• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dont ask Dont tell Policy Ruled Unconstitutional

Caine said:
As long as he didn't show any special treatment towards them on duty, I wouldn't see the problem.
Its a formal function. There is a difference between going to a wedding, and being drinking buddies.
Click to expand...

By that logic, a company commander can sleep with enlisted personel and as long as he/she doesn't show favoratism, it's ok.

A social event, outside of the unit is different.
 
winston53660 said:
Specific code please sir.
Click to expand...

I got a better idea; with all your miltiary experience and supreior knowledge, show us the regulation that allows such activity. Thanks in advance!
 
apdst said:
By that logic, a company commander can sleep with enlisted personel and as long as he/she doesn't show favoratism, it's ok.

A social event, outside of the unit is different.
Click to expand...

(2) Dating, shared living accommodations other than those directed by operational requirements, and intimate or sexual relationships between officers and enlisted personnel. This prohibition does not apply to

Army Fraternization Policies
 
apdst said:
I got a better idea; with all your miltiary experience and supreior knowledge, show us the regulation that allows such activity. Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

Where's the regulation that allows them to use the latrine?
 
winston53660 said:
Is there a case it has been applied in such a manner
Click to expand...

Not that Im aware of.

1SGs and Company Commanders commonly "fraternize" according to this logic.
 
This topic has garnered way more attention than it deserves.

If a homosexual in the military tries to force his or her attentions on another it is a violation of the U.C.M.J. and can be dealt with as prescribed un der the law.

If they are caught having sex on a base that too is covered and can be dealt with accordingly.
 
apdst said:
you don't get it, because you've never served in the military.
If a company commander accepts an invitation to one enlisted man's wedding, he has to accept the invitations to every enlisted man's wedding, under his command. If he misses one, then he can be accused of showing favoritism, which will get his ass in a crack. Get it now.
It would be like PFC Joe Blow saying, "Hey, Captain, let's go have a beer", and the captain saying, "sure, let's go". Fraternization doesn't just involve sexual activity, as far as the DoD is concerned. Had you a few moments of military service, you would already know that. Even Redress will tell you that.
Click to expand...

Thats bull**** because I've been to wedding with my CO present, and have known of others were he was not. In the first case it was a local wedding so he attended and in the latter it look place across the country while the soldier was on leave, but fact was he went to one and not the other. There is no regulation that enforces that level of equal treatment.
 
Councilman said:
This topic has garnered way more attention than it deserves.

If a homosexual in the military tries to force his or her attentions on another it is a violation of the U.C.M.J. and can be dealt with as prescribed un der the law.

If they are caught having sex on a base that too is covered and can be dealt with accordingly.
Click to expand...

Replace "homosexual" with "anyone".
 
winston53660 said:
(2) Dating, shared living accommodations other than those directed by operational requirements, and intimate or sexual relationships between officers and enlisted personnel. This prohibition does not apply to

Army Fraternization Policies
Click to expand...

There you go. A company commander cannot accept an invitation to the wedding of one of his enlisted men. Welcome to the real world! Sex isn't the alpha and omega of fraternization between officers and enlisted men. Had you served a couple of minutes in the service, you would know that.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Where's the regulation that allows them to use the latrine?
Click to expand...

There are none and frankly it is pathetic that so many have relieved themselves thus far. Besides that, Marines don't know what a "latrine" is and their bladders would have exploded by now were there such a regulation.

