Hiring a prostitute carries harsh punishment under recent UCMJ change.

-- Modified on 2/2/2006 6:06:48 PM

-- Modified on 2/2/2006 6:27:59 PM

This news sickens me. (not a shot at the poster. He did a good thing bringing this to our attention)

Apparently the folks at No Such Agency have put in place such a high moral standard that they have given priority consideration to those applicants that declare themselves Mormon.

Exactly how do you reconcile some of the things a soldier must do with morality of prostitution? (in a sarcastic voice) I mean it's OK to shoot and kill a fellow human being but we don't want you to do anything immoral.

I mean C'mon, these boys are busting their ass to protect this country and the government is now denying them a sexual release. Is it me or does that sound totally fucked up? I say, they deserve some discretionary leeway. After all they are watching our six when they're out there.

I mean I used to consider my self a Republican but this Republican administration reminds me of Nazi Germany. Our boys deserve a break. This administration needs to take into account the stresses of military life. So what that Okinawa is not directly part of the fight in the Middle East. Do they not deserve the same level of respect?

Those boys deserve better treatment than that.

Simper Fidelis bro! And Via Con Dios!

-- Modified on 2/2/2006 5:55:15 PM

that the vast majority here doesn't give a shit.

And it's not just the Republicans doing this.  The super-PC left is lined up alongside them.  

~Obviously you need to read UCMJ a little better!... punishment has always included a mention of BJ's as well. (Yep, read carefully if you ever brag about/ or mention a BJ you are guilty!!)   *Bottom line, don't kiss and tell, be safe... and know your
provider!*   As I posted recently: I'd love to know how many Sr ranking military didn't engage in the services of entertaining a lady of the evening in the PI's -
Plus, the military isn't the only one that stipulates "moral" behavior, many large corporations have ethics clauses........ I think the key words there are caught & guilty, not hiring....  kisses ~Tori

I seriously doubt this will close down Whispering Alley on Okinawa. When I served there were many UCMJ infractions every day that were never enforced.
Also did you notice the penalty for visiting a pro is the same as being a pro. Yes 25 years ago there were pros serving in the military, They were great girls and at Lejeune they made a fortune

But seriously - this return to puritanical ways is why a lot of folks ancestors came here- I'll be the first to say that in an ideal "garden of eden" maybe we would wish to marry - have sex only with our partner and that would be that... but we are human - and we put those that choose to serve in the most stressful of situations and then tell em - that we will judge them?!

At least in Lincoln's day, some had the good sense that to keep the "boys" happy - "the boys" had to be entertained! lol  I am a Republican - but my laundry list of stuff he does that i don't like grows day-by-day....  so far here is my list....
1) secure our borders (NOT Iraq's)  Fox has publically stated that he intends to recover the SW US.
2) permit embryonic stem cell research - not their commercialization but research such that we can understand how the process of differentiation is regulated and can be controlled.
3) Right to an abortion - get off it - women have many - many reasons for pregnancy termination - to remove their right to make the decision is wrong - just plain wrong...
4) Reform of social services -- including health care and ss.  absolutely essential for the future.
5) Weapons of Mass Destruction - it took WAY TOO long to admit that they were not there.... comon - you want to show daddy up?  Do it with push ups....

That is about it for now.....  but I cannot imagine that Kerry would have been better...

Reading your list - are you sure you're a Republican?  Sounds like you pretty much disagree with W's entire platform.

do YOU feel any safer with the troop committment in the middle east?  especially since - and I will state it again for the hard of hearing - the leader of the country to our immediate south has as a publically stated goal - the takeover of the US SouthWest.  that make ya feel good!?

Fiscal policy - ok - that I kinda agree with - position on crime I am ok with -

The problem with BOTH political parties is that they both assume extreme positions and for the vast majority of us - it is like who do you like the least - so you vote against him -

Sad to say - in a presidential election - I have NEVER voted for anyone - rather voted AGAINST the opposition.  anyone else have a candidate that was honest - and intelligent in their approach to all the pres has to  watch - foreign affairs, economy, crime, education, public health, transportation, military affairs, national security.... and so on....

help me here.

You voted for him because you thought he'd do what he said???  What a rookie mistake.  Did you just turn 18?

W must be quite a disappointment to you.  I voted for Kerry (ok, I voted against W) and I'm still disappointed in what he's done.

I'm disappointed with W - deficit, war, social issues, etc.

Kerry has quickly become irrelevant.