Sen. Lindsey Graham Says He Didn't Know Defense Bill He Approved Lifts Military Ban on Sodomy and Bestiality
By Elizabeth Harrington
December 7, 2011
Subscribe to Elizabeth Harrington's posts
ALSO
Senator McCain
It is sad to say I finely believe what is said about you! It has been said, "you are a RINO". I as a constituent of yours did not resend you back to the Senate to break down the institution of marriage. Your vote today to allow queers to have the same rights and privilege as a couple (one man/one woman) is not only wrong, it's Biblical wrong. Further more, I called your office to ask which way you intended to vote on the Marriage act. I was told by your staff " you had not made up your mind as of yet".
I then called Senator Kyl's office asking the same question and was told, that vote was taken two hours earlier.
Between the two phone calls, perhaps 20 second had passed.
Mr. McCain you obviously consider me to be your enemy and are working against me, but I have no one to blame but myself, for I voted for you.
Consider this an advanced notice: I will no longer work for you but against you. I will begin by posting copy's of this e-mail to all available.
Jack Hotchkiss
rejackh@gmail.com
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
(CNSNews.com) - Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), asked Wednesday if he was aware of a provision in the National Defense Authorization Bill that repeals the ban on sodomy and bestiality in the military, told CNSNews.com: “No, I can’t say I was.”
A former military prosecutor and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Graham joined 92 of his colleagues in voting to pass the 926-page National Defense Authorization Act, which contains a repeal of an article in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that bans sodomy, including engaging in sex with an animal, or bestiality.
The bill passed 93-7 last Thursday.
At the U.S. Capitol, Wednesday, CNSNews.com asked Graham: “The Defense Authorization Bill, were you aware of the repeal of the ban of sodomy and bestiality in the military, article 125?”
“No, I can’t say I was,” Graham said. “But I can, I think I know what the military is getting at there, in light of the change in policy. But no, I can’t say that I was, so we’ll look at that.”
CNSNews.com then asked, “And you don’t support that?”
“Well, I gotta -- I want to get DOD’s reasoning. Okay? I’m sure it was put in there as a -- as input from the Department of Defense, I’d like to hear them out,” Graham said.
CNSNews.com also asked if Graham thought the ban was related to the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the policy that prohibited gays from openly serving in the military that was ended in September.
“Sure it does. Sure it does,” Graham said. “You got the -- you got a United States Supreme Court case, Texas case, talking about consensual behavior with adults. I’m sure that may have some deal to do with it, too.”
Embed »
As CNSNews.com previously reported the bill that was first approved by the Senate Armed Service Committee and then approved on the Senate floor, includes a provision repealing the military’s ban on sodomy and bestiality.
Page 174 of the bill includes a provision headlined in capital letters: “REPEAL OF SODOMY ARTICLE.” Click here to see a PDF of the page.
The provision states: “Section 925 of such title (article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is repealed.” Click here to see the language of the provision as posted on Universal Code of Miltary Justice Website.
Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice says: “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. (b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
Disqus
Like
Dislike
3 people liked this.
Login
Add New Comment
Post as …
Image
Showing 1-40 of 107 comments
RJJ
PICTURE THIS LINDSEY HONEY
You are back in the service. Now imagine walking into any barracks and seeing a group of nude homosexuals doing the nasty. You walk out of the AIDS feast because now that you voted for it there is not a damn thing you can do about it. Is the gay vote that important that you would destroy the military?One of the benefits a gay gets in the service is free tax payer treatment for AIDS... that he already had before he joined or will get.
Like Reply
1 minute ago
Archangel
People like McCain and Graham need to GO! They are more detrimental to the well being of the United States of America and the inalienable rights of Americans than Al Qaeda!
Like Reply
4 minutes ago
gracentruth
Ignorance of things you need to know to do your job is not an excuse. It may be maleficence. Barry hussein is a good example of this.
Like Reply
16 minutes ago
capoprimo
Are our Representatives not expected to know what they vote for? Isn't that the basic requirement of their job? We might just well get a bunch of monkeys in there and train them to bush the "yea"or "'nay" buttons on the vote board. It would make about as much sense as we're getting from them now.
This is outragous, throw these people out, let's vote people in who are responsible and care for the well being of our Country and its citizens and not for their self serving narcissistic interests.
Like Reply
18 minutes ago
JALD
Maybe it was slipped into the bills after they were signed. I wouldn't put anything past this administration! they'll do anything to get their agenda passed! Think about it.
Like Reply
19 minutes ago
Alexia
Typical for the girlie man Senator Lindsey Graham from S.C.
Like Reply
26 minutes ago 1 Like
MNIce
"'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor'
What does this mean?
We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, think and speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything." Luther's Small Catechism, on the Eighth Commandment (Deuteronomy table).
