The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: twyacht on December 03, 2011, 05:22:00 PM
-
Using the military to advance a social/progressive agenda....When will it (insert expletive) STOP?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/senate-repeals-bans-on-sodomy-and-bestiality-in-the-u-s-military/
Senate Repeals Bans on Sodomy and Bestiality in the Military
Posted on December 2, 2011 at 3:06pm by Madeleine Morgenstern Madeleine Morgenstern
The U.S. Senate voted Thursday to approve a defense authorization bill which included a provision that not only repealed the military ban on sodomy, but also repealed the ban on having sex with animals — or bestiality.
CNS News reported:
On Nov. 15, the Senate Armed Services Committee had unanimously approved S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes a provision to repeal Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
Article 125 of the UCMJ makes it illegal to engage in both sodomy with humans and sex with animals.
It states: “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
The vote to remove sodomy from military law comes less than a year after President Barack Obama’s repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy for gay soldiers.
Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council, said there’s a definite link between the repeal of DADT and the repeal of the sodomy law.
“It’s all about using the military to advance this administration’s radical social agenda,” Perkins told CNS News. “Not only did they overturn Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but they had another problem, and that is, under military law sodomy is illegal, just as adultery is illegal, so they had to remove that prohibition against sodomy.”
Perkins said removing the bestiality provision may have been intentional — or it may just have been “collateral damage.”
Former Army Col. Bob Maginnis told CNS News some military lawyers have indicated bestiality could be prosecuted under another section of the military code of justice — Article 134, for offenses against “good military order and discipline.” It’s not a sure bet, though.
“If we have a soldier who engages in sodomy with an animal — whether a government animal or a non-government animal — is it, in fact, a chargeable offense under the Uniform Code? I think that’s in question,” Maginnis said. “Soldiers, unfortunately, like it or not, have engaged in this type of behavior in the past. Will they in the future, if they remove this statute? I don’t know.”
The bill, which passed 93-7, now goes to a conference committee to be reconciled with the House of Representatives’ version of the bill. According to Perkins, the House version reinforced the Defense of Marriage Act, saying that there is a military Defense of Marriage Act as well, prohibiting same-sex marriage on military bases.
“And now this is an added concern, that sodomy has been removed, and as we have discovered, that bestiality — the prohibition against it — has been removed from the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So yes, the House will have problems with this bill,” Perkins predicted.
****
Had enough yet?
-
I wonder what unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the opposite sex is. Sounds like fun whatever it is. ;D
-
It's gonna take 20 years to undo the damage these morons in D.C. has done... And thats if we start in 2012.
-
Sodomy and bestiality occur daily on the Senate floor!
-
Sodomy and bestiality occur daily on the Senate floor!
Also what the gov is doing to the general population
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Sodomy and bestiality occur daily on the Senate floor!
They f*ck a whole country, and our little dogs too.
-
They f*ck a whole country, and our little dogs too.
I think my little dog is a democrat. He relies on me for everything!
;D
-
Actually they had to do this.
It's why Clinton had to go with "Don't ask,don't tell" in the first place.
He did not have the votes to decriminalize sodomy.
I find it interesting that they included animal f*cking at this time, makes me wonder about this Congress .
And they get excited because Cain screwing a WOMAN ?
-
I'll repeat what I've said before on this type of subject.
I don't really care what two consenting adults do behind closed doors in the Military. I don't even have a problem with fraternization either. I had a short fling with an young lady officer who at the time was only two years older than I was. When we went out, she wasn't wearing her butter bar (Ensign) or much of anything else for that matter!
;)
-
I'll repeat what I've said before on this type of subject.
I don't really care what two consenting adults do behind closed doors in the Military. I don't even have a problem with fraternization either. I had a short fling with an young lady officer who at the time was only two years older than I was. When we went out, she wasn't wearing her butter bar (Ensign) or much of anything else for that matter!
