Ashamed?

When I was stationed in Germany I was ashamed once. While out drinking with some of my Army buddies we decided to walk back to the barracks instead of paying for a cab - mostly because we were broke and spent all our cash on beer.

Halfway there two of my buddies had to pee so they snuck up onto a doorway (we were still inside town, you see, Germany doesn't have houses like we do - it's mostly apartment buildings) and I guess we were pretty loud and lights came on and we could hear a older gruff sounding voice behind the door yelling at us to leave in German.

One of my buddies started cursing at the door and preceeded to pee all over the handle - calling them **** lovers and how we should have nuked their f'ing country and turned it into a parking lot. The other was laughing - I think we all were - I was only 22 at the time and pretty arrogant.

We wandered off down the road and started to hear sirens - you don't mess with the German Polizei - they carry these spring loaded nightsticks that hit you like a drill hammer!

Well we made it back to the barracks and past the guards and thought we were home clear.

First thing Saturday morning we all were awakened by our 1SG and marched out to see the elderly couple that my buddies pissed on their door with two local Polizei escorting us all.

Come to find out that the woman was a local politician (like a mayor I guess) and was a little girl during WW2 and was greatly offended by calling them a ****. Her husband was Armenian if I recall.

Did you know it is punishable by law to own anything **** related in Germany - still to this day? She went on to describe - through an interpretor - about how glad she was when the Americans came - they had heard about the Soviets coming from the east and about rapes and such. How some of the soldiers brought them candy and her family had let a few of the soldiers bunk in the downstairs.

Then her face changed - saddened she said she always respected the American soldiers until the night before and she wanted to meet us in person to explain (almost pleaded to us) that we couldn't have insulted her more by calling her a **** for she was never a **** and would not have been if she could have had a choice - she wasn't old enough to join the Hitler Youth groups.

Talk about being ashamed. At that moment, I felt lower than ant ****.

If the actions of our President ashames you... perhaps you need to gain a little more humility, because as arrogant as America can get - we are still human beings. A lesson I learned that day all to well.

Needless to say we were forced to clean the entire face of that apartment building. We weren't in uniform. But you could tell we were easily Americans. But no one laughed and the woman (damn I can't remember her name) brought us bratwurst sandwiches during it.

Being American is more than kicking *** and taking names, dude...

 

interesting story. cant say i would ever do anything like that (i am a very passive/submissive individual, the kind that likes to avoid face to face confrontation), but your buddy had another thing comin when he was running his mouth like that.

i think you took my "ashamed" comment the wrong way. I am not really ashamed he is president, mostly just ashamed in the decisions he is making/wants to make (the kind of ashamed like just covering your face with your hand). I am the kind of person who likes to hold onto the ideals of our founding fathers, consider me a traditionalist, because i believe those kind of ideas are what America is really made of.
Things like gay marriage, universal health care, big governmet, basically the core of Obama, belong in europe and california where they came from. (the california one is a joke so feel free to lol) Those things are not what george washington had imagained America to be. What i like to do sometimes is think what if Washington, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson all were able to take a time machine from 1776 to 2009. I couldnt tell you what they would think, but i imagine they would be, for the most part, very proud of what we have shaped our nation into. And the liberal agenda simply isnt in line with American values of yesteryear.

 

Hypocrisy Watch - how many liberals were ashamed of Bush when he was President? 100%?

You dont have to defend yourself for the regret you feel since Obama has been elected. I dont know what the disgraceful actions of young American soldiers has to do with Redline's feelings about Obama and his policies. I do share is sentiment about the liberal agenda.

 

Oy, anti gay marriage and anti abortion... I could philosophize with you on these points. It's quite a narrow minded view to be against gay marriage, and abortion must be legal. It's not perfect, but the alternative paints a grim picture for human rights. I'd love to hear your reasoning for holding the opinions that you do on these issues.

Good story, Palindari.