Of all of the posts I see here, I saw just one whose author tried to follow this commandment in regard to Senators McCain or Graham. Did you not see the actual wording in the bill? "Section 925 of such title (article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is repealed." This is just one line in a 900+ page bill. Assuming either of them even noticed in a high-speed scan of the bill (few people are capable of catching details at a read speed of more than 150 words per minute), would they have had any idea it was important enough to chase down this obscure reference? How many people got past the mind-numbing list of numerical statute references to see that a phrase possibly prohibiting child molestation was also removed from the UCMJ (down near the bottom of the page)? (I am a speed-reader, so I saw it). Remember, this is buried in a catch-all bill with all sorts of mundane, routine details - it is very easy to just flip through it to get the general gist and miss this stuff.
To make it harder for the Senators, altering statutes by reference without showing the text to be changed is a very common practice in bill writing. For example, a bill might have a paragraph saying, "Title MM, Section NNNN, paragraph x(c) is hereby amended by inserting "bis-phenol A" at the end of the second sentence." When a Senator gets loaded with multi-hundred page bills every week, he just doesn't have time to chase down every such reference.
This makes it very easy to sneak all sorts of garbage into the laws, and some Congressional staffers and their friends in the executive bureaucracies take full advantage of the situation to steal power from the people. Do a search on "cow flatulence", "research" "Kansas" and "Congress" for an example of how this can work. Note how the offending language ended up in the final bill despite being voted down multiple times.
Senators and Representatives should refuse to vote on any bill containing only references by number unless the statutory text to be changed is included with the file (hypertext linked) or printout, with original text and changes clearly identified. Another necessary change is to require a reasonable evaluation time for bills based on size. Finally, Congress must require all legislation to be within the enumerated powers of the Constitution, if only to keep the workload reasonable. One big problem we have with our over-grown Central government is that it is doing far too much for our elected representatives to properly oversee.
Like Reply
32 minutes ago
Jonathan Douglass
Isn't reading bills a part of their job? The have more vacation days than actual days worked and it seems like no one can read a bill that is up for voting. Does Washington in general know how to read? Holder, Kagen, the entire Congress...makes you wonder
Like Reply
36 minutes ago
Danl_P
Maybe the simple fact that the rule is unconstitutional interference in the private behavior of adults had something to do with it.
Of course, the nut cases of the religious right have no problem with outlawing private adult behavior if it violates their mythology.
Like Reply
37 minutes ago
wayne74467
Danl, do you own a camel, or just sheep?
Like Reply
7 minutes ago in reply to Danl_P
mustang
You two are a couple of sick Bastardos
Like Reply
45 minutes ago 1 Like
Henrykzaleski
There is nothing worse than an educated elected a**hole who pretends that he doesn't read what he signs. Say Senator Graham just sign some checks and send them my way, I'll do the rest. Shame on you for putting your country last.
Like Reply
46 minutes ago
mustang
You RINO's should be aware that you are not going to be re-elected and you Mc Cain are one sorry Azz human being and damn this country is sorry that you were given the right to ruin and run for the Presidency when there were people that really love this country that were more qualified then you
Like Reply
46 minutes ago
West Thea
Republicans and Democrats along with Joe Lieberman supported this bill with the only exception being seven Senators. These people have no excuse for this. What isn't mentioned is that the part which says "OR LIBERTIES WITH A CHILD" has been struck (removed) from the original legislation. It is little wonder that Iraq is telling the US military to get the hell out. Here is a telling truth about America:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Like Reply
1 hour ago
J42ERRY
another dumb as that doesn't read what he signs bull shit
Like Reply
1 hour ago
Mediafire
The 17th Amendment needs to be repealed immediately if not sooner!
Like Reply
1 hour ago 1 Like
stevor
Another MORON who followed Pelosi's advice to sign it and read it later.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 4 Likes
Highsider
I just have to wonder how much stuff suddenly just appears in the final printing of these bills, that wasn't there before the vote.
If our representatives are actually this careless, they need to be fired.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 3 Likes
CaptTurbo
Lindsey is another piece of RINO dung who needs to be removed from office.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 3 Likes
Kim T.
None of them read the bills anymore-they depend on staffers and lobbyists to tell them the pertinent facts in each bill and then they vote when it comes to the floor. The bills are too big and contain too much that's not associated with the original purpose of the bill. It needs to be one bill one subject. No addendums that don't have to do with the main issue. No omnibus bills. Clear, concise and to the point. But it won't happen because this confusion is what allows all the stuff Americans don't want or don't know about to get by.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 2 Likes
Jim.M
This further proves that once you open the gates to homosexuality, blindness follows and every form of depravity imaginable quickly follows suit.
Any congressman/woman who either supports such things and/or cannot read needs to be replaced with a moral person who still adheres to and respects the morals and values of real America.
93 to 7?
93 to 7????!!!
Like Reply
1 hour ago 5 Likes
Thurman
Go ahead and give the military to the gay.I think all the govement are gays themsels.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 2 Likes
levotb
If this doesn't bring about a serious effort to remove Graham from office, I don't know what will. He knew damned well what this provision meant! A McCain clone.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 3 Likes
rank
Here is a simple, yet apparently unique, qualification that we voters need to demand of every elected official. The ability to read and comprehend what they read. Then expect them to apply those skills before casting any vote on any piece of legislation! Otherwise, they should be recalled or at the very least voted out in their next election!