;)
Same here, but I'm still going to LMAO when the SPCA fights it to the SCOTUS. ;D
-
Same here, but I'm still going to LMAO when the SPCA fights it to the SCOTUS. ;D
Now that's funny right there!
;D
-
This country is going to hell so fast. Amazing. Things that just a few short years ago would have been unthinkable.
-
Maybe this is so our soldiers can relate better to the Afghan & Pakistani armies......
::)
-
Must be Barney Frank's going away present.
-
Actually, you can't repeal one without the other. They both fell under the heading of "unnatural relations". Besides which, do we really care about either? As long as they volunteer to kill jihadis what happens to the camels afterwards is not my business as far as I'm concerned. BTW, I AM looking forward to the PETA campaign. "The US Army isn't content to kill women and children, now they are after the livestock!" ;D ;D ;D
FQ13
-
Actually, you can't repeal one without the other. They both fell under the heading of "unnatural relations". Besides which, do we really care about either? As long as they volunteer to kill jihadis what happens to the camels afterwards is not my business as far as I'm concerned. BTW, I AM looking forward to the PETA campaign. "The US Army isn't content to kill women and children, now they are after the livestock!" ;D ;D ;D
FQ13
It's going to be a little rough on the Patrol dogs.
-
It's going to be a little rough on the Patrol dogs.
(http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q292/mpcady111/military_dogs.jpg)
Rough on the poor bastard that tries to mount these dogs.....
:o
I'm not gonna try it, YOU try it,....I'm not gonna try it,.....Let's get PFC Lance to try it,....he'll try anything!!!!!
FAIL... ;D
-
Lyrics to I'm In Love With Ewe (You) :
I've been waiting all my life for this morning
Just to wake up next to ewe holding me
And ewer head is resting gently on my shoulder
Like ewe're whispering to me
I'm in love with ewe
I'm in love with ewe
So glad I found ewe
I'm in love with ewe
My apologies to Joy Williams http://www.lyricsmania.com/im_in_love_with_you_lyrics_joy_williams.html
-
actually FQ13 brings up a good point, does anyone really care about gays in the miltary?
I personally don't, never have never will. its only when they are "loud and proud" that I take issue with it.
You don't see me running around acting like a fairy saying I like women. So don't do it saying you like men.
-
Ya' know, the outcome of all this idiocy has already been written out for us in Genesis 18:16-19:29.
It didn't work out all that well for Sodom and Gomorrah.
Ah'm jus' sayin'...
Crusader
-
Sorry, couldn't resist...........
-
... does anyone really care about gays in the miltary? ...
I do. You can't share a tent with that.. I can't, anyway.
God may favor the foolish, but the fool has said in his heart "There is no God"..
Sorry, guys. I f I have to choose between God and "the bigger man", I'll choose God..
Kinda puts a new twist on "Suck it up a d drive on", huh?..
-
When I was in the service in the mid to late 60s, Division G2, a gay guy joined our section.
He was stereotypically gay looking, effeminate, a bit of a lispy speech. He also did an ace job on all the "office" and "pencil whipping" tasks that came our way. He did his best to carry his load out in the field, and anyone who gave him a hand did it willingly because he carried more of his load at base.
He was assigned a single bunk room, don't know who made that wise decision but he roomed along, and if you happened to make a trip to the can in the wee hours you might notice him using the shower when no one else was around.
I was called into the Col. office one day and he asked me if I thought the guy was gay. I told him I was sure he was as I had seen h im necking in his car with a guy from Admin Co.
The Col. asked me if he has ever made any advances towards me or anyone else that I might know of. Told him that he never has and goes out of his way to avoid any situation that might make someone uncomfortable.
The Col. asked me if he did his job and if I minded him in the section. Told the Col. he did his job well and was glad for what he contributed and that I had no problem and had never heard any of the other guys express any problems.
He stayed in the section and was still there when I rotated.
Seemed like the way to handle it. He did a good job and didn't offend so no big deal was made of it.
