In this case, Sailor B consented to participating in an activity that, if precautions are not take, could result in HER failing to honor her military commitment.

Engaging in a legal act is not being an accessory to crime.  Is he an accessory to a crime if they have coitus and Sailor B does NOT get pregnant?  If not - why not?  Do we not prosecute attempted theft, robbery, murder, etc.?

Sailor B missed the cruise because she got knocked up.  Sailor A did not miss the cruise.  Punishing them both is the OPPOSITE of equality.

There is the problem - in the bold words.  You can have standards.  You can have equality.  You can have women in combat units.  You CANNOT have all three at the same time.   Attempting to have all three leads to interesting mental gymnastics.

I concur and being 11B I really concur but for the sake of this thread the standard was already in place and someone failed to meet it. If I see a women in combat arms thread I may be so inclined to read and post in there about that topic. I do like how you worded the standards, equality, and women in combat arms argument.

He is providing the material by which she becomes pregnant. His participation is essential, else she would not be nondeployable. Furthermore, it requires active participation on his part, not him simply preventing her from acting on her own.

It's only illegal if there are consequences. Much like a woman is only nondeployable if she gets pregnant. The scenarios are quite parallel.

As for retail liquor sales, it has already been established that the retailer does not bear responsibility for a patrons actions once that patron leaves the establishment. Nor are ammo manufacturers liable for the crimes committed using their products. The analogy is grasping at straws.

But then again, the "had sex, don't care" philosophy is rampant among men, many of whom feel no need or desire to actually be responsible for their own sexual activities, preferring to lay any consequences at the feet of the woman.

Here's an interesting question. Sailor B gives sailor A an STD (or any other disease, really) which renders him nondeployable. It does not render her nondeployable, but she had knowledge that she could transmit it to sailor A and it would result in him being nondeployable. Does she bear any responsibility if he becomes nondeployable? Or does it solely rest on his shoulders?

Well, she isn't nondeployable if she isn't pregnant, so no.

"The Navy has become a floating birthing clinic." -Michael Savage

"The Navy is a brothel with propellors." -Michael Savage

Assuming that sailor A has the same knowledge that sailor B has it solely rests on his shoulders. Sailor B is not responsible for sailor A not deploying due to sailor A's informed actions.

We may know the same lady.
The one I knew that this describes was in her 40's when it happened, first and only child.

 Except that they are not. Sailor A can deploy.  Therefor, Sailor A has broken no commitment, and thus no punishment.



Someone is grasping all right.  Not me.  YOU are the one that used BOTH  "it's only illegal if there are consequences" AND "it has already been established" - in the same POST yet.  Well, it has already been established that sperm donor Sailor A does not bear responsibility for Sailor B's failure to deploy.  Right back at you, ma'am.



I would like to reflect that "the feet of the woman" are not on the deck, whereas the man's feet are.  That is the difference.

Consequences aren't the same - why should the punishments be?



What magical herpegynaspyhilaids is this that renders one not deployable, and the other not?  Can you give me a real world example of this?  Also, "It has already been established"  () that knowingly exposing someone to a disease without there knowledge or consent is assault - which is a crime.  Sex is not a crime.  Yet.  I guess you wish it to be.

Here is an interesting question - Sailor A has coitus with Sailor B.  NOT intending to knock her up and make her miss her deployment, he uses a condom.  After he leaves, Sailor B fishes the condom out of the bedroom waste can, retrieves a turkey baster fromt he kitchen, stands on her head, chants a Wiccan fertility spell, and proceeds to get knocked up, because she really, REALLY doesn't want to go on the aircraft carrier. Should Sailor A be punished?  If not - why not?

She isn't drunk driving if someone doesn't sell her booze.  It is still all on her if she does.   Providing Sailor B with materials that could be potentially used to render her illegal or in violation of her commitment is not the same thing as breaking the law or a commitment.  Do you argue otherwise?  If so - why do bars and liquor stores have parking lots?

Diseases affect people differently. Her herpes or Hep C may be relatively asymptomatic while his presents in a much more severe fashion.

And I already covered your hypothetical. She's stealing his sled and inseminating herself. Still preventable if he avoids sex with a fellow servicemember, but at that point he's a victim and not responsible for any consequences.