Like Reply
1 hour ago 1 Like
libsaway
Let's find out who voted for this bill, post it and make sure they are all thrown out for dereliction of duty. Major mistake for McCain and any others who voted for this. Too feeble to even read the bill? Wow this country is in deep doo doo, particularly in light of Obamas comming out speech. Mr Marx in the flesh. We know what to do with him and his like now. Get to it Americans.
Like Reply
1 hour ago 3 Likes
suecostanzo
...and yet another idiot who only reads the bill after they pass it!!
what is wrong with US?!! We are the ones culpable in electing these squirrly non effective morons....STOP the madness....when their time is up...kick them out period end of story!
slime buckets all of them
Like Reply
1 hour ago 3 Likes
Mediafire
He didn't know! Yeah RIGHT!?
Like Reply
1 hour ago 3 Likes
texexpatriate
See my remark on the story on McCain. Both Graham and McCain need to be run out of Washington, D.C. and replaced with real, genuine Americans.
Like Reply
2 hours ago 4 Likes
1coachretired1
To be for DADT and against the repeal- is not an anti-gay position; it's a pro-military position. The basic idea is that sexual bonds are disruptive to the military bond.Soldiers, sailors and Marines living in close quarters who are having sex with one another, used to have sex with one another or would like to have sex with one another simply cannot function as a well-oiled fighting machine. A battalion of married couples facing a small unit of heterosexual men would be slaughtered.That's why instead of pushing openly gay servicemen on the military, patriotic gays should come out against girls in the military. Fair is fair. (In 1994, the first year servicewomen were allowed to serve on naval aircraft carriers, 39 women assigned to the USS Eisenhower alone ended up pregnant.)
Like Reply
2 hours ago 2 Likes
Slick5455
Come on Lindsey girl. You know you will be touring military bases the moment this thing is signed looking for playmates. Don't ply dumb with us.
Like Reply
2 hours ago 2 Likes
Doug
ladies and gentleman; a independent I be, and a independent I stay.
***we need to pass the bill before we can read what's in it! Pelosi.
Do you think we have a problem on both sides of the aisle?
****Graham; we got what I wanted so, we needed to pass the bill before we can read what's attached to it........
A independent I be, and a independent I stay!
God help us from these idiots in Washington.........
Like Reply
2 hours ago 4 Likes
grandmaclown
I don't think any of them know what they're voting for unless it includes one of their big spending ideas. Time to clean house and senate.
Like Reply
3 hours ago 8 Likes
buttons1994
Just proof that he didn't read the bill.. and I don't think any of them do!! We know the Dumbocrats didn't read the bill on Obamacare... God help us.. the worst administration ever in our country!
Like Reply
3 hours ago 6 Likes
Thurman
You told the truth there,The worst President there ever was and you can that to the bank.
Like Reply
1 hour ago in reply to buttons1994 2 Likes
Nostradamus
Graham needs to immediately fire members of his staff AND leave office when his term is up. He is an incompetent fool.
Like Reply
3 hours ago 7 Likes
Fjmc6
Rebooblicans..Vote them all out..Term limits...YES!
Like Reply
4 hours ago 7 Likes
Camarottajr
Is it because you Senators are so busy "Sticking It" to the American people that you don't have enough time to READ THE BILL! Term limits, term limits can't be said enough.
Like Reply
4 hours ago 8 Likes
James
Although the bill repeals the ban on bestiality, the main focus of this section was to repeal the ban on sex (hetero / homo) with other humans. Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice made having sex an offense punishable by court-martial. This repeal is really a move towards allowing deployed military personnel to have sex with each other without punishment.
Like Reply
4 hours ago 3 Likes
1coachretired1
What is homosexuality? Either the behavior is sexual immorality or there is no such thing as sexual immorality! Homosexual behavior, like adultery, fornication,incest and bestiality is classified as sexual immorality!
Dispite fairly sucessful attempts by self-described "gay" activists to equate behaviorally driven "gayness" to immutable and neutrally defined qualities such as race and gender, the reality is that being "gay" has nothing to do with what someone IS, and has everything to do with what someone DOES!
It is about feelings and behaviors. Behaviors that every world religion,thousands of years of history, and uncompromising human biology have universally rejected as both immoral and destructive!
If the homosexual lifestyle is just another "sexual orientation" then what possible justification can there be for opposing other orientations such as fornication,adultery,polygamy,incest, pedophelia or bestiality?
If one is immoral-then all are immoral!
Like Reply
2 hours ago in reply to James 2 Likes
James
Though I do not disagree with what you are saying, your response has nothing to do with my comment.
Like Reply
57 minutes ago in reply to 1coachretired1 1 Like
1 2 3 Next →
M Subscribe by email S RSS
Trackback URL
E-Brief
No comments:
Post a Comment