Search forums

Forums

Export thread

Pregnant?! Not in the army you don't bub!

Dec 20, 2009#1

@Li3n

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8422989.stm

General defends court martial for pregnant soldiers
A US Army general in northern Iraq has defended his decision to add pregnancy to the list of reasons a soldier under his command could face court martial.
It is current army policy to send pregnant soldiers home, but Maj Gen Anthony Cucolo told the BBC he was losing people with critical skills.
That was why the added deterrent of a possible court martial was needed, he said.
The new policy applies both to female and male soldiers, even if married.
It is the first time the US Army has made pregnancy a punishable offence.

I'm going to take every measure I can to keep them all strong, fit and with me

Gen Anthony Cucolo

Gen Cucolo told the BBC it was a \"black and white\" issue for him.
He said married soldiers in combat zones should either put their love lives on hold - or take precautions.
\"I've got a mission to do, I'm given a finite number of soldiers with which to do it and I need every one of them.\"
\"So I'm going to take every measure I can to keep them all strong, fit and with me for the twelve months we are in the combat zone,\" he

Court martial... yeah, i totally see that going well!

Dec 20, 2009#2

Kitty Sinatra

Does a general even have the authority to change military law?

Dec 20, 2009#3

The Lovely Boehner

What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#4

AshburnerX

Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#5

ThatGrinningIdiot!

AshburnerX;318501][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#6

North_Ranger

Court martialed for getting pregnant? WT-fuckin'-F?

Dec 20, 2009#7

strawman

BlackCrossCrusader said:
If you're on active duty, you shouldn't be engaging in any activity that'll jeopardize the operation. You are there to work, not to fraternize.

QFT.

Dec 20, 2009#8

Cajungal

It's a really harsh penalty for something that can happen even if you take every precaution, but I see the reasoning. Women will always face different challenges that seem unfair, but that's just how it is. If you're in the army in a combat zone, maybe put off procreation--for yourself, the people who depend on you, AND the safety of the child. I'm glad to hear that at least both parties are penalized.

It's not a great solution... I'm not saying there's no other way to handle this. But some jobs require us to put that sort of thing on hold. Now, if they weren't informed of this rule and are suddenly being court martialed, that's really unfair. If it's common knowledge that you're not supposed to (I really don't know a lot about the army), well... don't do it or don't join.

I'm afraid of what would happen if, God forbid, someone got raped. I'm sure that would be considered an extenuating circumstance... I mean, I hope.

Dec 20, 2009#9

Troll

No. This is overboard.

Dec 20, 2009#10

Dusty668

I've seen people get court martialed for freaking tattos by Lt. Colonels, so yah, they can do it. Depriving a unit in this case of a soldier, is serious no matter what reason.

Dec 20, 2009#11

AshburnerX

Cajungal said:
If it's common knowledge that you're not supposed to (I really don't know a lot about the army), well... don't do it or don't join.

While not strictly illegal, it's harshly frowned upon and you will receive major crap for doing it. It IS illegal to sleep with someone under your command, be it by rank or by position (so a Supervisor is held to the same standard as an Officer) for obvious reasons.

Cajungal said:
I'm afraid of what would happen if, God forbid, someone got raped. I'm sure that would be considered an extenuating circumstance... I mean, I hope.

Rape is notoriously hard to prove in military settings (because no one speaks out if they have proof), but I'd imagine they'd decline to press charges on the victim if Rape is proven.

Dec 20, 2009#12

The Lovely Boehner

The situation of soldiers getting raped by other soldiers is insanely depressing.

Dec 20, 2009#13

Hailey Knight

BlackCrossCrusader;318504][quote=AshburnerX;318501][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#14

Cajungal

Not without killing off all those pesky sperm, I guess. :\ I wonder if they could call the pill a "business expense."

Dec 20, 2009#15

Hailey Knight

Cajungal said:
Not without killing off all those pesky sperm, I guess. :\ I wonder if they could call the pill a "business expense."

Are you kidding? The government can't even afford enough combat armor.

Dec 20, 2009#16

ThatGrinningIdiot!

escushion;318566][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;318504][quote=AshburnerX;318501][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

He's also going to court Marshall the idiot who gets them pregnant. This seems fair to me: Both parties are engaging in an activity that could potential cost the unit a soldier for an extended period of time... they are doing it knowingly, and they have no excuse not to be using contraceptives in this day and age.

It doesn't help that the women involved are proving every critic of women in the military right every time this happens. *sigh* Way to set back your own cause.[/QUOTE]

I agree, if you're on active duty, you shouldn't be engaging in any activity that'll jeopardize the operation. You are there to work, not to fraternize.[/QUOTE]

So a husband can't have sex with his wife when she comes home for a few weeks of leave before going off where she could die and they never see each other again?

ARMY = No sex.

And yet, they don't want gay people.[/QUOTE]

You should read my post again, more carefully this time.

Dec 20, 2009#17

Cajungal

escushion;318571][quote=Cajungal said:
Not without killing off all those pesky sperm, I guess. :\ I wonder if they could call the pill a "business expense."

Are you kidding? The government can't even afford enough combat armor.[/QUOTE]

I was kidding. But you never know. I'm sure people get creative with their tax write-offs.

Dec 20, 2009#18

Hailey Knight

BlackCrossCrusader;318573][quote=escushion;318566][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;318504][quote=AshburnerX;318501][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#19

@Li3n

I guess anything less drastic just wouldn't be army enough.

Dec 20, 2009#20

ThatGrinningIdiot!

escushion;318577][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;318573][quote=escushion;318566][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;318504][quote=AshburnerX;318501][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#21

Troll

BlackCrossCrusader;318585][quote=escushion;318577][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;318573][quote=escushion;318566][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;318504][quote=AshburnerX;318501][quote=Charlie Dont Surf said:
What, the military discriminating against every soldier that isn't a white, straight, Christian male?