 

first and foremost these are my OPINIONS. opinions are like ********, everyones got one (forgot which movie thats from. Platoon?) You say its closed minded of me to have these views, i say you are too open of a mind.
1. I am a catholic. Not an entirely religious one, but i still hold those values. that should be enough, but im sure you would say "of course you wouldnt like gay marriage if your ones of THOSE people." From a non-religious postition...
Tell me in any which way gay marriage is right? It physically just doesnt work. They make nuts and bolts for a reason. You cant screw a nut into another nut! And as for the "its for the love me and my partner share, not about the sex" (bullshit flag! its about the tax benefits too... But if it was really all about the love, wouldnt they just stay together whether or not they could be married?) Hell, if they legalize gay marriage, I might as well just marry my buddy cause i think hes cool (just an example. not seriously. that would be gay lol) it would absolutely downplay the institution of marriage. God knows this country already has a divorce rate of around 50%

2. As for abortion goes, USE A ******* CONDOM! Even birth control! The reason abortion is wrong is you are quite literally killing a living human being, or at least one that has the potential for a life of value. That fetus inside is a developing human being and has the potential to live a life! who is anybody to take away that fetus's chance at life. a little story... my mother, unlike a lot of other families, actually tried to concieve children that were preplanned. How did the first chance end up? miscarriage. bummer. Second chance? my sister. third chance? another miscarriage. even bigger bummer. fourth chance? me. I feel very fortunate to have every made it to this planet and there are people out there who deliberately kill their unborn fetuses.

 

I'm not necessarily against gay marraige in a philisophical sense or abortion in a practical sense. I think it should be a states right issue and decided by a vote of the people.

Gay marraige is a case of a slippery slope. Polygamy should legitimately be compared to gay marriage when it comes to law. I choose to stand on the moral ground that the fundemental man-woman relationship should be honored above others. Anything that is similarly promoting could be considered narrow minded. It is the defintion of liberal to want to evolve away from tradition. The only real difference is sexual preference and it is easy to understand why people do not see fairness in the law. It is the liberal view that gay marriage should be equal, in the eye of the government, to traditional marriage. It is the conservative view that traditional marraige represents a fundemental element of human culture, has a special place in history as the foundation of the family, and should be perpetuated in this light. Perhaps the issue it is more complex than narrow mindedness. We can define marriage as an institution of opposite genders or a pair of people. Allowing gay marriage essentially says that it is the couple that should be honored. I would be interested to know why headshok sees the couple as distinguishable by law?

Abortion is something which I think society should recognize as unfortunte. There is nothing honorable in having the freedom to destroy a developing fetus. So it is understandable that people choose to make laws which promote an honorable society. I think that abortion should defintely be legally available in cases of rape etc. where a crime occured. But many people see conception as the creation of a life. They feel that humans have a moral obligation to nurture this life. If you know anything about pregnancy, you realize how quickly a fetus becomes a baby. The limit for an abortion is something like 3 months? not sure, but headshok should be able to provide justification for the placement of the boundary. And that boundary should justify the legal separation between murder and abortion.

I hold nothing against people who hold opposing views to my own. The answers to controversial questions are rarely obvious. I feel persuaded by the reasoning that I outlined.

 

Good points... But you'll rarely find a soldier to be "passive/aggressive" it goes against the job description

As for the word "ashamed" I used my example to show you the proper meaning of the word. Perhaps you meant "disappointed", "disillusioned" or "embarrassed" maybe? Ashamed doesn't seem to fit in the true definition of the word.

As for the "time machine" idea - I too have often wondered... here you have a hand full of men who started the next global superpower that brought about more world change than they could have ever wanted. Funny, you talk about "big government" Jefferson, during his administration, not only doubled the size of government - but effectively quadripled the entire size of the United States with the Louisianna Purchase.

Franklin mostly likely would have been intrigued and amused.

Now Adams would have been impressed and slightly concerned. You see Adams was about as liberal as they got - he even defended the same British soldiers that killed five civilians during the infamous Boston Massacre - getting four of them acquited and two charged with only manslaughter.

Today he would be branded a traitor by the far-right wing.

 

Gay marriage:

My concern here really stems from the point: what does it matter to you? If you are married, or value the notion of marriage, does a gay couple getting married somehow detract from the value of your own commitment? It shouldn't. Most of us grow up with the idea of finding somebody who we love, and spending our lives committed to that person. Marriage is the way that most people feel best demonstrates said commitment. Why should this be any different for a gay couple?

