It is different because for the most part, people were prevented from entering the military with those requirements in place. Nothing wrong with services making requirements to ensure a competent force that has good order and discipline. The COVID vaccine mandate is a bit different since its effects were mainly felt by those in the service (i.e. people getting discharged over it) instead of it being a barrier to entry (although there are probably some who were barred due to the vaccine refusal). Not trying to make an argument for or against the mandate. I have my own opinion on it just like everyone else.Tatoos limited people from beginning careers and probably ended a few.
GED / Diploma requirements have been changed and some instances changed back.
How is this different than changing any other regulation?
I think you hit it.The cadets, mids, service members did not comply with an order from their service. I think that should be the main point IMO. When you sign up for military service you are obligated to obey commands or risk being penalized. So why why would the services bring them back?
Purely a guess. They will go away.What do you all think is gonna happen for the mandate at the academies?
Musk is an experienced hype-man and noted internet troll. While I’m glad he’s making twitter’s dirty secrets public, I don’t think he knows anything about the vaccines etc that the rest of us don’t. What we’ll probably learn is how the company suppressed discussion that contradicted official narratives, which is important but I doubt anyone will be prosecuted as a result of the reports.Elon Musk just mentioned releasing twitter files related to covid. And teased about prosecution. I think we are going to learn about the science. Maybe the mandates were wrong, and we trusted the wrong info?
We agree to disagree.Musk is an experienced hype-man and noted internet troll. While I’m glad he’s making twitter’s dirty secrets public, I don’t think he knows anything about the vaccines etc that the rest of us don’t. What we’ll probably learn is how the company suppressed discussion that contradicted official narratives, which is important but I doubt anyone will be prosecuted as a result of the reports.
Doesn't this apply to drinking? If we're not worried about alcohol abuse and dependency, then weed is not really different.Smarter people than me will decide whether there’s a way to let personnel to use it off duty or on leave without jeopardizing safety and readiness—I know I don’t want my pilots or aircrew to be stoners!
Good point! Alcohol is always treated differently from other more harmful substances because of how normalized it is in our culture.Doesn't this apply to drinking? If we're not worried about alcohol abuse and dependency, then weed is not really different.
The experience at the Nellis AFB O'Club a long time ago would have been a lot different if the pilots had been smoking weed vs. doing shots all night. Probably for the better - fewer altercations, unwanted sexual advances, etc.
Iirc -after prohibition ended, the alcohol lobby fought against weed. For obvious reasons.Good point! Alcohol is always treated differently from other more harmful substances because of how normalized it is in our culture.
Looks like it'll pass any day now. Just needs the president to sign off.Has this actually passed yet?