UCMJ Didn't Need Changing.

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader didn't comment on the recent change to the Uniform Code of Military Justice which now prohibits US soliders from "engaging" prostitutes. It was your Maximum Leader's understanding that prior to the recent change, if a GI was stationed or otherwise serving in an area/country/other jurisdiction that had legal prostitution; the GI could avail himself of the services of a prostitute.

Now, your Maximum Leader is not an advocate of prostitution as a rule. But his general feeling on the matter are that if some appropriate jursidiction (like a state in the US or a foreign nation - or administrative subset of a foreign nation) wants to have legal prostitution that is fine. If you are inclined to partake, fine. If not, you may ignore it.

So, recently the UCMJ was changed. It is now illegal for our soliders or sailors to hire a prostitute, even in areas where prostitution is legal.

Which brings your Maximum Leader to the impetus for this post. He was over on the Lost Nomad blog and read this interestingly titled post: When Adultery is Better Than Paying a Prostitute.

It seems as though the penalties for hiring a prostitute are more severe than are the penalties for committing adultery with another GI's spouse. What the hell? That is just wrong. Just on the face of it, it is wrong. But when you stop to think of the potential problems adultery within the ranks can cause it would seem as though consorting (if it is consorting) with a prostitute would be a much less serious offence.

Your Maximum Leader would hope that the Department of Defence would come to its senses in this matter at abolish the prohibition on prostitution. And if not that, at least equalize the punishments for bad behaviour.

Carry on.