Abortion:

It is unfortunate, but the fact of the matter is, you've got two people involved in a pregnancy--and only one of them can have (fully) the rights afforded to us as human beings. You see, if you grant the fetus all the rights afforded to persons, you are taking away rights of the woman who bears it. She no longer has control over her own body. This is a real slippery slope, as you've got mothers being forced to have cesarians in dangerous labours (for the benefit of the baby) which has resulted in death. We've also got a problem with drawing the line with providing fetal rights. Drinking while pregnant shouldn't be allowed, right? How about smoking? How about eating unhealthily? Working a stressful job? Maybe we should dictate the lives of women for the 9 months they are pregnant.

Yeah, a bit of satire at the end there. Anyways, people should use birth control... responsible people should be planning ahead. However, people make mistakes. It boils down to rights... and, as human beings (not potential human beings), the mother is entitled to all the rights that we all have.

 

Rational discussion often highlights the core differences of competing perspectives.

I appreciate your viewpoint, headshok, but I disagree for the reasosns that I already stated and you failed to specifically address my concerns. Like I said, I have no philisophical objection to gay relationships or gay marriage. I personally beleive that traditional marriage defines a less ambiguous boundary between relationships that are distinguished under the law and those that are not. Your idea that marriage demonstrates a life long commitment between any two people fails to address the limits that still would otherwise exist. For example, can a woman marry her sister whom she loves more than anyone else? Can a man marry two woman whom he is equally committed to and in love with? The problem is not that it matters to me personally or somehow threatens my own marriage. The issue is that "traditional marraige represents a fundemental element of human culture, has a special place in history as the foundation of the family, and should be perpetuated in this light." Traditional marriage is a representation of the natural interaction of human genders. I do not think it is narrow minded for people to want a government who supports this view. It should be a states rigth issue and tolerance of BOTH viewpoints should be practiced.

I have more of a problem with a liberal attitude towards abortion. The assumption is that the baby is part of the womans body and therefore the woman can do as she pleases. Once again this introduces ambiguity. When does the baby cease to be part of the womans body and becomes its own body? My view is that when I woman becomes pregnant through her own actions, careless or intentional, she has forfieted certain benefits of human freedom. Drinking and smoking during pregnancy are good examples of this. If a woman wants to keep full control of her body, then she should exercise the control not to get pregnant. Pregnancy is a result of her choices. Life is a fundemental value of our constitution. I dont understand how abortion can be seen as unfortunate and dishonorable, and at the same time is should be a mothers right that trumps over the right of a baby to be born. I could be persuaded otherwise if someone could present a clear rationale for when during pregnancy abortion becomes murder.

 

The definition of marriage involves that 'less ambiguous boundary between relationships'... that's another reason why a gay couple might wish to get married. However you define marriage, it is always going to be the strongest or most significant level of a relationship. I think that gay couples should have that right. While 'traditional' marriage may be one thing in your mind, one should acknowledge that homosexuality is common in isolated cultures that have not been exposed to media/religion etc. Whether you believe homosexuality to be genetic, or somehow caused by something, or a choice... the fact is, it is the sexual orientation of many people. This obviously influences their sexual identity, and their entire way of life. They should be able to build their lives around a significant other just as anybody else can. This should include marriage.
I don't agree with incest because of the obvious genetic problems... procreation that yields / promotes abnormality is a worse result than a relationship that cannot procreate. Your incestual gay sister thing is getting a bit too hypothetical for me to invest any time into thinking about it.

I share your frustration with the abortion dilemma... it is a terrible thing, and the frustration stems from the fact that, most times, it could have and should have been prevented.
I am of the belief that we cannot give the fetus rights--ever. Birth is the point where that crazy relationship (a relationship like no other) between mother and fetus is severed. Both entities are now, to some degree, self reliant. Here is when the baby can be afforded all rights given to us as persons without infringing on the rights of another.
That being said, it is important to make the decision to abort as soon as possible, as it is dangerous for the mother to wait too long, and there is really no point in waiting.

Those who can fathom abortion in the instance of rape... it's troubling that you can condone the 'murder' of (what you believe to be) an innocent being because it came to be as a result of a crime/assault. That needs some more explanation.