Dec 20, 2009#22

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Mind PM'ing me an explanation then?

Dec 20, 2009#23

WolfOfOdin

Erm....if you're on leave and considered active duty, you have to be ready to deploy in a moment's notice. Therefore, any self-induced activity that can delay or cancel said deployment is considered an offense and breach of one's active duty status. This of course bars serious sickness, death or injury.

Dec 20, 2009#24

AshburnerX

escushion said:
Yeah, and when you come back from the few weeks, you're on active duty. Pregnancy lasts for nine months and you don't always know about it right away. Back on active duty, pregnant from leave... court martial!

So the fact that they have some time off means its OK for them to do something stupid and irresponsible, fully knowing that it could result in something that could get them in trouble when she goes back on duty? Being on Liberty is not an excuse to dodge their responsibility to their units.

Besides, once you enlist, the government gets to decide what you can and can't do for the next 2-8 years. You are told this before you sign the papers. Anyone who has enlisted knew full well what they were getting into. I really don't see an issue here.

Dec 20, 2009#25

Officer_Charon

At the risk of drawing fire, I feel that certain points should be clarified here.

A court martial != being fired from the military. A court martial is a military court that views cases presented to it in the same manner that a judge views criminal or civil cases brought before them. Discharge, either honorable, general, bad conduct, or dishonorable, is but one verdict that may be passed. Lesser punishments that may be levied may include reduction in rank, loss of pay/privileges for a period of time etc, with the punishment being appropriate for the offense.

He said married soldiers in combat zones should either put their love lives on
hold - or take precautions.

He's not ordering his soldiers to not have sex - he's telling them to be mindful of the fact that they will be entering/returning to a combat zone, and to act appropriately. It's no different to the many... MANY safety briefs that we get with regards to things like motorcycle racing, DUI, home safety etc. The general has to maintain his command at a level of readiness, and he cannot maintain this level if his soldiers become pregnant.

I probably wouldn't be as critical of this, had I not heard, in my presence, a junior female Marine stating that she was going to get herself pregnant by someone, she didn't care who, so she wouldn't have to deploy with her unit.... and it worked. Hearing things like that makes me rage so much.

I view the military as a commitment. You have taken it upon yourself to provide your service to your nation. It is not a handout. It is not a free ride. Any failing on your part to understand the oath that you swear upon signing up should have consequences.

I love the idea of people having families - I'm starting one myself. But when people do so, disregarding their obligations, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

/soapbox.

Dec 20, 2009#26

Kitty Sinatra

Dusty668 said:
I've seen people get court martialed for freaking tattos by Lt. Colonels, so yah, they can do it. Depriving a unit in this case of a soldier, is serious no matter what reason.

But did the court actually convict them?

See my question is: is getting pregnant actually punishable under military law?

Dec 20, 2009#27

Espy

Officer_Charon said:
At the risk of drawing fire, I feel that certain points should be clarified here.

A court martial != being fired from the military. A court martial is a military court that views cases presented to it in the same manner that a judge views criminal or civil cases brought before them. Discharge, either honorable, general, bad conduct, or dishonorable, is but one verdict that may be passed. Lesser punishments that may be levied may include reduction in rank, loss of pay/privileges for a period of time etc, with the punishment being appropriate for the offense.

He said married soldiers in combat zones should either put their love lives on
hold - or take precautions.

Click to expand...

He's not ordering his soldiers to not have sex - he's telling them to be mindful of the fact that they will be entering/returning to a combat zone, and to act appropriately. It's no different to the many... MANY safety briefs that we get with regards to things like motorcycle racing, DUI, home safety etc. The general has to maintain his command at a level of readiness, and he cannot maintain this level if his soldiers become pregnant.

I probably wouldn't be as critical of this, had I not heard, in my presence, a junior female Marine stating that she was going to get herself pregnant by someone, she didn't care who, so she wouldn't have to deploy with her unit.... and it worked. Hearing things like that makes me rage so much.

I view the military as a commitment. You have taken it upon yourself to provide your service to your nation. It is not a handout. It is not a free ride. Any failing on your part to understand the oath that you swear upon signing up should have consequences.

I love the idea of people having families - I'm starting one myself. But when people do so, disregarding their obligations, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

/soapbox.

Beat me to the punch. I was pretty much going to say the same thing, but probably not half as eloquently.

Dec 21, 2009#28

Dusty668

Gruebeard;318658][quote=Dusty668 said:
I've seen people get court martialed for freaking tattos by Lt. Colonels, so yah, they can do it. Depriving a unit in this case of a soldier, is serious no matter what reason.

But did the court actually convict them?

See my question is: is getting pregnant actually punishable under military law?[/QUOTE]

Yes, they were convicted, reduced in rank, fined, reduced in pay, and or sent to Fort Leavenworth. See the charge was NOT 'Having a Tattoo' or 'Breaking your arm while being drunk as a skunk and doing something stupid/dangerous' the charge was "Rendering self unfit for duty in a deployed combat unit" or "Not following a legal command given by a superior officer".

To be fair though these 3 guys I saw personally, hung themselves with a LOT of rope, each one had many chances to back out of the courts martial and given the chance to take a article 15, but each felt that they could win it with their savvy and know how. Each was advised by superiors, friends, and squadmates that they were taking the the wrong way. and one of them even had the example of previous experience as he was at the trail of the first guy as a witness like me.

Then once they put themselves in the hands of JAG, it was all over but the paperwork.

Dec 21, 2009#29

Covar

Gruebeard;318658][quote=Dusty668 said:
I've seen people get court martialed for freaking tattos by Lt. Colonels, so yah, they can do it. Depriving a unit in this case of a soldier, is serious no matter what reason.

But did the court actually convict them?

See my question is: is getting pregnant actually punishable under military law?[/QUOTE]

If a General tells you not to get pregnant, then yes. The UCMJ is one tough bastard.

