Pregnancy - a court martial offense?

[Schmedlap]

I wonder how long it will be before someone actually claims that G-d is the baby daddy. That never worked where I grew up.

I doubt that it would work in this case, either. The most recent lawsuit against the almighty that I am aware of was dismissed with prejudice. While service of process would seem a no-brainer, given omniscience, the judge concluded that the court could not conclude that papers had been filed in the absence of a legal address. Even if that had succeeded, it is doubtful that the court would have been willing to grant the injunction sought, since any attempt to enforce the court order would likely have invited a hail of fire and brimstone from the defendant.

[Adam L]

I doubt that it would work in this case, either. The most recent lawsuit against the almighty that I am aware of was dismissed with prejudice. While service of process would seem a no-brainer, given omniscience, the judge concluded that the court could not conclude that papers had been filed in the absence of a legal address. Even if that had succeeded, it is doubtful that the court would have been willing to grant the injunction sought, since any attempt to enforce the court order would likely have invited a hail of fire and brimstone from the defendant.

Irrelevant! The court will not be held hostage by any force human or dieity. Terrorism will not be tolerated!

Adam L

[J Wolfsberger]

Irrelevant! The court will not be held hostage by any force human or dieity. Terrorism will not be tolerated!

Adam L

It wouldn't be terrorism. In this situation the defendant is also a Higher Court asserting jurisdiction.

[Adam L]

It wouldn't be terrorism. In this situation the defendant is also a Higher Court asserting jurisdiction.

Perhaps, but he would be an interested party in this case. Since this would create a conflict of interest he would be obligated to recuse himself.

Adam L

[marct]

It wouldn't be terrorism. In this situation the defendant is also a Higher Court asserting jurisdiction.

Now that would depend on how you viewed the deity in question . Consider this book as an hypothetical on the jurisdictional question....

[jkm_101_fso]

Did I miss something in the thread? I was under the impression that sex was a violation of GEN Order #1. At least that's what I thought during all of my deployments. I thought the only people authorized to have sex were married couples deployed together.

If I'm wrong on this, I'm going to feel really stupid. I know that on more than one occasion I told my Soldiers: "it is illegal for a Soldier to have sex in Iraq, unless you are married and it's with your wife".

Actually, it was probably a good thing I told them that.

[Schmedlap]

I told a whopper of my own. I told my Soldiers that "gross stupidity" was an article 15 offense. That prevented more dumbassery than I can even begin to list.

[IntelTrooper]

I told a whopper of my own. I told my Soldiers that "gross stupidity" was an article 15 offense. That prevented more dumbassery than I can even begin to list.

Don't forget that it can make survivors ineligible to receive your SGLI.

[Stan]

Did I miss something in the thread?

I thought the only people authorized to have sex were married couples deployed together.

Jake, I think that one got nixed also. Well, so long as one of the consenting and married partners doesn't get pregnant

[J Wolfsberger]

... "it is illegal for a Soldier to have sex in Iraq, unless you are married and it's with your wife".

True. But about as effective as legislating rainfall.

[Schmedlap]

I don't understand the exception for married Soldiers. All of my married friends insist that sex ceases upon marriage.

[selil]

Irrelevant! The court will not be held hostage by any force human or dieity. Terrorism will not be tolerated!

Adam L

G_D is a terrorist? I knew it! Now I know how I ended up with twins!!! They are kinetic biological weapons.