

I'm very curious what you would have done to ensure it was properly implemented and how.

This being said, I fail to see what, if any part, of the relatively short DADT policy actually served any use whatsoever. On one hand people say you can be here I just don't want to know about it (Nor can you ever have sex with another member of the same sex in your off-time), but on the other people do, or try to find out indirectly and people get discharged. After 17 years of service it's not a game I like to play. I've done my job, and would like to continue, regardless of what people think I may or not be behind closed doors.

Bradley was stationed at a command that was more tollerant. There are those that are like this and there are those that clearly aren't. I've work in both environments, as you probably have.
I've seened alleged homosexuals brought up under false accusations, having a picture snapped at a nightclub and published, or someone seeing them out with their partner in town. They didn't "tell", they were sought out, investigated and discharged.
Contrary to its supposed purpose, Since 1994, the first full year in which the policy was in effect, more than 8700 service members have been discharged under the policy. In 2001, 1250 men and women were fired from their jobs in the Armed Forces
You're right, sex shouldn't be an issue at work and what I do sexually in my offtime shouldn't bar me from fighting for our country just because you know about it or caught wind of it or suspect..

The guys in the pride parades wearing leather and sitting in slings are not my spokes people. Unfortunately those are the images that the media tends to focus on that have scarred societies views of what "normal" gay men look like. As for our advocates, many are members of SLDN (Servicemembers Legal Defense Network), or prior military themselves such as Joseph Rocha http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti.... Many of the advocates are also those that are acting out of pleas through silent request, anonymous emails, and the sort to be our voice since we cannot. Sure there are those that are doing it on their own behalf seeing the problems that the soon to be repealed DADT policy has caused. If I were to have spoke out myself, I'd be discharged and be one of them (civilian) myself, not an active duty advocate.

I'm basing the merits of my career on my evaluations, awards, and recommendations by my upper chain of command, not by a personal overinflated ego. This *IS* about equal rights, and the reason the LGBT community is the ones speaking up is because those serving and fighting for their country can't do so unless they want to become civilians themselves. They are the voice, that simple.

Most of the comments on this page are nothing more than exaggerations, stereotyped responses and hate. I've served my military, and continue to still, for 17 years and have led the pack for awards and distinguished service. Most of the gay military members I know have done the same, and set the example for those to strive for. It isn't about wanting pink uniforms or to have unprotected "homoerotic" sex, it's about wanting to be able to serve my country (and yes to protect even people like you) without having to come up with lies every day about who I'm seeing, dating, what I did last night, where I went, or anything related to my personal life out of fear of my 17 years of service being thrown away. It's unfortunate that the media focuses on the extreme and negative sides of the gay community that most of you are basing your beliefs and stereotypes on, and saddening that you are so narrow minded to believe all gays act and behave like such a minority that you've seen. Would you assume you should serve fried chicken if you had a black person over for dinner? Okay then.

Should I have to worry about someone seeing a picture in my wallet, or overhearing a conversation on my phone to my partner, that it could possibly end my career? If this did happen, the military would be losing one of it's finest. THAT'S what much of this means to gays who are serving. Even after the repeal is signed and adopted by the military, I'll probably stay quiet about my life, but I won't have to worry about nosy bigots like many of the people posting here putting your nose into my personal business causing me to lose my career and tossing aside my years of service to this great nation.