However, there is a code that exists amongst the military. There are certain expectations that aren't exactly written down. Commanders are expected to give parties for his officers periodically and they are expected to attend. Officers are also expected to be married by a certian time, which is supposed to enforce the idea of "family" to the rest. Many things aren't written down. Fraternization involves so much, that a general idea suffices on paper. However, there is more than what is written inside the military. It's a culture not easily explained, which is why people always seem to need to see a link in order to understand what some state.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
There you go. A company commander cannot accept an invitation to the wedding of one of his enlisted men. Welcome to the real world! Sex isn't the alpha and omega of fraternization between officers and enlisted men. Had you served a couple of minutes in the service, you would know that.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's not a matter of "cannot." Certain things are simply frowned upon. But a case where a C.O, a few other officers and NCOs are invited isn't exactly fraternization at all. It's simply an event to celebrate.
 
apdst said:
There you go. A company commander cannot accept an invitation to the wedding of one of his enlisted men. Welcome to the real world! Sex isn't the alpha and omega of fraternization between officers and enlisted men. Had you served a couple of minutes in the service, you would know that.
Click to expand...

You didn't recognize that there wasn't a comma or any other puncutation between "shared living accomodations" and "other than those directed by operational requirements" (which you bolded)????

I recognized it.

And, I served in the 82nd Airborne Division for 4 years...... thats longer than a couple of minutes.
 
Caine said:
You didn't recognize that there wasn't a comma or any other puncutation between "shared living accomodations" and "other than those directed by operational requirements" (which you bolded)????

I recognized it.

And, I served in the 82nd Airborne Division for 4 years...... thats longer than a couple of minutes.
Click to expand...

I served in the United States Army across the globe, for 12 years, which is 3 times 4, acheiving the rank of E-7P ("P" designator pointing out that I had completed the 1st sergeant's course at Ft. Benning). So! After completing PLDC, BNCO, ANCO and the 1SGT course, I may know a lil' bit?
 
apdst said:
I served in the United States Army across the globe, for 12 years, which is 3 times 4, acheiving the rank of E-7P ("P" designator pointing out that I had completed the 1st sergeant's course at Ft. Benning). So! After completing PLDC, BNCO, ANCO and the 1SGT course, I may know a lil' bit?
Click to expand...

It doesn't take 12 years to notice certain things there bub.
 
Caine said:
It doesn't take 12 years to notice certain things there bub.
Click to expand...

Right! I don't know jack **** about the Army. Ok, got it!

What was your MOS, BTW? Class-9 clerk? Supply specialist?
 
Meh, I think people are getting too wound up about this. The most important and condemning aspect of the judge's ruling was that DADT harms military readiness. It is a policy that does the opposite of what it is suppose to do, and the evidence to support that argument is pretty damning. Anyone who wants to continue this policy is going to have to argue why they want to harm military readiness in order to continue it.
 
apdst said:
Right! I don't know jack **** about the Army. Ok, got it!

What was your MOS, BTW? Class-9 clerk? Supply specialist?
Click to expand...

Where did I say you didn't know anything?
Oh no, to the contrary, I said that it doesn't take 12 years to learn certain things. One being fraternization, which is taught in BASIC TRAINING

As per the rest of your post, Im not even going to dignify it with a response, its just your attempts to belittle someone because they weren't artillery or whatever the **** you were.
 
Caine said:
Where did I say you didn't know anything?
Oh no, to the contrary, I said that it doesn't take 12 years to learn certain things. One being fraternization, which is taught in BASIC TRAINING

As per the rest of your post, Im not even going to dignify it with a response, its just your attempts to belittle someone because they weren't artillery or whatever the **** you were.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he is using Fraternization all wrong. There is nothing to stop any officer from attending any wedding of another service member. Hell, there is nothing stopping officers from, on occasion, partying with enlisted members. My going away party when I got out had several officers present, including our skipper. His 12 years of service has not made him right.
 
Redress said:
Yes, but he is using Fraternization all wrong. There is nothing to stop any officer from attending any wedding of another service member. Hell, there is nothing stopping officers from, on occasion, partying with enlisted members. My going away party when I got out had several officers present, including our skipper. His 12 years of service has not made him right.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
Thats what Ive been trying to point out, that he is using it all wrong.
You, Gunny... err.. sorry, Massa Saarge, and myself have all pointed that out to him now.

And Gunney is a real tight ass about military procedure usually.....

err... Massa sarge...sorry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom