Uniform Code Military Justice: Article 125

[Eddo36]

UCMJ means US military law. Number 125 one 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.

Source: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm125.htm

 

What do you people think about this? I think it should be repealed. The straight people in uniform at least have other ways to make love, unlike men of different orientations who have no other ways to engage in love and are thus discriminated on. Also affected are those with harmless fetishes that does no damage in reality.

Edited January 18, 2007 by Eddo36

[Tale]

Wait, isn't this law an unenforced law in many states, as well?

[Laozi]

I don't care what happens between adults. Now if someone has sex with an animal, they should be executed on the spot.

[Dyan]

I don't care what happens between adults. Now if someone has sex with an animal, they should be executed on the spot.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's a little harsh. They should at least get a trial and "go through the motions" first. After that - put them up against a wall and shoot them.

 

Aside from that, I agree with you.

[Walsingham]

I'd say , no. I'm open to discussing it though.

 

I have no problem at all with homosexuals of any flavour in the military. I know some, and they do as fine a job as they always have. In fact they work better because they're not constantly worried.

 

However, with the greatest respect, sex of any kind confuses what is by nature a demanding and necessarily simplistic arrangement - military discipline. By undermining discipline you put people's lives at unnecessary risk. Including particularly the persons concerned. So I view it as a kindness to the perpetrators to place every possible obstacle in the way.

 

Having sex with animals is by way of the impossibility of giving consent, a form of cruelty. Fetishising cruelty is not something I would care to encourage in the armed forces.

[Surreptishus]

Zoophilia is not a "harmless fetish", its disgusting and inexcusable.

 

A fetish is Eddo and his obsession with military *bottom centred* threads.

 

*Edited by Walsingham*

Edited January 18, 2007 by Walsingham

[kirottu]

I agree with eddo. The animals are just asking for it otherwise they would wear clothing. Now they

Edited January 18, 2007 by kirottu

[Eddo36]

*edited by Walsingham for adult content*

[Sand]

What one or two people do in their own abode is their business and not mine. As long as it is consent on all parties involved I do not see the harm.

Edited January 18, 2007 by Sand

[Walsingham]

OK, gentlemen, we've crossed the line. Sorry, but there ya go. I wasn't expecting this to segue so strongly onto the bestiality theme.