Comments on: DADT may be dead as early as mid-year http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/01/27/30059 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Sat, 25 May 2013 21:17:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Kate http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/01/27/30059/comment-page-1#comment-87935 Kate Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:50:54 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=30059#comment-87935 I'll be interested to see how they frame changing the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice - the "law" that applies to military personnel) to eliminate the current sodomy article. That has been a fall-back tactic for opponents of DADT repeal in the past..."but the UCMJ says NO to teh ghey sechs!" Because after hemming and hawing a bit about the excact NATURE of "unnatural carnal copulation", they lay it right out there: "It is unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that person’s mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal; or to place that person’s sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal; or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person; or to have carnal copulation with an animal." Nice of them to be so concerned about protecting animals, btw...and I think I'm pretty safe in guessing that with the execption of completely untouched virgin-types, pretty much EVERYONE in the military has violated the "mouth/organ" provision of good ol' Article 125...oh, the horror! I’ll be interested to see how they frame changing the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice – the “law” that applies to military personnel) to eliminate the current sodomy article. That has been a fall-back tactic for opponents of DADT repeal in the past…”but the UCMJ says NO to teh ghey sechs!”

Because after hemming and hawing a bit about the excact NATURE of “unnatural carnal copulation”, they lay it right out there: “It is unnatural carnal copulation for a person to take into that person’s mouth or anus the sexual organ of another person or of an animal; or to place that person’s sexual organ in the mouth or anus of another person or of an animal; or to have carnal copulation in any opening of the body, except the sexual parts, with another person; or to have carnal copulation with an animal.”

Nice of them to be so concerned about protecting animals, btw…and I think I’m pretty safe in guessing that with the execption of completely untouched virgin-types, pretty much EVERYONE in the military has violated the “mouth/organ” provision of good ol’ Article 125…oh, the horror!

]]> By: Pliny http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/01/27/30059/comment-page-1#comment-87933 Pliny Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:45:44 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=30059#comment-87933 Something tells me that they wouldn't be so on-the-ball about this if they weren't afraid of the LCR suit. There's probably a lesson in this for HRC somewhere.... Something tells me that they wouldn’t be so on-the-ball about this if they weren’t afraid of the LCR suit.

There’s probably a lesson in this for HRC somewhere….

]]>