What an insult to the gay men who are willing to serve the country no matter what
gay men who are ~~willing~~ forced to serve.
Military service is not optional in South Korea.
That's the thing: most of them are not willingly there. Military service is compulsory for all able-bodied, South Korean men.
Does this mean gay sex between serving members or include while on any sort of leave etc.
Between members makes sense (but should apply to sex in general)
Imagine having to fill out the leave application
Purpose of Leave: gay sexy time
I have no idea if same sex marriage is legal there but would be really weird if you could be in a same sex marriage but while enlisted can't have sex..
In Thursday’s five-to-four ruling, the court said allowing same-sex relations could undermine discipline within the military and harm its combat capabilities.
Hello, Korean constitutional court? Ever heard of the Sacred Band of Thebes? Being gay only made them stronger
How are relationships in the military (particularly south Korean) usually handled. I read the article but was unable to find out if this ban is specifically for couples within the armed forces or if it also applies to a relationship with someone outside of the armed forces. Is there a difference for heterosexual relationships? I'm unsure of how South Korea recruits for the military (conscription or volunteer) but do they not accept people in certain relationships? I would love to know if anyone has the answers.
They can´t be serious, everybody knows that the armed forces consist almost exclusively of men!
So no blue on blue?
This claim is especially dumb and nonsensical if opposite-sex relationships are still allowed, since those impact combat readiness way more. Especially when they are relationships where one partner is in a higher position of power.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
SEOUL, Oct 26 (Reuters) - South Korea's constitutional court on Thursday narrowly upheld a law banning same-sex relations within the armed forces, citing a possible risk to the military's combat readiness in a ruling criticised by activists as a setback for gay rights.
Under the country's military criminal act, members of the armed forces face up to two years in prison for same-sex relationships.
In Thursday's five-to-four ruling, the court said allowing same-sex relations could undermine discipline within the military and harm its combat capabilities.
Activists said the law fuels violence and discrimination against and stigmatization of gay soldiers.
"This continued endorsement for the criminalization of consensual same-sex acts within the Korean military is a distressing setback in the decades-long struggle for equality in the country," Boram Jang, Amnesty International's East Asia researcher, said in a statement after Thursday's ruling.
South Korea has one of the world's largest active armies, with all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 28 required to serve between 18 and 21 months.
The original article contains 226 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 25%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Fuck south korea
Might be next to be outlawed
Not on active duty!
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/