Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

F U Bachmann!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by kbscobravert View Post
    USCENTCOM General Order #1 prohibits pornography, not limited to here in Afghanistan. You can fuck your buddy in the room next to me but I can't jerk off to clean straight porn.

    Talk about screwed up morality police.
    Is there not a policy against sex in general?

    I would think that any somewhat attractive female enlistee would get down right raped.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Big A View Post
      Is there not a policy against sex in general?

      I would think that any somewhat attractive female enlistee would get down right raped.
      No. You can not cohabitate unless you are married and even then your billeting has to be specific for a married couple.

      I had a bosnian greaseball banging a smokin hot AF chick in my b-hut two rooms down. When I say room there is a sheet of 1/4 plywood between us and it is only 8' tall in a 10' tall building. He got fired, she got charged with adultery, and some other stuff. We fired him he violated cohabitation and even that was a stretch.
      Fuck you. We're going to Costco.

      Comment


      • #18
        She can't ban porn. It's protected by the first amendment.
        ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by kbscobravert View Post
          No. You can not cohabitate unless you are married and even then your billeting has to be specific for a married couple.

          I had a bosnian greaseball banging a smokin hot AF chick in my b-hut two rooms down. When I say room there is a sheet of 1/4 plywood between us and it is only 8' tall in a 10' tall building. He got fired, she got charged with adultery, and some other stuff. We fired him he violated cohabitation and even that was a stretch.
          So what if she was single? What would she have been charged with? To me cohabitating is living with someone, a 20 minute sex romp is not cohabitating.

          Is that a catch all phrase that is used in situations like this?

          I am genuinely curious, I've never served thanks to those that are willing to, nor am I one to cheat. I'm just curious as to what the rules/laws are.

          Comment


          • #20
            Banning ANY vice simply gives organized crime a new market to exploit. And they most certainly will.

            Additionally, it turns otherwise perfectly law abiding citizens (A HUGE NUMBER OF THEM) into criminals.

            Comment


            • #21
              Bachmann scares me. It's fine that in her personal life she has those values, but when/if she starts to push them onto other people there is a major issue. And with her running for prez you know that's gonna happen if she's elected.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Big A View Post

                I am genuinely curious,
                Generally speaking - in the military - if the CO does not like something, they just have to get "in the ballpark" of what they are busting your balls about and DONE. There is some process to bitch and moan, but...

                When it comes to foreign nationals and all that crap, there is no process. Dime a dozen.
                Originally posted by MR EDD
                U defend him who use's racial slurs like hes drinking water.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Repost, from two days ago even!

                  Unless the media covers this up. http://jezebel.com/5819322/bachmann-signs-anti+porn-pledge-saying-blacks-were-better-off-during-slavery

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Yale View Post
                    She can't ban porn. It's protected by the first amendment.
                    You're correct, but....
                    Originally posted by mikeb View Post
                    Bachmann scares me. It's fine that in her personal life she has those values, but when/if she starts to push them onto other people there is a major issue. And with her running for prez you know that's gonna happen if she's elected.
                    this. I dislike any politician that remIves personal choice from personal decisions. Perhaps I depart from conservatives on this but I tend to believe that a person has the ability to decide what is best for themself better than some moralistic idealogue that makes a pledge to be morally superior.

                    I have zero issue when they lay out their own beliefs as people generally do that.

                    Republican candidates need to worry more about the republic and less on regulating the NSFW forum.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Sean88gt View Post
                      You're correct, but....


                      this. I dislike any politician that remIves personal choice from personal decisions. Perhaps I depart from conservatives on this but I tend to believe that a person has the ability to decide what is best for themself better than some moralistic idealogue that makes a pledge to be morally superior.

                      I have zero issue when they lay out their own beliefs as people generally do that.

                      Republican candidates need to worry more about the republic and less on regulating the NSFW forum.
                      Agreed. It's like Mr. Paul said, "Do you really need a law to tell you not to do heroin?"
                      ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X