Dec 21, 2009#30

Tinwhistler

possible UCMJ regulations that you could be court martialed under in this scenario

article 90: Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm90.htm

article 92: Failure to Obey Order or Regulation
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm92.htm

possibly article 115: Malingering, if it's lawyered up enough (since pregnancy can be argued to be a disability which prevents deployment)
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm115.htm

Dec 21, 2009#31

Chibibar

ok. I can understand that having sex while on duty (i.e. not on leave) could be a bad thing and should be avoided, but when husbands and wives go home and spend what little time they have with their family, that is a different story.

No matter how careful you are, there is a small chance of pregnancy. (also sperm whisking hehe)

So... basically to avoid the chance of court martial, they are pretty much saying, no sex while you are in the service (leave or no leave)

Dec 21, 2009#32

Espy

Chibibar said:
ok. I can understand that having sex while on duty (i.e. not on leave) could be a bad thing and should be avoided, but when husbands and wives go home and spend what little time they have with their family, that is a different story.

No matter how careful you are, there is a small chance of pregnancy. (also sperm whisking hehe)

So... basically to avoid the chance of court martial, they are pretty much saying, no sex while you are in the service (leave or no leave)

No. They are simply saying be careful when you are on Active Duty. It's hardly unreasonable for them to expect you to be able to do your job and avoid things that could compromise your commitments.
In the article the General says he's trying to stop people from getting pregnant while deployed in Iraq with him.
My wife knows women who have gotten pregnant to get out of deployments as well, this is something I'm sure they are trying to stop from happening.
Some of you guys are really over-reacting.
Because I think people missed it here is Off. Charons great post about it again:

Officer_Charon said:
At the risk of drawing fire, I feel that certain points should be clarified here.

A court martial != being fired from the military. A court martial is a military court that views cases presented to it in the same manner that a judge views criminal or civil cases brought before them. Discharge, either honorable, general, bad conduct, or dishonorable, is but one verdict that may be passed. Lesser punishments that may be levied may include reduction in rank, loss of pay/privileges for a period of time etc, with the punishment being appropriate for the offense.

He said married soldiers in combat zones should either put their love lives on
hold - or take precautions.

Click to expand...

He's not ordering his soldiers to not have sex - he's telling them to be mindful of the fact that they will be entering/returning to a combat zone, and to act appropriately. It's no different to the many... MANY safety briefs that we get with regards to things like motorcycle racing, DUI, home safety etc. The general has to maintain his command at a level of readiness, and he cannot maintain this level if his soldiers become pregnant.

I probably wouldn't be as critical of this, had I not heard, in my presence, a junior female Marine stating that she was going to get herself pregnant by someone, she didn't care who, so she wouldn't have to deploy with her unit.... and it worked. Hearing things like that makes me rage so much.

I view the military as a commitment. You have taken it upon yourself to provide your service to your nation. It is not a handout. It is not a free ride. Any failing on your part to understand the oath that you swear upon signing up should have consequences.

I love the idea of people having families - I'm starting one myself. But when people do so, disregarding their obligations, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

/soapbox.

Dec 21, 2009#33

Chibibar

epsy: I did read that, but I'm also a realist. I have friends who have kids from having sex WITH condom and pills and still gotten pregnant. It is not 100% (as proven in other post nothing is 100%) so sure, the female enlist can be as careful as she want with her husband/boyfriend/lover but there is that small chance she can get pregnant and get court martial and possible reduce in rank, pay, position, or even out of the military.

That is why I post above what I posted. Basically (but not directly) is not to have sex so you reduce the chance of pregnancy (of course there are those sperm whiskers)

Dec 21, 2009#34

Espy

Chibibar said:
epsy: I did read that, but I'm also a realist. I have friends who have kids from having sex WITH condom and pills and still gotten pregnant. It is not 100% (as proven in other post nothing is 100%) so sure, the female enlist can be as careful as she want with her husband/boyfriend/lover but there is that small chance she can get pregnant and get court martial and possible reduce in rank, pay, position, or even out of the military.

That is why I post above what I posted. Basically (but not directly) is not to have sex so you reduce the chance of pregnancy (of course there are those sperm whiskers)

Dec 21, 2009#35

Norris

I don't really see a problem with this. Since a court martial is, as stated above, just a trial (not a punishment in and of itself) if the pregnancy is truly an accident for whatever reason it can be testified to that effect. Especially if it happened while on leave at home.

But if you did use any precautionary measure, or got preggers on purpose to duck duty, then hell yes you deserve to be court martialed.

Dec 21, 2009#36

fade

Just to throw in a lefty voice....surprise, I agree with the general. I think a lot of people are going to associate "extremely bad" with "court martial" thanks to pop culture.

Dec 21, 2009#37

Chibibar

Espy;318809][quote=Chibibar said:
epsy: I did read that, but I'm also a realist. I have friends who have kids from having sex WITH condom and pills and still gotten pregnant. It is not 100% (as proven in other post nothing is 100%) so sure, the female enlist can be as careful as she want with her husband/boyfriend/lover but there is that small chance she can get pregnant and get court martial and possible reduce in rank, pay, position, or even out of the military.

That is why I post above what I posted. Basically (but not directly) is not to have sex so you reduce the chance of pregnancy (of course there are those sperm whiskers)

Sorry Chibi, I don't think you are being a realist, I think you are posing an interesting but statistically very unlikely event. Is it possible? Sure. Is it probable? No.
And you and others on here won't like this since many here seem to think it's a downright crime to have to avoid sexual urges in order to honor your commitments, but even if that was the case? Learn to deal with it or get the hell out of or avoid making incredibly important commitments that supersede your horniness. Sorry.[/QUOTE]

well.. I don't think it is a crime really, but I'm saying it is a bit harsh.

