Isn't that called a shotgun gay wedding?

FlyingLizardOfDoom: Isn't that called a shotgun gay wedding?

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 125. SODOMY

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

Yes but was it legitimate sodomy? Because if it was legitimate sodomy, a man's bunghole has a way of shutting that all down.

BarkingUnicorn: Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 125. SODOMY

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

Also note that the UCMJ definition of sodomy includes oral sex, and that "In fact, it appears that the majority of people prosecuted under Article 125 are straight"

/stubmitter

BarkingUnicorn: FlyingLizardOfDoom: Isn't that called a shotgun gay wedding?

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 125. SODOMY

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

Unnatural carnal copulation?
Hot.

FlyingLizardOfDoom: Isn't that called a shotgun gay wedding?

No, it's called rape.

Since it's General, not Admiral, I'm guessing straight. *clicks*

... Yup.

Is that worse than rapeing a woman as far as sentancing goes?

From the linked article: Link

The captain, who was brought into the 82nd Airborne Division just before the start of the unit's year-long deployment in September 2011 at the behest of Sinclair, told Huggins that she had been having a sexual relationship with Sinclair for three years.

She was "in tears, crying and, I think, fearful," Huggins said.

Huggins said he was told by the aide that she assumed Sinclair would leave his wife for her. She learned that was not the case when, after accessing Sinclair's personal emails, she saw correspondence to Sinclair's wife and to other women.

Huggins said the woman said she was ready to end the relationship and alleged that Sinclair had forcibly sodomized her by grabbing her by the neck.

Sounds like it could be a 'woman scorned' situation.

No gay weddings.

Come on, people, there are plenty of straight people who get married....or remarried.....again...and again...and again.

Not sure what that's called actually.

BarkingUnicorn: FlyingLizardOfDoom: Isn't that called a shotgun gay wedding?

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 125. SODOMY

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

"unnatural carnal copulation"

what does this mean? although penis in vagina is the only "copulation" that can result in a child being conceived, i argue that penis in mouth and penis in anus are also "natural" copulations.

besides, whatever the interpretation of the ucmj article, most people in the military are guilty

I am guessing that only ONE of the women it was forced. Most women would TOTALLY get off on being farked by a General in public.

Joelogon: BarkingUnicorn: Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 125. SODOMY

(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

Also note that the UCMJ definition of sodomy includes oral sex, and that "In fact, it appears that the majority of people prosecuted under Article 125 are straight"

/stubmitter

Came for this.

Going to be satisfied.

as to the charge here..."forcible" indeed adds a completely illegal aspect that i in no way intended to condone...rape is rape and it's wrong

"Lighten up Francis"

Still a better love story than Twilight.

Folks, that provision of Article 125 (a) was repealled.

You're Gawdamm RIGHT I did!

/oblig.

REPEALED. Dear God, weak keyboard fu!

..."forcible sodomy".

Wait! I don't know of any other kind.

bungle_jr: as to the charge here..."forcible" indeed adds a completely illegal aspect that i in no way intended to condone...rape is rape and it's wrong

forcible means because he is a general.. anyone under him in the chain of command would be off limits, even if willing,

I give it one star out of five. Would not ride again.

biglew99: [growthnation.com image 260x267]



You're Gawdamm RIGHT I did!

/oblig.

Yeah, but some of us are only looking for ONE good man.

Sorry, I don't resemble Demi Moore.

Wise_Guy: From the linked article: Link

The captain, who was brought into the 82nd Airborne Division just before the start of the unit's year-long deployment in September 2011 at the behest of Sinclair, told Huggins that she had been having a sexual relationship with Sinclair for three years.

She was "in tears, crying and, I think, fearful," Huggins said.

Huggins said he was told by the aide that she assumed Sinclair would leave his wife for her. She learned that was not the case when, after accessing Sinclair's personal emails, she saw correspondence to Sinclair's wife and to other women.

Huggins said the woman said she was ready to end the relationship and alleged that Sinclair had forcibly sodomized her by grabbing her by the neck.

Sounds like it could be a 'woman scorned' situation.

5 times?

Wise_Guy: Sounds like it could be a 'woman scorned' situation.

Only 8% of rape accusations made to law enforcement are false. Therefore, he definitely raped her. Why do you hate women?

biglew99: [growthnation.com image 260x267]



COLONEL JESSUP
DID YOU ORDER THE CODE ROD

Is there a military badge for rape? Maybe a special skills badge.

sinclair: I just sodomized a subordinate
afghan:a goat? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

UPS calls Sinclair Amateur. adding We screw people professionally and in great numbers. And they pay us.

Given his logistics training UPS plans to hire him as soon as his Army paperwork is done.

I bet he didn't have the goddamn courtesy to give him a reach-around.

LoneWolf343: I bet he didn't have the goddamn courtesy to give him a reach-around.

Real men don't reach around. There are plenty of women ready to go there.

Rank has its privileges.

cmon people. if you cant sodomize subordinates as a brigadier general of the screaming eagles, WHERE CAN YOU.

Fark Rye For Many Whores: biglew99: [growthnation.com image 260x267]

[angryczeck.com image 288x288]

COLONEL JESSUP
DID YOU ORDER THE CODE ROD

Raging gay moonbat is gay and raging.

Not his best moment of acting...actually his best moment was in the movie "Jerry McGuire" when I swore he was straight for about 30 seconds.

Nicholas Urfe: Wise_Guy: Sounds like it could be a 'woman scorned' situation.

Only 8% of rape accusations made to law enforcement are false.

I'm sure the 80 guys in 1000 (I'll run with your number for sake of argument) that are falsely accused take great comfort in that, particularly the ones serving time...and yes, it happens.

Wise_Guy: From the linked article: Link

The captain, who was brought into the 82nd Airborne Division just before the start of the unit's year-long deployment in September 2011 at the behest of Sinclair, told Huggins that she had been having a sexual relationship with Sinclair for three years.

She was "in tears, crying and, I think, fearful," Huggins said.

Huggins said he was told by the aide that she assumed Sinclair would leave his wife for her. She learned that was not the case when, after accessing Sinclair's personal emails, she saw correspondence to Sinclair's wife and to other women.

Huggins said the woman said she was ready to end the relationship and alleged that Sinclair had forcibly sodomized her by grabbing her by the neck.

Sounds like it could be a 'woman scorned' situation.


Yep. If you're going to go nuts on that kind of stuff, better make sure you take care of your people.

Frothy Panties: Folks, that provision of Article 125 (a) was repealled.

Nope. Repeal was removed in conference.

protectyourlimbs: [a.abcnews.com image 271x411]

Is he wearing two watches? What a douche.

strangeguitar: ..."forcible sodomy".

Wait! I don't know of any other kind.

Exactly. That little buggerhole is tight. Your not getting in there just by asking nicely.

biglew99: You're Gawdamm RIGHT I did!

Fark Rye For Many Whores: COLONEL JESSUP
DID YOU ORDER THE CODE ROD

Came for "A Few Good men" references, leaving satisfied.

Impossible. He's a member of the armed services, and that automatically makes him a hero who is deserving of our unmitigated gratitude and adulation.

SnyderCat: biglew99: [growthnation.com image 260x267]



You're Gawdamm RIGHT I did!

/oblig.

Yeah, but some of us are only looking for ONE good man.

Sorry, I don't resemble Demi Moore.

slayer199: biglew99: You're Gawdamm RIGHT I did!

Fark Rye For Many Whores: COLONEL JESSUP
DID YOU ORDER THE CODE ROD

Came for "A Few Good men" references, leaving satisfied.

Happy to oblige, sir.

The 101st, on the other hand, goes in more for teabagging.

/nuts, nobody yet?

Am just glad this creep isn't part of the long grey line.

The Army released charge sheets and identified the investigating officers when it charged Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan with the Fort Hood shootings in 2009 and Pfc. Bradley Manning in the WikiLeaks disclosures...Staff Sgt. Robert Bales - whose own court martial starts on Monday at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington state - got no such protective treatment...That stands in contrast to the treatment being received by Brig. Gen. Sinclair. "Clearly those cases are much more high-visibility and high-stakes than the Sinclair case," Davis says...The military also aired accusations in a rape case against a basic-training instructor, Staff. Sgt. Luis Walker

I'm shocked that the military was more reluctant to publicize the charges of a general officer than those of a major, a couple of staff sergeants and a private.

The argument that the article is making is that the military is protecting him because he's in the "good ole boys club" by being a general. The reasoning is that far more serious charges have been publicized against lower ranking officers / non-coms. The article makes the inference that more serious charges mean more embarrassment for the Army. So therefore, Sinclair is being given preferential treatment due to being a general since his offenses were less serious, which means less embarrassing. The problem with that train of thought is that it's a crock of shiat.

Deputy commander of one of the more recognizable units in the Army, a Ranger, a chest full of medals, a 27 year career, and a general? Misconduct by this guy is far more embarrassing than some idiot 25 year-old Air Force staff sergeant. It may not be right, but I can see why the military was more hesitant to publicize this guy's misdeeds than the other examples provided in the article.

What about rum and the lash?

Fano: What about rum and the lash?

Or the whiskey and the hash?

FTFK

Joelogon: Frothy Panties: Folks, that provision of Article 125 (a) was repealled.

Nope. Repeal was removed in conference.

So the repeal was repealed in a repeal vote?