Has DADT repeal effected how you poly?

swingers

New member
Since the Repeal of DADT, there has been a mandatory "Brief" date that the DOD must Brife all of its people by before it actually instates parolell policies that replace the old one. In my own briefing, the question of swinging, poly, and kink came up and the SGT holding the briefing basically said that "Adultery is still a crime". so thoes BI men and women that are married must still practice in secrecy.

Do you think this will ever change? Will we ever be in an America where our armed forces can practice their lifestyle without stigma and legalities? I long for the day that i saw in starship troopers and Supernova where men and women are mature enough to shower together with respect for eachother. i forsee the oposite coming ahead, 6 seperate showers for the 6 different sexual orientations, omitting trany of course because i dont think the military will ever accept them either.

i know i was basically free wrighting and i got a couple different topics in there, but what do you think?
 
I have a security clearance and I was wondering if my poly lifestyle would be a problem. I found a memo on this. It basically said that swinging, kink, homosexuality and adultery in itself would not disqualify a clearance. That is unless the person was hiding it and could be blackmailed. I thought that was pretty enlightened. So that gives me some hope.
 
wow, thats cool, an you post that memo? im curious as to where it originated. also, can the military charge you with anything if they found a personal you and your spouse posted on an alternatave lifestyle sight?
 
wow, thats cool, an you post that memo? im curious as to where it originated. also, can the military charge you with anything if they found a personal you and your spouse posted on an alternatave lifestyle sight?

it's hard to say. adultery is punishable under the UCMJ but it seems like the spouse would have to be the one to bring it up the chain. I may be wrong though.
 
In my own briefing, the question of swinging, poly, and kink came up and the SGT holding the briefing basically said that "Adultery is still a crime". so thoes BI men and women that are married must still practice in secrecy.
OK, isn't adultery a civil offense, not a criminal one? I.e, someone could sue you for divorce, but if you're in an agreed open marriage, it's not considered adultery? (I admit I'm not legal expert here!)
 
wow, thats cool, an you post that memo? im curious as to where it originated. also, can the military charge you with anything if they found a personal you and your spouse posted on an alternatave lifestyle sight?

I wish I could remember where I found it. It was about 6 years ago. I want to say it was for a Navy clearance but I don't really remember. (I just remember that it wasn't quite the same branch of government I got my clearance through, but I was hoping that the guidance was the same.

It didn't address what happens with my employer finding out I am into a poly lifestyle. I have a friend who was accused of having an adulterous affair with some guy associated with our work. This guy was heavily questioned based on this rumor. My friend only heard about afterwards. Her boss didn't want to tell her because he thought the whole affair (pun intended) was a ridiculous thing to worry about. Since nothing happened and the only "proof" was someone speculating, nothing happened. But I wonder what would have happened if she had had sex with that guy.
 
OK, isn't adultery a civil offense, not a criminal one? I.e, someone could sue you for divorce, but if you're in an agreed open marriage, it's not considered adultery? (I admit I'm not legal expert here!)

military doesn't look at it that way. you're either married or you're not.
 
under UCMJ, Adultery is a court marshal punishable offence, and since UCMJ goverens us in uniform under the DOD, so it would be considered a Federal offence to comit adultery.... am i correct?

all im saying is, with DADT repealed. it is easier for the SINGLE (by civil and military deffinition) service members to practice polyamory. but do you think they will ever loosen the deffinition of adutery to only includ incidentses that were not consentual by all partners and spouses involved? the military would probably require some kind of memo or contract stating that the married couple is in a non-monogomous relationship freely and consentually.
 
OK, isn't adultery a civil offense, not a criminal one? I.e, someone could sue you for divorce, but if you're in an agreed open marriage, it's not considered adultery? (I admit I'm not legal expert here!)

