Gulf1 - C - Pappas

Guaranteed Solution to Military Sex Problems

by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

There is much hand wringing about the state of sexual conduct in the military services, from the bottom to the top.  Sexual assaults occur at the rate of 1:3 in the military as compared to 1:6 in civilian settings. It should, but may not be obvious that neither statistic is cause for celebration.

There are two components to resolution of sex problems in the military services:
1.    Return to a policy of male only service-members or in the alternative, enforce total segregation between male and female military members; and

2.    Adopt a Core Values Program similar to the one instituted by the late Vice Admiral Jack Fetterman during his tenure as Chief of Naval Education and Training. The purpose of this Program would be to teach basic moral values to enlistees and officers, many of whom were never exposed to or absorbed those values before joining the Services. Included in a Core Values Program would be training focused on development of high standards of personal ethics and morality, self-disciplined physical purity, i.e. chastity and celibacy, and punishment. 
It is understood that in contemporary America morality is not a high priority; in fact the mere mention of morality is the cause for snickering and the butt of jokes.

Jokes and snickering ignored: here is how it would work:
1.    There will be no sexual “hanky panky” whether voluntary or as an assault, and whether physical or verbal by military members; (civilians and civilian contractors will be addressed separately.)
2.    As defined herein a sexual assault is an unsolicited sexually suggestive or an explicit sexual act or sexual language directed at another, whether human or animal. (More about animals separately.)
3.    There will be strong and swift consequences if this proscription is violated, as follows:
a.    Women who become pregnant incident to voluntary sexual contact whether or not the baby is aborted, and whether or not the baby is fathered by a military member, will be discharged with a Dishonorable Discharge after confinement for the duration of any contract resulting from specialized training;
b.    The male sexual partner in the above instance, who is a military member will be discharged with a Dishonorable Discharge after confinement for the duration of any contract resulting from specialized training;
c.    Any military member, male, female or sexual pervert who commits a sexual assault as defined above will be discharged with a Dishonorable Discharge after confinement for the duration of any contract resulting from specialized training. 
4.    There will be no excuses, no exceptions and no questions. 
It’s time to re-instill basic discipline in the military services; and knock off excuses. Condoms? Save the money, they will not be needed. 

Update to Guaranteed Solution to Military Sex Problems

Due to the immediate and strong responses to “Guaranteed Solution to Military Sex Problems” two changes are provided below.

The first paragraph is changed to read:

“There are two components to resolution of sex problems in the U.S. military services (this is not a comprehensive study or comparative analysis):”

The Paragraph “Jokes and snickering ignored” paragraph 3. a. is changed to read:
3.    “There will be strong and swift consequences if this proscription is violated, as follows:
a.    Women, other than those who are married and who become pregnant incident to voluntary sexual contact…”

Thanks to the many readers who responded quickly and objectively.
Semper Fidelis
Bob Pappas

Copyright © June 27, 2013 by Robert L. Pappas. With proper attribution, this essay may be quoted and redistributed, except it may not be used in conjunction with any advertisement without the author’s expressed written permission.

 

Liars and the State of the Nation

by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

As youngsters, the memory of which is now fading with the accelerating passage of time, we were taught to respect authority and obey our parents. My own five foot, two inch mother liked to remind me, "It's better to obey than to sacrifice." I got her point when she denied me a bicycle, but I broke the code in another vein by admitting something I had done.  The bicycle finally arrived and mother was specific about the reason, I had told the truth. It's too bad the lesson didn't stick, but I always remembered it. Unfortunately, over time I abandoned that valuable lesson. I could produce whoppers on par with Clinton or Obama, although, admittedly not as consequential. I decline to include Bush in the lineup despite some misguided observers would. Fortunately, I found my way out of the lying trap and like a reformed alcoholic, I abhor lying and liars, chief of which is the President of the United States. Slick liars like Obama and Clinton are the "best."

There is a distinction between lying, deception and misleading; and making a mistake based on erroneous information. The Bush case in point forms the basis of the War that followed the attacks of September 11th, 2001. I am not a Bush apologist, he can handle his own defense, but when objectively assessing the rationale for going to war with Saddam Hussein of Iraq virtually every intelligence agency in the world asserted that the Hussein regime possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction.  Even key Democrats including Senators Hillary Clinton and John Kerry made speeches from the floor of the Senate that asserted the same and urged that action be taken. The final action to go to War rested on President Bush's shoulders, but unlike his successor, before he acted he obtained approval from the House of Representatives as required by the War Powers Act of 1973.  And thus the multi-front War on Terror opened in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Former Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska was so taken with Clinton's ability to lie that he stated to the effect that Clinton was the best liar he had ever heard. He evidently chose "best" instead of "damnable" out of consideration of their common Democrat roots. Clinton can be credited with among other things, such as the "Lewinski," mainstreaming lying, that is, making it an acceptable lifestyle. Mistakes are human error, not lies. Intentional misrepresentation, obfuscating and deception are all forms of lying.

For months the Nation has been beset by a succession of provable lies by this Administration at the highest levels. Had any Administration other than the Obama Administration engaged in such pervasive lying and cover-ups, impeachment proceedings would be underway on a bi-partisan basis. The only reason one must conclude that impeachment is not underway at present is because of the skin color of the occupant of the White House. No one would dare initiate impeachment proceedings against the first mulatto, who incidentally rejects the Caucasian component of his genetic makeup in favor of his black heritage. In his book, "Dreams from my Father, a Story of Race and Inheritance" Obama states to the effect: "Like Malcolm "X" I would if I could, purge the white blood from my veins."

