The Briefing Room
General Category => Military/Defense News => Topic started by: flowers on July 30, 2013, 09:03:07 pm
-
Adult magazines like Playboy and Penthouse are reportedly permitted to be sold on military installations because they do not meet the federal definition of indecent material, according to a top Pentagon official.
Frederick Vollrath, assistant secretary of defense for readiness and force management, responded to a complaint from Morality in Media in a July 22 letter by saying that a review board had scrutinized those magazines and determined that “based on the totality of each magazine’s content, they were not sexually explicit under [the federal law],” Military Times reports.
Morality in Media, an anti-pornography group, complained in June about the sale of adult magazine on Department of Defense property.
The group claimed that the display and sale of adult magazines in military posts amounts to a violation of the Military Honor and Decency Act of 1996, which prohibits the sale or rental at military exchanges of material in which “the dominant theme ... depicts or describes nudity, including sexual or excretory activities or organs in a lascivious way.”
Morality in Media officials released the letter from Vollrath, saying his response “would be hilarious if it were not so tragic,” adding that it’s puzzling why the Pentagon would continue to sell pornographic magazines while in the midst of a sexual exploitation scandal.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/30/playboy-penthouse-reportedly-not-indecent-under-federal-law-allowed-for-sale-at/#ixzz2aZ5KYekv
:th_10444: :bolt:
-
I guess there wasn't anything of any greater import to report on than this? Obamacare's been repealed? Obama officially changed parties and became a registered Republican? Nothing?
-
I guess there wasn't anything of any greater import to report on than this? Obamacare's been repealed? Obama officially changed parties and became a registered Republican? Nothing?
And I guess no one should post anything they think is of interest unless they first clear it with you so you can rule on its "importance"?
-
Many of us post articles that appeal to a larger audience. I am intentionally all over the place when I post, so that I can reach more people who might be interested. Many of my posts are not responded to, which is fine by me, because many more are. I only respond to those I'm interested in, and I imagine others do the same. I appreciate the efforts of all the posters who give us variety.
-
I read those magazines cover to cover, while serving my conscription, for my country.
Among the freedoms that my service sought to preserve was my freedom, was freedom of speech; Playboy"s to say it and me to hear it.
-
I guess there wasn't anything of any greater import to report on than this? Obamacare's been repealed? Obama officially changed parties and became a registered Republican? Nothing?
And I guess no one should post anything they think is of interest unless they first clear it with you so you can rule on its "importance"?
I'm not commenting one way or the other on your posting itself, but rather on the substance of what was posted - in fact, I'd rather you did keep posting everything you find that you think is interesting, no matter what; how else would I have known this was going on? Thanks for posting!!