-
It wasn't a problem in my little part of the Navy either. We had several homosexual (I don't use the term "gay") men and women in our rate. For the record, we didn't serve aboard ship but the areas of the world we worked were remote, isolated and the community was very, very small in regards to the size of the full Naval contingent worldwide.
Anyway, I don't recall any conflicts with anyone during my tenure.
As I've already said, an all volunteer military MUST accept anyone that volunteers. I also don't have a problem with women in combat as the Israelis, Russians and a number of other countries have proven that women are more than capable soldiers.
-
When I was in the service in the mid to late 60s, Division G2, a gay guy joined our section.
He was stereotypically gay looking, effeminate, a bit of a lispy speech. He also did an ace job on all the "office" and "pencil whipping" tasks that came our way. He did his best to carry his load out in the field, and anyone who gave him a hand did it willingly because he carried more of his load at base.
He was assigned a single bunk room, don't know who made that wise decision but he roomed along, and if you happened to make a trip to the can in the wee hours you might notice him using the shower when no one else was around.
I was called into the Col. office one day and he asked me if I thought the guy was gay. I told him I was sure he was as I had seen h im necking in his car with a guy from Admin Co.
The Col. asked me if he has ever made any advances towards me or anyone else that I might know of. Told him that he never has and goes out of his way to avoid any situation that might make someone uncomfortable.
The Col. asked me if he did his job and if I minded him in the section. Told the Col. he did his job well and was glad for what he contributed and that I had no problem and had never heard any of the other guys express any problems.
He stayed in the section and was still there when I rotated.
Seemed like the way to handle it. He did a good job and didn't offend so no big deal was made of it.
It wasn't a problem in my little part of the Navy either. We had several homosexual (I don't use the term "gay") men and women in our rate. For the record, we didn't serve aboard ship but the areas of the world we worked were remote, isolated and the community was very, very small in regards to the size of the full Naval contingent worldwide.
Anyway, I don't recall any conflicts with anyone during my tenure.
As I've already said, an all volunteer military MUST accept anyone that volunteers. I also don't have a problem with women in combat as the Israelis, Russians and a number of other countries have proven that women are more than capable soldiers.
There you go, Professionalism has no gender or orientation beyond getting the job done.
I still however question the logic behind taking "animal molesters".
SPCA is gonna raise hell. ;D
-
There you go, Professionalism has no gender or orientation beyond getting the job done.
I still however question the logic behind taking "animal molesters".
SPCA is gonna raise hell. ;D
I wonder if PETA will make an issue of it? Maybe they will insist that you respect the animal in the morning?
-
I wonder if PETA will make an issue of it? Maybe they will insist that you respect the animal in the morning?
PETA doesn't care if you f*#k it, just don't eat it or wear it for clothing!
BTW, we should block "The Leather Shop" forum to non-members or someone from PETA will be paying us a visit!
;D
-
PETA doesn't care if you f*#k it, just don't eat it or wear it for clothing!
BTW, we should block "The Leather Shop" forum to non-members or someone from PETA will be paying us a visit!
;D
Only if you wear a condom........... :-X :-X :-X
-
I actually use to like peta... about once a year they would have models run around nake in several big citys wearing signs that said something like "I'd rather be nake then wear * fill in the blank*"
They need to go back to that form of advertising. ;)
I'm all for treating animals with respect, but at the end of the day, meat is food, and the only way you get meat is by a animal dieing. As long as they are raised, killed and processed in a respectful manor. For the most part the meat processing is already doing that, yeah thier are some scum, and bad practices, but for the most part I am prefectly fine with whats going on.
-
There are some issues in the thoroughbred horse racing industry that are a bit disgusting but that's nothing new!
PETA, like any other feel good group is littered with the uniformed, easily swayed sheep that make up a good portion of the southwest and the northeast.
-
PETA ? Those are the scum that killed the dog track and made it so your kid can't see an Elephant at the circus.