It is an important commitment, but it is also a long one (4-8 years and some longer depending on the situation) now if you can avoid it for 8 years then kudos, but human are emotional creatures and sometimes that taken over logic (well like a wife make love to their husband before going off to war and not seeing them for another year or two)

I'm just saying that even the most careful CAN get pregnant, and yes, it is a trial (not a sentence) but I feel that it should have been a case by case. Putting down military law like this just sparks some of these things.

(off the wall) I guess maybe all military personal should get fixed before service to ensure this would never happen during active duty.

Dec 21, 2009#38

Espy

Chibibar said:
now if you can avoid it for 8 years then kudos,

I really think you don't understand whats going on here and you are focusing on something that isn't the actual issue so I don't think we are having the same discussion.

Dec 21, 2009#39

@Li3n

Espy;318809][quote=Chibibar said:
epsy: I did read that, but I'm also a realist. I have friends who have kids from having sex WITH condom and pills and still gotten pregnant. It is not 100% (as proven in other post nothing is 100%) so sure, the female enlist can be as careful as she want with her husband/boyfriend/lover but there is that small chance she can get pregnant and get court martial and possible reduce in rank, pay, position, or even out of the military.

That is why I post above what I posted. Basically (but not directly) is not to have sex so you reduce the chance of pregnancy (of course there are those sperm whiskers)

Sorry Chibi, I don't think you are being a realist, I think you are posing an interesting but statistically very unlikely event. Is it possible? Sure. Is it probable? No.[/QUOTE]

Somehow i think accidental pregnancies are more common then getting pregnant to avoid deployment.

I'm guessing he's just trying to scare them into using protection or something...

But how is anyone gonna prove if it was accidental or not?! You can't so you punish everyone.

(off the wall) I guess maybe all military personal should get fixed before service to ensure this would never happen during active duty.

That's not 100% either unless we're talking extirpation (doctor can screw it up).

Dec 21, 2009#40

drawn_inward

I think the babies should be conscripted.

Dec 21, 2009#41

strawman

drawn_inward said:
I think the babies should be conscripted.

It's been done:

http://www.google.com/search?q=baby+carriage+ied

Dec 21, 2009#42

@Li3n

drawn_inward said:
I think the babies should be conscripted.

Using cuteness against the enemy is prohibited by the Geneva Convention.

Dec 21, 2009#43

SpecialKO

If the military is having an ongoing problem with people getting pregnant to get an early ticket home, I can see why the General made the decision he did. Whether there are mitigating circumstances or not, the fact of the matter is that soldiers need to be fit and able for duty during their term of service.

Question for the military folks: in practice, are court martials more like court hearings or an actual trial? Or are there degrees?

Dec 21, 2009#44

Chibibar

Espy;318838][quote=Chibibar said:
now if you can avoid it for 8 years then kudos,

I really think you don't understand whats going on here and you are focusing on something that isn't the actual issue so I don't think we are having the same discussion.[/QUOTE]

maybe.. I'm not sure that we are.

this is where I'm coming from.

I have friends who are in the military (most of them are home now but a few of friend's friends are oversea) they always tell me on women they meet etc etc. Now I hear stories of R&R and stuff now of course the women side I am not as familiar.

I can understand where the General is coming from is servicewomen are using pregnancy as a ticket way home, but there are also legit/accidental pregnancy from their husbands when their wives are on leave for the holiday or something. I feel that to punish all sends the wrong kind of message. That is where I'm getting at.

So, how to avoid getting pregnant from service women who ARE NOT using pregnancy as a ticket home? well, one way is not to have any sex with their husbands on leave (or boyfriend) ok... but our brothers and sisters are on tour 4-6months at a time some longer and hardly see their family. That is a long time to hold out even on higher commitment.

I don't think that is realistic. People need release somewhere.

Dec 21, 2009#45

@Li3n

But dude, it's only the entire reason you exist... what can be easier then not listening to your genes?

Dec 21, 2009#46

Chibibar

@Li3n said:
But dude, it's only the entire reason you exist... what can be easier then not listening to your genes?

heh, I know that there are tons of people who can live without it for years, either, they don't want it anymore, or can't get any.

Dec 21, 2009#47

WolfOfOdin

A court martial works kinda like an actual trial. It's an adverserial system (Prosecutor V Defense), wherein the JAG Corps prosecutor will present and argue evidence against the appointed defense attorney (usually a military lawyer as well, or at least a lawyer very familiar with the ins and outs of military law). The presiding officials may then either establish what punishments are to be imposed (dishonorable discharge being the usual worst punishment if you've -really- screwed up), defferment to a civil institution if it's found that the military has no true jurisdiction over the accused or if a municipality or state government has greater jurisdiction against the accused, or the charges may be dismissed outright due to the prosecutor failing to meet the burden of proof, ect.

A court martial has about the same weight as an impeachment in tone though. It's bad that it came to this, but the outcome can and more often than not will be wildly different than what the media usually likes to portray.

Dec 21, 2009#48

Espy

Chibibar said:
I can understand where the General is coming from is servicewomen are using pregnancy as a ticket way home, but there are also legit/accidental pregnancy from their husbands when their wives are on leave for the holiday or something. I feel that to punish all sends the wrong kind of message. That is where I'm getting at.

It sends the message that you have made a Commitment that supersedes your personal horniness. Thats it.
Or try this: Service to Country>your unprotected sex life
I don't think I can repeat this again: No one is saying that anyone is going to stop others from having sex. They are simply saying that people need to understand their actions will have consequences, proceed at your own risk and protect yourself best you can. I get in my car and I know, even if I use my safety belt and drive very safely I might still get hit. I still drive. I don't just stay at home. I accept the risk.

Dec 21, 2009#49

@Li3n

Chibibar said:
heh, I know that there are tons of people who can live without it for years, either, they don't want it anymore, or can't get any.

First one i don't believe, and the second one is another thing entirely.

Sure, there are people who are able to will themselves not to, but like people that kill themselves or do other stuff contrary to their instincts (the word is kinda too weak for what i mean) they're the exception.