I get it. You don't want women in the military. You want women to bear all culpability for anything that happens in her womb, to include bearing children they were forced to conceive. You resent that women aren't subject to the draft, even though you don't want women in the military.

And I'll hazard a guess that you aren't particularly fond of women being able to vote. And that a rape or sexual harassment victim bears some responsibility for being a victim if she is wearing clothing or engages in activities you deem inappropriate.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

What are your medical credentials again?

You are.

Sailor B missed the cruise because of an act both Sailor B & Sailor A participated in and in which both should have used the necessary PPE to prevent the negative outcome. Sailor A should be punished for his participation in the activity that deprived the taxpayers.

You hit most of my guesses. I can take a step back on the rape/sexual harrassment thing until such time as I feel like ever actually looking up a few of those threads, if ever. And you have blatantly said that all abortion is murder. I've seen it often enough. That includes those pregnancies arising from rape, as well as pregnancies which will never result in a live birth, and those which fundamentally endanger the life of the pregnant woman. So yeah. 100% control of a woman's womb surrendered to the government once an egg gets fertilized, no matter how or what the result may be.

As for your "overwhelming majority" you are talking 2-6%. That is a slight majority, not an overwhelming one. Slight. And that could be very, very easily overcome if conservative voters bothered to get off their asses and actually vote, but they don't. Including men, who can't seem to be bothered (several percentage points fewer male voters than female). Not to mention that single men vote more consistently democrat than married women. The voting thing isn't determined by random happenstance of birth. Nor is it an insurmountable difference if conservative voters could be bothered to vote at all.

ETA: I've always stated that a draft should be all or none, but being resentful that it wasn't and holding it against currently serving military personnel is sort of silly. And barring a few strategic Intel units, almost all military units have the potential to see combat, as do all MOSs. So the "combat unit" caveat is a bit disingenuous.

Should Sailor B be forced to identify Sailor A to the CoC?

Shouldn't even be a question - Sailor A should be a honorable member of the .mil and own his actions.

That isn't a step back.  At all.  That is a mealy -mouthed on-step-back half-assed semi-retraction.  You have blatantly lied about me.  Insulted me.  Because you disagree with me.  There ARE NO threads by me that would support such a claim.





Falsely accusing me about me again.  I have repeatedly asserted that life of the mother is a legitimate reason for terminating a pregnancy, though prone to abuse.  I have also said that a rape victim should not have to carry a rapist's child.  Do you plan to quit lying about me any time soon?



Again not true, and you conveniently skate past the events that LEAD to that fertilization taking place.

YOU asked if I was in favor of women voting.  I haven't actually answered.  I simply pointed out that the three absolute worst presidents in my lifetime, if not ALL time, would not have been elected had women NOT had the vote.  Voting is not a right - it is a qualified privilege, and it should be used responsibly and in an informed manner.  Do you agree?



Not resentful.  Simply pointing out that men and women are not equal, and in many ways, women have the better end of the deal.  You want equality?  Be equal.  All the way.  Same PT standards, same parental leave rules, same duties.



Not disingenuous at all.  There is a vast difference in the TO&E and expectations between combat, combat support, and support units.  That all have training to defend themselves, (at least in theory), does not make them equal in capabilities or suitability for women to serve in them.  For example., a male tanker can pee in an empty MRE bag and chuck it overboard. Tank doesn't have to stop.  How would that work with a female?  How much use is a 110 pound woman at breaking an M-1 Abrams track, or humping ammo?

Trick question.  Sailor B couldn't do it to begin with.

A female in a Stryker urinates in the oil drip pan.

Kharn

IMHO, we ought to adopt what the RN used to do back in the 1800s - Half Pay if you're in a sea billet career field but aren't for any reason other than normal shore duty rotation/school.

And yet I had sailors come whine to get flown home early because their wives were due.  Typical reply:  "you had to be there for the laying of the keel, you don't have to be there for the launching."

Y'all are making quite a few assumptions: to wit that "Sailor A" is (1) in fact a Sailor (or Marine), (2) in in the same command, and (3) isn't Sailor(s) A.

A poster in this thread suggested that IF Sailor B was knocked by Sailor A, that Sailor A should face the same disciple for Sailor B missing the cruise that Sailor B gets - hence the discussion.

Well that escalated quickly.