Help Fight for the Right to Love!

Sign for Free Below!  (It only takes 1 minute to register and sign!) 

Thousands of service members are needlessly punished every year for consensual relationships that in no way deter their ability to serve and protect our great nation.  They are punished for "fraternization" simply for having romantic relationships with fellow service members of different ranks, because the regulation as presently written is vague and nonsensical.

The fraternization policy is arbitrarily defined, arbitrarily justified, and arbitrarily enforced.

The military's internal documents have all admitted to the various failings of the fraternization policy for decades - here are a few examples:

• The Army Lawyer magazine, published by the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps, in Issue 3 of 2020, attacked the ethical failings of the current policy, stating that "it is clear that several flaws exist", and described parts of the fraternization policy as "particularly troubling" and "most troubling".  The article in Army Lawyer concluding that the policy merely created "Another Victimless Crime", and concluded that the military has "absolutely no reason to criminalize such relationships. Such relationships have no direct, tangible, or adverse impact upon good order and discipline and are neither ethically nor morally wrong".
• The Air Force Air University published a historical summary in 1998 tying the "tradition" of prosecuting fraternization to medieval and feudal class systems which have no resemblance to modern American society, our egalitarian ideals, or our constitutional democratic republic and codified inalienable civil and human rights - it recommended reform.
• An an internal paper written at the Army Sergeant Major's Academy in 2005 recommended an update to the policy and described the current policy as arbitrary, unethical, and inconsistent. 
• The American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy states that strong relationships and family structures actually contribute to the mental health and resilience of military personnel (Sayers, Steven L. "Family Reintegration Difficulties and Couples Therapy for Military Veterans and Their Spouses." Cognitive and Behavioral Practice. 2011.)

If the military's own leaders and lawyers acknowledge that this is a failure and miscarriage of justice, then why are service members still being dismissed and their lives and careers ruined?

The result of the current fraternization policy is de facto classism.  Rather than helping soldiers, it is an unethical breach of Constitutional rights that destroys their professional and private lives.  Further, it is often used as a tool for nefarious 'unit politics,' subject to personal rivalries and witch hunts that destroy unit cohesion, making for a weaker force.  Morale has demonstrably been impacted, as both those who have consensual relationships are punished, year after year.

The solution is simple: Rather than placing a blanket ban on cross-rank relationships, the protocol should differentiate between healthy relationships and those that may cause a conflict of interest - specifically "quid-pro-quo".  We say "no" to "quid-pro-quo" through the UCMJ's clearly defined Sexual Harassment policy, which is already firmly in place. 

We want a policy based on American virtues like mutual respect and egalitarian fairness.

We are asking for a re-writing of the existing fraternization policy in the United States Uniform Military Code of Justice. Our aim is to make it fair, flexible, and supportive of the well-being of our brave men and women in uniform who have chosen to dedicate their lives to their nation's service.  Specifically, the "status basis" language must be removed - it is a violation of our most fundamental Constitutional rights

Specifically the current regulation violates the 1st Amendment - Free Association protections; 14th Amendment's protections against abridgement of fundamental rights,  Equal Protection Clause, and Privacy protections.  A status-based ban also segregates the services, establishing a legally distinct socioeconomic class, in violation of Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the US Constitution, which states that "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States".  Relationships Off-duty and Outside the Chain of Command do not inherently violate trust or compromise the esprit de corps of the military - unduly violating the rights of our citizens in uniform DOES demonstrably damage morale and colors the military in an extremely negative light... unless this is resolved.  All fraternization cases should have to show evidence that relationships demonstrated a quantifiable and qualifiable as undue and negative influence on the chain of command in order to be considered improper --- not that they simply existed between personnel of differing rank.

Without the right to love, we don't have freedom.  Help us fight for love and to protect those who protect you.

We kindly request your support and ask you to sign this petition. Let's transform this policy into one that ensures fairness, justice, and respect.