United States

In the United States, laws vary from state to state. In those states where adultery is still on the statute book (although rarely prosecuted), penalties vary from life sentence (Michigan),[54] to a fine of $10 (Maryland), to a Class I felony (Wisconsin).[55] In the U.S. Military, adultery is a potential court-martial offense.[16] The enforceability of adultery laws in the United States is unclear following Supreme Court decisions since 1965 relating to privacy and sexual intimacy of consenting adults.[56] However, occasional prosecutions do occur.[57]

Admittedly this is just from Wiki and might be totally out to lunch but it is interesting never the less.
 
adultery is actually a sub chapter of article 134 which is the "general article" or catch all.

Adultery, as a military offense, is difficult to prosecute (legally) for several reasons.

There are three "Elements of Proof" for the offense of Adultery in the Military:

(1) That the accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person;

(2) That, at the time, the accused or the other person was married to someone else; and

(3) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
Element #2 is usually pretty easy for the government to prove. There is normally sufficient written evidence to prove whether or not someone is legally married. (Many folks will be surprised to learn that in the military, a single person can be charged with the crime of adultery).

Element #1 can be very hard to prove. Remember, a court martial (like civilian court) requires *proof* beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof of sexual intercourse normally requires photographs, a confession of one of the parties involved, an eye-witness, or other legally admissible proof. (The mere fact that someone stayed over at another individuals house, or even slept with them in the same bed is not proof of sexual intercourse.
Element #3, in many cases, can be the most difficult item to prove. The government must show that the individual's conduct had some direct negative impact on the military. This normally would include cases of fraternization (officer & enlisted) or a relationship with another military member, or a military spouse.


http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/adultery.htm
 
all im saying is, with DADT repealed. it is easier for the SINGLE (by civil and military deffinition) service members to practice polyamory. but do you think they will ever loosen the deffinition of adutery to only includ incidentses that were not consentual by all partners and spouses involved? the military would probably require some kind of memo or contract stating that the married couple is in a non-monogomous relationship freely and consentually.

there is nothing saying a single person can't be poly. they're not married so there is no adultery.

as for being married. it says wrongfully had intercourse. if it's consensual nn-monogamy, is it wrong??

DADT never had anything to do with non monogamy anyway. once DADT is repealed, all it means is that if you are gay or bi and in the military, you can now tell the people you work with. there will also be a change to the UCMJ article pertaining to sodomy, making it OK as long as it's consensual.
 
thank you very much for that informitave responce. although i am military and currently practicing swining, i had never actually looked up the leagal implications. (stupid of me) but we have been paranoid and tried to make sure we keep a good secure lid on what we were doing. i guess where we foul up is the fact that we actually try and stay withing the military community when we explore. our logic was that if we stuck with military they understood more of the life that we live and the risk we take enguaging in.... extracirricular activities as a married couple. but now realizeing that, usually, only military would know the ins and outs of UCMJ if they would intend to burn us. so, when it comes to the element of promisquity that accompanies swining, i think we should stay with civilians, but when it comes to searching for likeminded polyamourus people, i think military should be cleare of vindictive people.

what do you think? this is just me free wrighting, but is there a incident anyone can show where service members were prosicuted under UCMJ because of either their poly/swing/kink activities (besides under the dont ask dont tell policie reguarding homo/bisexuality)?
 
what do you think? this is just me free wrighting, but is there a incident anyone can show where service members were prosicuted under UCMJ because of either their poly/swing/kink activities (besides under the dont ask dont tell policie reguarding homo/bisexuality)?

I personally have never seen anyone prosecuted for poly. I work with a guy who swings and is pretty open about it actually. I have seen 1 person prosecuted for adultery. 45/45 but this guy was sleeping with another guys wife in his own shop. I was there when they got caught to make sure my friend didn't kill the guy.

I think as long as you keep it under the radar (don't talk about it at work or anyone you work with who may not understand) you will be fine.

and like I said DADT is a totally different set of rules. even after the repeal, the military doesn't recognize gay marriage. still no adultery.
 
Im thinking it could be ther 3rd or 4th person in the relationship, if there was a fude or something between, if they so chose, i suppose they could bring it to the command as a form of retribution.

i do remember a case of either a brittish or canadian general who was procicuted becaus of posting himself on a local swinger websight, but the charge was because he had opened himself up for blackmale, not the moral implications about it. but that wasnt in the US.
 
Back
Top