Senate is trying to pass an amendment that would decriminalize homosexual acts in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Jun 29, 2011 6:12 PM GMT

    Senate sanctioning 'sodomy'?

    Senate is trying to pass an amendment that would decriminalize homosexual acts in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

    http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1379632
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2011 7:15 PM GMT
    Art_Deco mentioned this subject in another thread. I am amazed the legislation to allow homosexuals to serve in the US armed forces (i.e. the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act 2010) did not contain an amendment to the UCMJ. Otherwise, what is the point? The effect will be to allow openly gay people to serve, but make them liable to a charge under military law should they engage in oral or anal penetrative sex, regardless of the circumstances (Note: it also applies to oral or anal penetrative sex with a person of the opposite sex, so it is utterly antiquated!).
  • jim_sf

    Posts: 2094

    Jun 29, 2011 7:21 PM GMT
    metta8 saidhttp://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1379632


    Um. That source is less than reliable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2011 7:48 PM GMT
    The Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act 2010 Section 2(2)(D) effectively requires the Secretary of Defense to:

    "Recommend appropriate changes (if any) to the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

    Assuming he does recommend the removal of the 'Sodomy' from the UCMJ, does that mean it can be removed by executive order or will it require congressional approval?
  • groundcombat

    Posts: 945

    Jun 29, 2011 8:31 PM GMT
    So I suspect they didn't amend the UCMJ because it (politically) sounds bad to attach sodomy to DADT repeal. The enforcement was weak on it anyway considering "sodomy" also includes heterosexual anal and oral sex.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 29, 2011 8:44 PM GMT
    groundcombat saidSo I suspect they didn't amend the UCMJ because it (politically) sounds bad to attach sodomy to DADT repeal. The enforcement was weak on it anyway considering "sodomy" also includes heterosexual anal and oral sex.


    Absolutely. I doubt anyone has actually be charged with 'Sodomy' for donkey's years. But it is not the sort of thing that should be lingering in the UCMJ post-DADT repeal.
  • iGator

    Posts: 150

    Jun 30, 2011 1:43 AM GMT
    The UCMJ is incredibly difficult to change. For example, Article 119a makes abortion illegal for military members...