@WolfOfOdin

You mean they don't still hang you for treason and the like?!

Dec 21, 2009#50

strawman

@Li3n said:
Sure, there are people who are able to will themselves not to, but like people that kill themselves or do other stuff contrary to their instincts (the word is kinda too weak for what i mean) they're the exception.

One thing that distinguishes humans from many animals is the ability to consciously choose to suppress, ignore, or otherwise take a path that diverges from their instinctual or genetically programmed behavior.

I think it's pretty sad that it's generally accepted in our society that people are unable to suppress their instincts.

Dec 21, 2009#51

@Li3n

Sure, keep telling yourself we're oh so different from animals.

Dec 21, 2009#52

Kitty Sinatra

fade said:
I think a lot of people are going to associate "extremely bad" with "court martial" thanks to pop culture.

Why are so many people here assuming that's what other people here are assuming?

Probably comes from some animal instinct, I'd assume.

Dec 21, 2009#53

strawman

Gruebeard said:
Probably comes from some animal instinct, I'd assume.

Choose your own adventure: Retort edition

1. You're mother's an animal instinct.

2. That's what she said.

Dec 21, 2009#54

Kitty Sinatra

Your, not you're.

That's the grammar nazi instinct, found primarily in bees . . .

spelling bees.

Dec 21, 2009#55

Dusty668

Being in the military requires all kinds of instincts to be suppressed, ignored, or down right eliminated.

Shooting, explosions, fire, panic fear-soldiers have to function in it calmly and with purpose performing complicated coordinated tasks absolutely correctly.

Fears of heights, privation, enclosed spaces, exposure to being shot-and knowing the consequences of these actions intimately and performing their tasks and going back into it again and again as required for their mission.

Sounds of combat, animals run from it-of course, combat is noisy, scary and painful. The sound alone from a mortar/bomb/grenade blowing up can cause painful ear damage if you are close enough. Compared to this, stopping at third base should be easy.

Dec 21, 2009#56

strawman

Gruebeard said:
Your, not you're.

That's the grammar nazi instinct, found primarily in bees . . .

spelling bees.

(You got me dead to rights...)

Dec 21, 2009#57

Chibibar

Dusty668 said:
Being in the military requires all kinds of instincts to be suppressed, ignored, or down right eliminated.

Shooting, explosions, fire, panic fear-soldiers have to function in it calmly and with purpose performing complicated coordinated tasks absolutely correctly.

Fears of heights, privation, enclosed spaces, exposure to being shot-and knowing the consequences of these actions intimately and performing their tasks and going back into it again and again as required for their mission.

Sounds of combat, animals run from it-of course, combat is noisy, scary and painful. The sound alone from a mortar/bomb/grenade blowing up can cause painful ear damage if you are close enough. Compared to this, stopping at third base should be easy.

True, but you are with your comrade in the same danger, which other instinct kicks in. Protect your buddy/friend/pal etc etc.

but remember MOST people usually have 1 on 1 intercourse so you don't have your buddies with you and you are with a gorgeous willing woman/man that you haven't encounter/seen for well.... quite some times. It is hard to suppress those urges (not impossible)

Dec 21, 2009#58

Soliloquy

@Li3n said:
Sure, keep telling yourself we're oh so different from animals.

Dec 21, 2009#59

WolfOfOdin

Well, if you do commit treason and it's proven, you get to meet your maker on an all expenses paid trip courtesy of the US government. However you have to screw up ROYALLY as a soldier for that to happen...like selling passcodes or troop movements to enemies, revealing strategically or logistically vital sites/info or murdering your brothers-in-arms for the enemy.

Dec 21, 2009#60

Hailey Knight

I guess this is no big deal. There's always abortions.

BIZZOW!

Dec 21, 2009#61

Adammon

Gruebeard;318978][quote=fade said:
I think a lot of people are going to associate \"extremely bad\" with \"court martial\" thanks to pop culture.

Why are so many people here assuming that's what other people here are assuming?

Probably comes from some animal instinct, I'd assume.[/QUOTE]

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/cspanjunkie/top-us-general-bans-pregnancies-soldie

Read some of the comments there and get back to me on 'assumptions'.

Dec 21, 2009#62

Kitty Sinatra

You're gonna have to point out the comments you're referring to. In among all the lame jokes, I only see people talking about possible jail time at worst.

Dec 22, 2009#63

@Li3n

Soliloquy;319001][quote=@Li3n said:
Sure, keep telling yourself we're oh so different from animals.

Dec 22, 2009#64

bhamv3

I would have no problem meeting the conditions of this ban.

/not getting any

Dec 22, 2009#65

@Li3n

bhamv3 said:
I would have no problem meeting the conditions of this ban.

/not getting any

I propose making the army only accept people that aren't getting any... that way it shoots 2+ rabbits at once.

Dec 22, 2009#66

Dusty668

Then if they start getting some kick them... heeeeey wait a minute! You just argued your self in a circle. Think one of your wheels are sticking.

Dec 22, 2009#67

@Li3n

I direct you to my sig...

Dec 22, 2009#68

Dusty668

Yah, my normal card game is solitaire.

Dec 22, 2009#69

Kitty Sinatra

did this thread just turn into an abstinencebaw?

Dec 22, 2009#70

@Li3n

you expected something else?

Dusty668 said:
Yah, my normal card game is solitaire.

I meant the last one, but sure, that works too.

Dec 22, 2009#71

Jay

This reminds me of something that happened on Sunday. I was in the pharmacy and I told this girl who bought a pregnancy test "good luck".

Dec 22, 2009#72

@Li3n

You forgot to add "with your court martial"

Also, i love the tags.

Dec 22, 2009#73

Armadillo

"We're no different from animals" is just another way of saying, "I don't think people should be expected to have any self-control whatsoever."

I feel the same way about this that I do about teenage pregnancy: it's really not that hard to avoid either knocking someone up or getting knocked up.

Dec 22, 2009#74

Green_Lantern

escushion said:
ARMY = No sex.

And yet, they don't want gay people.

I understand what you actually want to say, but that part could be a bit clear, outside the context it doesn't make sense

---------- Post added at 07:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:28 PM ----------

SeriousJay said:
This reminds me of something that happened on Sunday. I was in the pharmacy and I told this girl who bought a pregnancy test "good luck".

you are evil.

and I love it. :devil:

Dec 22, 2009#75

Philosopher B.

fade said:
Just to throw in a lefty voice....surprise, I agree with the general. I think a lot of people are going to associate "extremely bad" with "court martial" thanks to pop culture.

Yeah. What he said. I don't have a problem with this.

Dec 22, 2009#76

Espy

It's been withdrawn by the general should anyone care. Kind of a wussy thing to go for it then back off when he got criticized (did he not think the crap was gonna hit the fan?) but I'm not terribly surprised.

Dec 22, 2009#77

@Li3n

Armadillo said:
"We're no different from animals" is just another way of saying, "I don't think people should be expected to have any self-control whatsoever."

That's because you have a skewed idea of how animals behave.

Armadillo said:
I feel the same way about this that I do about teenage pregnancy: it's really not that hard to avoid either knocking someone up or getting knocked up.

Statistics say it is...

Dec 22, 2009#78

Soliloquy

@Li3n;319186][quote=Soliloquy;319001][quote=@Li3n said:
Sure, keep telling yourself we're oh so different from animals.

He said while sitting at his mass-manufactured desk inside his gas-heated home, pressing buttons on a device of extraordinary complexity that was conceived of, in its entirety, by the human mind. Slowly, he sips some coffee that was transported to his city from across the world via a giant mechanical flying machine, the drink's heat held in by an artificial polystyrene foam that will last for 500 years after he tosses it casually in the garbage.

"Yes, we're not very different from animals," he said. "Not very different at all."[/QUOTE]

Ha... i don't drink coffee.

But sure, keep telling yourself that tool use and nest building = overcoming your genetic programming (i did say instincts was too weak a word).[/QUOTE]

All right, let's use some more relevant examples.

Have you ever seen any other animal give itself a self-imposed limitation on eating the fatty foods that it's genetic programming is designed to have it seek out? Have you ever seen any other animal practice abstinence, despite their desire to do otherwise? Do you know of any other animal that engages in diplomacy instead of fighting its rivals?

Remember: the phrase "self control" was invented because it describes something that actually exists.

Dec 22, 2009#79

@Li3n

No, never seen any lean animals that had access to all the food they wanted, or any animals that instead of actual fighting just have one give in after a show of fangs etc.

I'll give you the abstinence thing, although there are animals that are fully monogamous and won't do it with anyone but their chosen partner, even if the partner is dead (very few).

Dec 22, 2009#80

Soliloquy

@Li3n said:
No, never seen any lean animals that had access to all the food they wanted, or any animals that instead of actual fighting just have one give in after a show of fangs etc.

I'm not entirely sure if you're being sarcastic here... Though I would at least say that there's more to diplomacy than being threatened and giving in, and that lean household pets have their diets regulated by a human.

It's important for me to be clear on this, though: I'm not saying that humans' behavior doesn't have similarities to other animals' behaviors. What I am saying is that human behavior has evolved so far beyond animal behavior (supercomputers instead of sticks, etc.) that they're only really comparable on a base level, like how a mountain is comparable to a rock.

@Li3n said:
I'll give you the abstinence thing, although there are animals that are fully monogamous and won't do it with anyone but their chosen partner, even if the partner is dead (very few).

Well, at least we've come to some sort of quasi-agreement. Instead of, you know, fighting it out.

Dec 22, 2009#81

Chibibar

well we have seen (post and videos) of squids using ARMOR

Sharks are notoriously picky eater (selection of food? since they are the top food chain in the ocean)

Dec 22, 2009#82

AshburnerX

Chibibar said:
Sharks are notoriously picky eater (selection of food? since they are the top food chain in the ocean)

Actually, Sharks will eat just about anything because of their poor eyesight. They've found sharks with metal armor, luggage, and UNEXPLODED BOMBS in their stomachs.

Dec 22, 2009#83

SpecialKO

AshburnerX;319604][quote=Chibibar said:
Sharks are notoriously picky eater (selection of food? since they are the top food chain in the ocean)

Actually, Sharks will eat just about anything because of their poor eyesight. They've found sharks with metal armor, luggage, and UNEXPLODED BOMBS in their stomachs.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, sharks are more in the "when in doubt, EAT THAT SHIT!" school of thought.

Dec 22, 2009#84

Chibibar

TeKeo;319606][quote=AshburnerX;319604][quote=Chibibar said:
Sharks are notoriously picky eater (selection of food? since they are the top food chain in the ocean)

but the octopi!!!

Dec 22, 2009#85

Kitty Sinatra

would one individual tiger shark who's a picky eater blow your argument out of the water?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-outthere11-2009aug11,0,2353549.story

Also, I think chibbs was probably thinking about some recent research that suggests great whites are picky. I saw an article about that while googling up this shit. It's apparently tiger sharks that eat anything, not great whites; plus there are plenty of other varieties of shark, not all of them (if any of them) will eat like tiger sharks tend to . . . especially as not all tiger sharks even do

Dec 22, 2009#86

Chibibar

Gruebeard said:
would one individual tiger shark who's a picky eater blow your argument out of the water?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-outthere11-2009aug11,0,2353549.story

Also, I think chibbs was probably thinking about some recent research that suggests great whites are picky. I saw an article about that while googling up this shit. It's apparently tiger sharks that eat anything, not great whites; plus there are plenty of other varieties of shark, not all of them (if any of them) will eat like tiger sharks tend to . . . especially as not all tiger sharks even do

hehe.. thanks

my wife is a shark nut. I saw clips here and there of all the shark stuff (movies, documentary, videos etc etc) so I only pick up a snippet here and there. That is why I post what I posted.

