pawnman

5-year ADSCs for a PCS.

Got it. We can afford to RIF people from the force entirely, but we can't afford to send them to the guard and reserve. More insight from the AFPC machine.

I suppose I can only re-emphasize that if the thread is that boring, you don't have to keep checking on it.

I don't know enough to say he is guilty or innocent. I do know that this is more the heart of the problem than any number of songbooks, pin-ups, or dirty jokes: senior leaders get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, and their "punishment" is the same retirement most people are working towards. The fact that senior leaders, when found out in these sorts of scandals, are "punished" by not having to work and continuing to make more on a monthly basis than the majority of the enlisted force just for breathing. It doesn't exactly send the message the Air Force is looking for. Again, I don't know if this is the case for Wilkerson. I'm sure we'll find out. But just allowing senior officers to retire isn't exactly "holding them accountable".

So we have a huge glut of pilots, which is why we haven't changed the bonus, but the pilots are too valuable to let them Palace Chase? Please, run me through that logic.

Well, I think we addressed that issue and we've moved into a larger discussion about what the repeal of DADT and the striking down of DOMA may mean for the future force. Do you just want a thread of people going "2" and "You're right" when it comes to addressing uniform infractions? Mock whatever you want. I'm pointing out that even the founding fathers realized societal standards changed, so they gave us the means to change the constitution as required...something we've done A LOT. You can claim there's some almighty source for morals and ethics if you want. I just think it's interesting that many cultures have arrived at very similar ethical and moral standards without the guidance of Yahweh. That implies to me that it is an evolutionary impetus, not a God-inspired one.

I'm sure big blue will determine it in their best interests to allow him to retire with full benefits. Pretty sure he's not getting promoted, no matter what the outcome of any of these cases is in the end.

"I sure did, do you want his contact information to confirm it?"

I don't know if you need to go that far. I'd just prefer if the people looking at my PRF knew what a JDAM was without consulting the list of acronyms on the back of the form.

Deism still implies that morals come from God. And since Jefferson and Franklin were both slave owners who saw no reason to grant rights to anyone who wasn't a white landowner, it's interesting you hold them up as examples of unchanging ethical standards.

So other than societal agreement or divine inspiration, where do you think morals come from?

Well, it doesn't cost anything to bitch about callsigns, head/box, or 69.

Ah. So religion is the only way to ethical behavior. Seems I've spent a lot of time fighting a group of guys trying to put that into practice.

Ah. So what is it you believe moral relativism actually is, if you are saying that everyone should find their own source for moral guidance?

Oh goody. Will we deny VSP to folks before we RIF them again? How many do you suppose we will immediately re-hire?

Pretty sure we haven't instituted rules for dress code off-duty, so far. And what do you propose we base ethics on? What is your unchanging ethical standard that you believe will be just as valid in 500 years as it is today?

I don't have a dog in the faith-or-works fight. I was raised in the Lutheran church, and one of the major tenets was "faith alone". I spent years believing this, studying this, and defending this. I'm just saying, the bible provides plenty of ammo to both sides. I argued this for days with my Catholic buddy. It's only one of a few dozen places where the bible has contradictory guidance. Ultimately, I really don't care, as long as we aren't using the bible as our source for legal rulings and legislative precedent. Someone said that the bible talking about slavery and keeping women silent was a reflection of the time period it was written in. I'd agree, but that means that all the homosexual passages are also a reflection of the time period it was written in. Either you think that the bible provides guidance, or you don't. Too often, people tend to pull out the one or two verses that suit their argument, and claim they represent God's will.

Sort of like AFIT. It counts, but not until the Air Force selects you for school. Once you're selected for school, then you don't actually go anywhere, they just credit NPS/AFIT/Olmsted as your IDE in-res.

Would love to do a staff tour, but first I have to get a school select slot, which means I need to be in the top 20% of the CAF. Being honest with myself (and all of you), I'm pretty sure I'm not top 20% next to the WIC, exec, and #1 of xx ALO guys in my community. The staff job sounds good, but we need to get the squadrons to release us first...from what I've seen, staff tours, especially at the Pentagon level, are reserved for people who will be future commanders. Then comes HAF for commander potentials, then maybe NAF if there are slots left over.

We can start with James 2:14-17 My plan? I'm just going to live my life without regard for a deity who has shown a marked reluctance to intervene when his "most beloved creations" need him the most.

So are we. Unless you're one of those young earth creationists.

So is it unnatural or not? If you concede that multiple animal species engage in homosexual behavior, then quit saying it is abnormal and unnatural. If you've got other arguments, go right ahead. This one is clearly false, and easily proven false. Oh, I know! How about "harmful effects from divorce"? Too many to count, for the families, for the friends, for the kids left behind...we should go back to the Puritan standard of "until death do we part" and outlaw divorce in this country as well. Maybe we can go really old school and start arranging marriages between kids who have never even met, then we can take the pre-marital sex out of society as well.

Actually, Paul tells slave owners in how to treat slaves, and slaves how to behave towards their owners, several times in the NT. I'll give you a hint...he never tells the owners to set their slaves free. I should introduce you to my Catholic buddy. The two of you can have a lengthy debate about faith alone or needing works to earn salvation. Even at it's most basic, Christianity is still a stick-and-carrot proposition...believe in what we tell you and you go to heaven, don't believe and you go to hell. Then you stick on a bunch of things you should do if you believe in Christ.

Needed one for the Emir's prize race horses.

Why didn't they when inter-racial marriage was repealed? Perhaps because they are entirely different issues?