The Power of Citizen Journalism
Post News ($)»     Post Blog»     Upload Image»     Groups»     Events»     Alerts»     How do I ...»
Email Print Share

Email this article

Recipient email:
Your email:
optional
Message:
optional

article imageOp-Ed: Higher Morale or Higher Morals For The Troops?

Posted May 7, 2008 by  LewWaters in Politics | 9 comments | 231 views
Next in Politics
Related News
1 more article on this subject:
Advertising
Many a Serviceman over the years has enjoyed viewing magazines like Playboy. Far from home, sleeping and eating in dirty unsanitary conditions, facing death and dreaming of the U.S., viewing such magazines has been known to lift many spirits.
If a newly elected Congressman from Georgia, Paul Broun has his way all that may come to a crashing halt. Broun, described by many Republicans from Georgia as the "Accidental Congressman" has introduced a bill, The Military Honor and Decency Act (H.R. 5821) that Broun claims "will right a bureaucratic and moral wrong" closing what the Georgia Baptist says is
"a loophole in current law that is allowing the sale of sexually explicit material on American military installations located both within the United States and around the world."


Pornography and pornographic materials are already banned for sale on Military Bases. A Department of Defense review commission deemed just last year that magazines such as Playboy, Penthouse and Playgirl are not pornographic, but Rep. Broun's proposal would lower the threshold required to deem material sexually explicit.

Broun, who compares himself to Texas Congressman Ron Paul, although they differ on the Iraq Battle claims,
"Allowing the sale of pornography on military bases has harmed military men and women by: escalating the number of violent, sexual crimes; feeding a base addiction; eroding the family as the primary building block of society; and denigrating the moral standing of our troops both here and abroad. Our troops should not see their honor sullied so that the moguls behind magazines like Playboy and Penthouse can profit."


Some Male Troops responded by saying this legislation, if passed, may hurt the morale of the deployed Troops. Not unexpected, some Female Troops would support the ban.

Apparently not taken into consideration is the hard-core pornography and extremely explicit sexual material that is readily available just off base at nearly every Military Base in existence, save the current combat zones. This ban would only affect the sale of the magazines on Base through the Post Exchanges and not the numerous 'Adult' Shops.

Is it really necessary to ban these magazines so coveted by deployed Troops for so many years?
article:254372:9::0
4 subscribers
Subscribe To This Thread[?] :
  • skeptikool Posted May 7, 2008 by  skeptikool
    #1
    Absolutely insulting! While they may obtain attractive pin-ups, I don't doubt that these magazines will be purchased and passed around for their intellectual content.

    I suspect a dirty at work mind here. Unimaginable. Perhaps he sees these servicemen taking this material into the latrines for the purpose of wanking off.
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  LewWaters
    #2
    General feeling in his district is that he will be a one-termer
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  Mark L Harvey
    #3
    One-termer. Good. The guy has screws loose and stripped - no pun intended - maybe.
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  Saikat Basu (Maverick)
    #4
    God, I don't believe it! Why doesn't he work on something which will ban wars in the first place. The world seems to be getting narrow minded. This kind of moral policing only helps to make mountains out of molehills.
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  LewWaters
    #5
    @ Saikat Basu (Maverick)
    God, I don't believe it! Why doesn't he work on something which will ban wars in the first place. The world seems to be getting narrow minded. This kind of moral policing only helps to make mountains out of molehills.


    To ban wars, you first have to come up with a way to counter people like Saddam, Bin Laden and many others throughout history.

    That being said, bills like this shows why the GOP is also lagging behind in campaign funds and is on shakey ground with voters. 17 Republicans have signed on to co-sponsor this demoralizing and unneeded bill.
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  Pamela Jean (GotTheScoop)
    #6
    With all of the problems facing this country - this is a top priority for this guy? Stupid......though I think Penthouse is gross......Playboy and Playgirl (are there naked packages displayed in Playgirl? haven't bought a Playgirl in 30 years! LOL) are tame.

    Give me a break.
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  Saikat Basu (Maverick)
    #7
    @ LewWaters
    To ban wars, you first have to come up with a way to counter people like Saddam, Bin Laden and many others throughout history.

    That being said, bills like this shows why the GOP is also lagging behind in campaign funds and is on shakey ground with voters. 17 Republicans have signed on to co-sponsor this demoralizing and unneeded bill.

    Rightly said about Laden and his ilk. I wonder what the servicemen think about this? I think their response would be something on the lines of @#$*!
  • avatar Posted May 7, 2008 by  Chris V. (cgull)
    #8
    I agree with the comments there are far more real issues to tackle, the guy must be a religious crusader.
  • skeptikool Posted May 7, 2008 by  skeptikool
    #9
    I suspect most caught my drift, but that should have read:

    I suspect a dirty mind at work here.


    That comes from wee-hour posting when one should be sleeping. Moral? No matter the time, always check for editing.

    Just had to laugh at the juxtaposition. Accompanying the Playboy front page image of these three delicious morsels, (Yeah, I'm sure they have it in the brain department too) was this Rogers ad that referred to watching the bottom line.

Add a Comment

You have to Login or Register to comment


Email:
Password:
Remember meForgot password?