Dec 22, 2009#87

Armadillo

@Li3n;319537][quote=Armadillo said:
"We're no different from animals" is just another way of saying, "I don't think people should be expected to have any self-control whatsoever."

That's because you have a skewed idea of how animals behave.[/quote]

I do? Base instinct tends to be the course of action for animals, something that humans are quite capable of overcoming.

@Li3n;319537][quote=Armadillo said:
I feel the same way about this that I do about teenage pregnancy: it's really not that hard to avoid either knocking someone up or getting knocked up.

Statistics say it is...[/QUOTE]

OK, how is it hard to avoid knocking someone up/becoming knocked up? I'm talking about in the normal course of human activity, not horrific circumstances like rape or other abuse. I'm not a supporter of abstinence-only education, but it IS the only 100%, sure-fire way to avoid pregnancy. If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Dec 22, 2009#88

Adammon

Armadillo said:
OK, how is it hard to avoid knocking someone up/becoming knocked up? I'm talking about in the normal course of human activity, not horrific circumstances like rape or other abuse. I'm not a supporter of abstinence-only education, but it IS the only 100%, sure-fire way to avoid pregnancy. If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Pfft, try telling that to Mary.

Dec 22, 2009#89

Chibibar

Armadillo said:
OK, how is it hard to avoid knocking someone up/becoming knocked up? I'm talking about in the normal course of human activity, not horrific circumstances like rape or other abuse. I'm not a supporter of abstinence-only education, but it IS the only 100%, sure-fire way to avoid pregnancy. If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

also.. there are those sperm whiskers.... not 100%

Dec 22, 2009#90

Armadillo

Adammon;319673][quote=Armadillo said:
OK, how is it hard to avoid knocking someone up/becoming knocked up? I'm talking about in the normal course of human activity, not horrific circumstances like rape or other abuse. I'm not a supporter of abstinence-only education, but it IS the only 100%, sure-fire way to avoid pregnancy. If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Pfft, try telling that to Mary.[/QUOTE]

Well, there's ALWAYS an exception. I'd even extend that protection to Zeus' illegitimate conquests.

Dec 22, 2009#91

Kitty Sinatra

Chibibar;319647][quote=Gruebeard said:
would one individual tiger shark who's a picky eater blow your argument out of the water?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-outthere11-2009aug11,0,2353549.story

Also, I think chibbs was probably thinking about some recent research that suggests great whites are picky. I saw an article about that while googling up this shit. It's apparently tiger sharks that eat anything, not great whites; plus there are plenty of other varieties of shark, not all of them (if any of them) will eat like tiger sharks tend to . . . especially as not all tiger sharks even do

hehe.. thanks

my wife is a shark nut. I saw clips here and there of all the shark stuff (movies, documentary, videos etc etc) so I only pick up a snippet here and there. That is why I post what I posted.[/QUOTE]

Well you gave into them so readily when all they did was say "sharks eat anything" that I had to do at least a cursory search to see what was up. That brief search suggests that you were more on the side of right, that given the right circumstances even an eating machine can be finicky.

Mind y'all, I'm of the opinion that we really are nothing but animals, that we live and are guided by our "base instincts" as much as any other critter, we just don't acknowledge it because we like to believe our intelligence puts us above it; I don't see how that's reasonable, though, when our intelligence itself is part of our animal nature, not above it.

Dec 23, 2009#92

@Li3n

"Armadillo said:
@Li3n;319537 said:

Armadillo said:

"We're no different from animals" is just another way of saying, "I don't think people should be expected to have any self-control whatsoever."

Click to expand...

That's because you have a skewed idea of how animals behave.

Click to expand...

I do? Base instinct tends to be the course of action for animals, something that humans are quite capable of overcoming.

Yeah, i said instincts is not the best word as it has the wrong association.

I meant that self-control is also a natural response to danger etc. and animals also have it, even if it's not as obvious as in humans.

Armadillo said:
If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Sure, but how many actually do that...

I'm not entirely sure if you're being sarcastic here... Though I would at least say that there's more to diplomacy than being threatened and giving in, and that lean household pets have their diets regulated by a human.

Simple examples mean i don't have to look stuff up. There are plenty of more complex behaviours in the animal world regarding conflicts between individuals.

And you think lean animals = humans not giving them more food i don't think you ever had a pet...

Dec 23, 2009#93

Kitty Sinatra

Yeah, cats control their own diet. Most cats anyway. Nearly every cat I've known at least. I had one cat, Sly, who makes a perfect example. For most of her life, we simply kept her bowl filled with dry food. She ate as much as she wanted, whenever she wanted. We had no input in that decision.

Indeed, she pestered us to no end if she could even see the bottom of the bowl. The only way to get her to leave us alone was to go fill it up. And after doing so, she wouldn't even eat. It just calmed her worry over running out of food.

She was a healthy cat and not fat.

This all changed when she hit old age, though. We had to regulate her food then, otherwise she would just eat and eat and eat. It very much seemed like she lost her self control at that point.

And as I'm typing this, I'm recalling my late great grandmother. In her final years, she too lost her self control when it came to food. She ate so many sweet; would just down them one after another when before she barely touched the stuff, just ate enough to enjoy the taste.

Just with this one example - and comparison with a person - I would be unable to say that cats don't have self control. And unable to think that cats are anything special, I'd extend this observation to all mammals by default and even other animals with the barest intelligence.

And I come back to my most basic thought on this topic: Humans are very much the same as animals.

Dec 23, 2009#94

Denbrought

I don't see the problem, sex isn't limited to vaginal intercourse. Soldiers have plenty of alternatives.

Besides, they signed up to give their body and skill to the selected country, there's plenty of shittier sides to being a soldier than this, and plenty of situations where soldiers can get themselves into if they don't show proper constraints (o hai death/crippling/POW/etc).

Dec 23, 2009#95

Armadillo

@Li3n;319979][quote=Armadillo said:
If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Dec 23, 2009#96

Chibibar

Armadillo;320109][quote=@Li3n;319979][quote=Armadillo said:
If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Sure, but how many actually do that...[/quote]

Every choice comes with risks and benefits. Part of being human beings is using our evolved brains to make the decisions we feel are in our best interests while mitigating the risks associated with our actions. Yes, sex is awesome, but the risks involved are huge, even more so in the military. In addition to the standard pregnancy/STD risk, they have the risk of punishment from their employer. After running all of that through the ol' brain, if you decide that the risks of having sex are worth the pleasure, then knock yourself out. Just don't bitch and moan if it comes back to bite you in the ass.[/QUOTE]

yea. but not having sex for like a year (depending on your tour I guess and allow/ability to come home) and be with the person you LOVE and married to and have no sex..... that is tough.

Dec 23, 2009#97

Chibibar

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091223/ts_nm/us_iraq_pregnancy;_ylt=Ake8_1Z6o5feqUaS2LgyhlF0fNdF

updated. So.......... he is NOT planning to court martial pregnant people or send them to jail, BUT still keep the policy in place? so I guess other Officers can still enact on this rule.

Dec 23, 2009#98

Kitty Sinatra

As I read the article, you got it. His rule allows the lesser punishment of reprimand, which is what he plans to use . . . though the option of a court martial still stands, presumably for what's deemed a more heinous breach of his rule (having twins? lol. But no, likely if it's found that someone got willfully pregnant to get out of duty, or something like that).

It seems the "no change" mentioned in the article means that he's not backing down on his rules.

Also: Yay. That article was kind of enlightening on the flexibility of the commander to modify (and even create?) rules/laws for his subordinates to follow. It sort of answered my earlier questions from this thread.

Dec 23, 2009#99

Armadillo

Chibibar;320148][quote=Armadillo;320109][quote=@Li3n;319979][quote=Armadillo said:
If you desperately don't want to get pregnant, if getting pregnant will RUIN EVERYTHING, then you have one option to be sure. That's how it is.

Dec 23, 2009#100

Chibibar

Armadillo said:
Yes it is. My point still stands, though. They have a decision to make: have sex and run the risk of getting their wife pregnant, or abstain and make absolutely sure she can't get pregnant. It's far from an easy choice, and I don't envy those who have to make it, but the choice is still theirs and theirs alone.

Dec 23, 2009#101

AshburnerX

Chibibar;320210][quote=Armadillo said:
Yes it is. My point still stands, though. They have a decision to make: have sex and run the risk of getting their wife pregnant, or abstain and make absolutely sure she can't get pregnant. It's far from an easy choice, and I don't envy those who have to make it, but the choice is still theirs and theirs alone.

Dec 23, 2009#102

Chibibar

AshburnerX;320254][quote=Chibibar;320210][quote=Armadillo said:
Yes it is. My point still stands, though. They have a decision to make: have sex and run the risk of getting their wife pregnant, or abstain and make absolutely sure she can't get pregnant. It's far from an easy choice, and I don't envy those who have to make it, but the choice is still theirs and theirs alone.

Of course it is their choice, but I think that is asking a lot more. There are rare cases that it could be their only son to pass on the family line. So no kids (due to war) could essentially kill that family line (only child etc etc) each family don't have a brood anymore. Most usually have 1-2 kids if any and maybe both serve in the military have have an equal chance of getting killed.

So I guess new service from the government.

Sperm/Egg bank
Contraceptive (if needed)
Surgery (for those who don't want kids anymore)[/QUOTE]

Except that passing on the family line isn't exactly a huge fucking deal in the US. In fact, it's not exactly uncommon for wives to keep their maiden names or for husbands to take their wives' names. No offense, but your rationale is very chauvinistic and out of date, Chibi.[/QUOTE]

note I said sperm AND EGG bank. which mean from either line male AND female. So it is possible a family line (regardless which side) could be terminated.

edit: to me, bloodline can come from either side. Granted the "traditional" line would be from male heirs, but I consider both side of the family since both side history is important, but like I said, it is a rare cases and I'm showing extreme. The original premise was posted to show "far extreme" cases that could possibly happen in this scenario. Remember that male and female serve in the military, but what if all the children serve and died (it is possible even a fictional movie Saving Private Ryan was about a family of losing all member except one) so you could have your wife died and her family line died with it.

Dec 23, 2009#103

Kitty Sinatra

AshburnerX said:
Except that passing on the family line isn't exactly a huge fucking deal in the US. In fact, it's not exactly uncommon for wives to keep their maiden names or for husbands to take their wives' names. No offense, but your rationale is very chauvinistic and out of date, Chibi.

I'm not sure you and Chibs on the same page here. It seems like Chibs is talking about the genetic line, not the family name.

Dec 23, 2009#104

Chibibar

Gruebeard;320259][quote=AshburnerX said:
Except that passing on the family line isn't exactly a huge fucking deal in the US. In fact, it's not exactly uncommon for wives to keep their maiden names or for husbands to take their wives' names. No offense, but your rationale is very chauvinistic and out of date, Chibi.

I'm not sure you and Chibs on the same page here. It seems like Chibs is talking about the genetic line, not the family name.[/QUOTE]

Heh, yea. That is what I was going for (even add edit part of my post) hence I put down egg and sperm. I figure it was enough, but I presume and that is my mistake.

I'll try to be fully clear in all aspect (I'll try not meaning that I will always) in my posts, but that would make many of my post long and well.... boring

Dec 24, 2009#105

@Li3n

Armadillo said:
Part of being [STRIKE]human beings[/STRIKE] alive is using our [STRIKE]evolved brains[/STRIKE] sensory input to make the decisions we feel are in our best interests while mitigating the risks associated with our actions.

all better...

Forums