Posted on May 10, 2016
Should the military dictate who you can Marry if it doesn't affect good order and disipline?
9.97K
30
12
3
3
0
Example: you have 2 enlisted individuals, one goes officer the Army Fraternization policy states you have to get married within a year or the relationship has to be terminated. What are your thoughts
Posted in these groups: 
Fraternization
Marriage
Fraternization Marriage
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
8
8
0
I dont know why they think getting married within that year is going to make any difference. People are gonna be people. And whos to say they wanna get married within a year anyway. I understand the reason behind some things the army has policies for but unfortunately you cant help who you fall in love with good bad or indifferent
(8)
(0)
5
5
0
Not Who, but if you should or not. Not dictate but advise.
On another note:
I was in a relationship with a SGT when I was a SPC. We dated until I commissioned. Knowing the Army Regulations and realized we had different goals in the Army, so we decided to terminate the relationship instead of getting married. So, the Army did not dictate who I should date or marry. We knew the rules and we made a decision. And if one should not agree with the Army rules and regulations, then ETS is an alternative option, or make sure no one finds out about the relationship and keep it professional. But there is always an option.
On another note:
I was in a relationship with a SGT when I was a SPC. We dated until I commissioned. Knowing the Army Regulations and realized we had different goals in the Army, so we decided to terminate the relationship instead of getting married. So, the Army did not dictate who I should date or marry. We knew the rules and we made a decision. And if one should not agree with the Army rules and regulations, then ETS is an alternative option, or make sure no one finds out about the relationship and keep it professional. But there is always an option.
(5)
(0)
3
3
0
A few thoughts:
- Fraternization by definition is detrimental to good order and discipline. It confuses the issue to have these two terms/phrases in the same sentence in a contradictory manner.
- Policy. Let's start from fact and not from one narrow example. What exactly does the DA policy state? That should be the start point of the discussion.
- Historical. The current DA policy came about in 1999 as a result of different standards among the services and was an attempt to standardize across DoD. This was/is important as we fight joint combined arms and have the services stationed and operating co located.
- Current. DA policy is DA policy. How the policy is applied always boils down to a local commander's decision. There are individual and commander ways to balance an individual's personal decision/life with DA policy. In other words, there is a lot more gray area than black and white. Ensuring the individuals are not in the same chain of command is one example of a way to balance.
- At the end of the day, service in the military is a privilege not a right. If a person can not support a regulation, policy, or standard in the military then they can self select out of the military or work within the system in a professional manner to get the regulation, policy, or standard changed.
- Fraternization by definition is detrimental to good order and discipline. It confuses the issue to have these two terms/phrases in the same sentence in a contradictory manner.
- Policy. Let's start from fact and not from one narrow example. What exactly does the DA policy state? That should be the start point of the discussion.
- Historical. The current DA policy came about in 1999 as a result of different standards among the services and was an attempt to standardize across DoD. This was/is important as we fight joint combined arms and have the services stationed and operating co located.
- Current. DA policy is DA policy. How the policy is applied always boils down to a local commander's decision. There are individual and commander ways to balance an individual's personal decision/life with DA policy. In other words, there is a lot more gray area than black and white. Ensuring the individuals are not in the same chain of command is one example of a way to balance.
- At the end of the day, service in the military is a privilege not a right. If a person can not support a regulation, policy, or standard in the military then they can self select out of the military or work within the system in a professional manner to get the regulation, policy, or standard changed.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
In saying that Sir, military used to berate, demean, and kick out the gay & lesbian community. Another point would be that Green Beret who was kicked out for stepping in on the Boy who was brutily rapped and Officers kept to those so called policy, regulations, and standards, so what Im saying is some policys, regs, and standards arent always the right thing or in the best interest of the Army
(1)
(0)
COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM
SSG Winkler, agreed regarding policy, reg and standards however these should be the start point of the discussion when it comes to marriage and fraternization. The conversation can then migrate from what is to what should be (if needed). Also, you confuse the discussion by bringing up unrelated topics. You call it kicking out the gay and lesbian community while I call it enforcement of the policy of the US Government as the time. This policy has changed over the years (from can not serve to don't ask/don't tell to service is allowed). In terms of the Green Beret, I argue this was a failure on the part of his leadership and not a failure of policy, reg, or standard. Simply stated, his leadership did not have to take the actions that they took.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google