Featured Marine Corps rejects applicant

But gangbanger tattoos are ok. Go figure.

 

Shameful, but it is their policy. I know lots of kids who have had that happen. Police departments practice some of the same policies.

And that's why I tell the young kids, "I know you think it's cool and it let's you express yourself, but if you want to go into the military or law enforcement, you may want to hold off until AFTER you get in".

They often have to find out the hard way.

I think the Army's policy is a little less stringent than the others on tattoos.

 

Was this a trend in the 60's and early 70's? It looks like one of the easiest ways to dodge the draft.

 

And throughout the WND article, they choose to use pictures from the 1960's...interesting.

 

If Yamamoto had just waited 30 (maybe just 20) years to bomb Pearl, there would have been a pretty good chance that we would all be speaking Japanese today.
If Iran ever gets the delivery system to piggyback one of the nukes they're going to have (if our POTUS has his way), I strongly imagine that before all the fallout has fell, DC will be covered with white flags!!!
When the marines go PC we are screwed!!!!!!!!!!! :tear::tear::tear:

 

Having served in the military, and grown up in Mississippi during the 50s and 60s, I can see both sides. I have seen the Confederate flag used by some as a racist symbol and others as a states rights symbol. It seems that the recruiting stations and/or AFFEES could figure out where each person is coming from. I have no problem with the symbol. I hate racism from the things I saw in the years I grew up however.

But my opinion really does not matter. Anywhere you go to work you agree to abide by certain rules. If you cannot or will not, then go work somewhere else.

If my opinion prevailed, in the article I read, I would have let the guy in.

 

If Nixon had won the 1960 election, we could have had Watergate eight years earlier.

 

No they are not.

 

The new policy states that any tattoo on the forearms or neck are no longer allowed. I skimmed the article (very quickly) and didn't see where his tattoo was located. This could be a factor.



For me, the Confederate flag is not a symbol of racism, but of divisiveness. We are all Americans. Our flag is Old Glory. To hold to another banner is to be divided. But that's just me.



Edited to add: Gangbanger tattoos are definitely NOT ok.

 

Exactly....they have this policy for quite some time now also.

http://www.militaryspot.com/news/marine_corps_clears_up_tattoo_policy/

 

I would just like to know if your position is the same for Native American flags and symbols. Like the Confederates, they fought against the Union; often against the exact same soldiers and officers, and the displayed imagery is derived, if not precisely the same, as they did so. And in another, but related, issue, is the state flag of New Mexico a religious flag?

 

Originally Posted by Sapper Woody
TFor me, the Confederate flag is not a symbol of racism, but of divisiveness. We are all Americans. Our flag is Old Glory. To hold to another banner is to be divided. But that's just me.

Shall ye answer? Shall anyone else answer?

 

The native Americans are an indigenous people, and have a legitimate separation, as long as they remember they are still Americans. They were, in essence, annexed by the U.S.



The confederate flag is different. It was Americans who seceded from the Union, causing a division (wrongfully or rightly is a different discussion, and irrelevant to this one), and then rejoined the Union (or just realized they never left; again, an irrelevant, separate discussion). To hold to that flag is to hold to a separation, a divide.



For clarity, I never said I offended me, either. I do, however, think it is ignorant and divisive. Just as much so as "The South shall rise again". While attempting to show southern pride, it is actually promoting a second civil war.

 

Agreed, never really gotten the whole infatuation thing with the Confederate flag.

Strange that Native American imagery was brought up like they were the "divisive" element.

 

As I (who brung it up) said, it's just considering whether all imagery that harks back to fighting against the United States is held to the same limitations of acceptance. And we can't say it is today. And how is any imagery which represents resistance to the USA not "divisive?"

 

How is Native American imagery divisive? They didn't exactly ask for their land to be annexed and then to be treated like second hand citizens for decades after. Is it being divisive for simply not wanting to get steamrolled by Manifest Destiny?

 

:thumbs: ...exactly the plight of the Palestinians.

 

Wow....how does any of this have to do with Marine policy regarding tattooing? You guys have gone way off base.:laugh: