I read the article and he is being charged for much more than sodomy. I know the definition of sodomy within the UCMJ. I always thought that article should have been re-written to mean "forced" sodomy. What a husband and wife due in their home (even on base) should be of NO interest to the military. Oral sex is included in the sodomy article, but is very normal for heterosexual couples. I was guilty of that article countless times during my 11 years Navy.
That said, I don't believe consenting males buggering each other is good for military morale and will eventually come to no good. Interesting that this General is going to be tried under that article and yet the military is conducting classes for homosexual tolerance/acceptance. Not saying the General engaged is such activity, just that it's hypocritical. If the other charges are true, get rid of that POS.
I’ll go you one further: I don’t think the romantic element belongs on the combat team. How about no homosexuals period and no mixed sexed units below the division level or aboard combat vessels. Your a navy man, is there any reason a vessel could not have a female only crew?
“definition of sodomy within the UCMJ.”
I agree with your assessment. In addition, I would bet that the writers of the UCMJ were in violation of it as they were writing it. Well, not at the same moment but at home with their mates.