When Obama took office, he promised to surround himself with people who were like-minded. If one examines them they will find a group of certifiable traditional America haters led by Obama. He doesn't have to tell them what to do; they instinctively know what he wants and have been doing it from the day he took office. Anyone who still believes that the problems that face the United States are because of Obama's inexperience has his head in the sand...or in the alternative, alimentary canal. He knew full well what he would do once in office which included to damage or destroy, Obama called it "fundamentally changing America:"

•    The U.S. Constitution ("it's too restrictive");

•    U.S. free market economy ("they've tried it and it doesn't work");

•    U.S. international stature (Hillary's reset with Russia);

•    The Armed Forces (Sequestration that harms the military structure and readiness);

•    The National moral fabric ("Gay marriage is a fundamental right");

•    Christianity ("I will stand with Islam");

•    Military cohesiveness and readiness (Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell);

•    Legal immigration (Evident on its face);

•    Energy exploration (Put millions of acres of national lands off-limits to energy exploration);

•    Coal fired power plants ("...bankrupt them");

•    Traditional Marriage (To the effect: "I support the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.");

•    Life of babies born alive (Voted three times for aborted babies that were born alive to be killed.);

•    Pro-life policies and activities ("I would not want one of my daughters to be punished by an unwanted pregnancy.");

•    U.S. Health Care/Insurance ("Our objective is to incrementally move to a single payer" and "spread the wealth around.") and,

•    Privacy (During a press conference, the President dismissed what he called “hype” over the surveillance programs.) and,

•    Many more.

People like suspended IRS employee, Lois Lerner didn't need orders from the White House. Obama as President was license enough for her to target conservative groups that applied for tax exempt status, extending approval of their applications for years. In a related side note the Barrack Hussein Obama Foundation, run by Obama's half brother received 501 (c) (3) tax exempt approval in thirty days on June 26th, 2011, backdated to 2008.

"Houston! We have a problem."

Semper Fidelis

Copyright © 061013, by Robert L. Pappas. With proper attribution, this essay may be quoted and redistributed. It may not be used in any way, in conjunction with any advertisement without the author’s expressed written permission.

On "Gay" Marriage

by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

“Freedom for everyone,” said former Vice President Dick Cheney in a statement supporting his daughter’s sexually perverted relationship with another woman. However, whereas one may agree with the Vice President on much that he advocates, the present debate is not about whether or not homosexuals have a legal right to engage in their perverted version of sex that has been settled by the Supreme Court. The present debate is about redefining the eons old definition of marriage; that is, the traditional, healthy and normal union of a male and a female for the purpose of procreation.

If marriage is instituted of God...and it is: e.g. "And he (Jesus) answered and said unto them, Have you not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they two shall be one flesh?"  Therefore, by logical deduction all other forms of sexual behavior are detrimental at the least, and absent penitence, are catastrophic to relations with the Creator. It is notable that Jesus never, repeat, never advocates anything but normal sexual relationships despite Hollywood's and liberals' concerted efforts to distort His message and His person.

Contemporary females have been sold a bill of goods that the debate is about ownership of their bodies.  In a loose sense they do, but if one has an understanding of spiritual things, one comes to grips with the fact that the bodies of Believers are the temple of God; we are not our own. Consider that little tidbit in the context of contemporary sexual "freedom." One acknowledges that if God is not in the equation, then unlike Believers who are God's redeemed and adopted children, unbelievers/infidels are forms of animal life, which is what some believe and advocate.

For those who don’t know, the American Psychological Association came to its senses a number of years ago and backed away from its decade old claim that sexual perversion has genetic roots; a claim for which there is not one scintilla of evidence.  Why do I refer to abnormal sexual behavior as  "sexual perversion?" Simply put, because it is. It is to use ones normal sexual function in an unnatural manner. Webster's Dictionary states that perversion is: "1. The action of perverting: the condition of being perverted. 2. a perverted form; especially : an aberrant sexual practice or interest especially when habitual."  One notable writer states: "For this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."

 Anyone with common sense intuitively knows that, even as the Association frantically tried to justify aberrant sexual behavior.  In the interest of non-politically correct language, male and female sexual perverts are just that, no matter what their label: “gay,” “lesbian,” “transgender,” “transsexual,” “transvestite” or most any other word or term that describes sexual perversion.

One is saddened by the knowledge that sexual perverts are trapped in an addiction every bit as strong as the strongest chemical addictive substances, and are incapable; in fact, so much so that they reject rational arguments on the merits. In their effort to construe themselves as “scientific” social and psychological practitioners devised an extensive vocabulary to describe deviant sexual fetishes. In recent years the Association has shifted its focus away from behavior modification of clients, to societal/social adaptation; that is, telling everyone to get used to it.

Sexual perverts make a lot of noise about their right to "love"...they have it. They make a lot of noise that what they do in the privacy of their bedrooms is their business...they have that too. They make a lot of noise about equal rights, and in at least 13 states they have the right to civil unions that bestow virtually every right of a married couple; and in recent months a number of States have either voted to bestow the title of "marriage" on sexually perverted unions or a Court has mandated "marriage" by countermanding and/or overruling the will of the people to abide by the traditional definition, as in California.  Therefore, given that "they" already have all the rights, what's the issue?  The issue is to erase any distinction between normal marital unions and sexually perverted unions; a philosophical, physical and spiritual impossibility no matter how the law may be crafted.

Ah, yes! The Courts, those guardians of the Constitution and arbiters of equality under the law are supposed to protect minorities from the tyrannical majority, that's their job. But, isn't it ironic that tyrannical minorities regularly trample the rights of a too tolerant, silent majority and no Court as much as flinches?

"Houston, we have a problem!"

Semper Fidelis

Copyright © 060613, by Robert L. Pappas. With proper attribution, this essay may be quoted and redistributed. It may not be used in any way, in conjunction with any advertisement without the author’s expressed written permission.