Eddo36 Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) 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 I think it should be repealed.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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tale Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 Wait, isn't this law an unenforced law in many states, as well? "Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laozi Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 I don't care what happens between adults. Now if someone has sex with an animal, they should be executed on the spot. People laugh when I say that I think a jellyfish is one of the most beautiful things in the world. What they don't understand is, I mean a jellyfish with long, blond hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyan Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 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. HK47: Commentary: It is not possible to destroy the master. It is suggested that you run while my blasters warm, meatbags. Bastila to Revan: You are easily the vainest, most arrogant man I have ever met! Canderous to Bastila: Insults? Maybe if your master had trained your lightsaber to be as quick as your tongue you could have escaped those Vulkars, you spoiled little Jedi princess! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walsingham Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 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. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surreptishus Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirottu Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) I agree with eddo. The animals are just asking for it otherwise they would wear clothing. Now they Edited January 18, 2007 by kirottu This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddo36 Posted January 18, 2007 Author Share Posted January 18, 2007 *edited by Walsingham for adult content* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 (edited) 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 Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walsingham Posted January 18, 2007 Share Posted January 18, 2007 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. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts