Wednesday, September 22, 2010
lady gaga supports gays in the military
All right. Another controversial topic. First, what do you think about celebrities and artists getting involved in political causes? How often does this sort of thing happen in Slovakia? Do influential people like musicians have a moral duty to use their influence to try to make the world a better place? Or should they stick to what they know and leave these issues to politicians and academics? Can they be more effective than politicians since they don't have to be so careful about pleasing constituents and maintaining a squeaky clean reputation? On the other hand, do celebrities also have a moral obligation to be a good role model? Secondly (and be respectful here!), what are the issues involved in allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. At the moment, US army officials are not allowed to ask about sex orientation and recruits should keep quiet. If they don't however, they can be kicked out. Does this seem a fair system to you or would you like to change it? Would it work in Slovakia? In Western Europe?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Firstly, I would like to say that Lady Gaga shouldn’t get involved in political issues. I understand that she is famous and she wants to get a little attention but by demonstrating, she is just turning people against politicians. She doesn’t know all the details politicians are discussing and making You Tube videos urging the Senate to make a decision might be contra productive. She should do what she knows best and not stick her nose in serious manners. Also Lady Gaga should realize that she is not really a good role model. A lot of artists can be good role models, for example Bono, but Lady Gaga does a lot of crazy stuff that creates an image of a person who should be taken with a lot of reserve.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I don’t really get why there are so many problems with allowing homosexuals to serve in army. Even if the Senate allows homosexuals to serve in army, I don’t think there will be a lot of them that wants to serve anyway. And if they want to serve, what is the problem? More soldiers, more power. Although, I understand that lots of soldiers will consider homosexuals weak and soft and won’t trust them when they are in a battle, but friend in need is friend indeed. Another thing might be that soldiers are afraid to spend their time in army with homosexuals because they are afraid of sexual harassment. But most of homosexuals are not the violent types that would demean to something like sexual harassment. And a chance of sexual harassment is equal in by both homosexuals and heterosexuals. I don’t really see why homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to serve their country, if they feel they can help, they shouldn’t be stopped only because they’re homosexuals. They are no worse than others.
@Mai
ReplyDeleteMai made some very good points in his comment. I don't understand as well why homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to join the army if they want to. That is a clear sign of discrimination to me just as if Afro Americans for example weren't allowed to join and that is for state which is boasting about how liberal it is a significant failure. I agree with all the supportive arguments that Mai made for this point.
Concerning the involvement of Lady Gaga, I can't see much harm done by her actions. She said what she felt she needed to say and acted according to it. Senate can live though a little bit of criticism. I agree with Mai that Lady Gaga doesn't know the political background of the whole situation but at the same time I wouldn't ban her from expressing her opinion about it. However I'm not that naive to think that she did it (only) because of the reasons she presents to the public. I may be skeptical (like Mai) but I would say the reason behind celebrities getting involved in other social fields is almost always just to increase the attention around them. But even if this was the case, I would let them say anything they want to so at least the variety of opinions would be wider and it is up to people themselves who they want to trust or be influenced by.
Alexandra L.
@Mai
ReplyDeleteMai, I am very disposed to your opinion about the issue in the article. I totally agree with you on the point, that there is way too much drama around the whole dilemma, if homosexuals should, or shouldn’t be allowed to join the army. I also support your statements that they should be allowed, that they aren’t any worse than heterosexuals are and that even if they would be allowed, most of them probably wouldn’t join anyway. Apart from you, I would like to spend more time on criticizing the politicians for spending so much time on this dilemma, because the whole arguing strikes me. Not only that it should be a debate less fact that homosexuals should be able to join the army, there is also the fact, that there are hundreds of more important problems to be solved and discussed (e.g. 3rd world poverty, global warming). To conclude, there is one thing I don’t agree with you on. Regarding what Lady Gaga does and the fact that she isn’t an expert on this topic, I think her effort to draw attention is on place. She contributes to a good thing, i.e. trying to convince the vital ones, who have the decision in their own hands.
Branislav Skocek IB3