[little jeremiah]

You’re ridiculous.

You are one of the most arrogant people on FR. You’re so vain you’re funny. You’re actually funny.

Oh, since you’re a genius and everyone else on FR is a drooling neanderthanl, could you make it clear whether you think male on male sodomy and sodomy with animals should be legal according to the the UCMJ?

Just so we drooling barely educable retarded short bus riders know your lofty opinion?

Thanks in advance for making your important POV known to us all.

[CitizenUSA]

Strategerist makes a valid point. The UCMJ does indeed make heterosexual oral sex illegal for service members. As a minimum, oral sex between husband and wife shouldn't be criminal.

On the other hand, we all know the senators did this in order to approve of homosexual acts, too. They could have removed just the sodomy provision for heterosexuals, but they went further for a reason. This is all part of the DADT repeal deal. They want to make the perverse acceptable if not normal.

We also know where this ultimately leads. Have a spiritual, natural law, or medical/scientific reason for opposing homosexual sex? Better think twice before you express that opinion, because our political betters think homosexuality is a civil rights issue. That, of course, legitimizes using the full weight of federal power to force people to accept and approve of homosexuality, just like they did to stop racial discrimination.