<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[US military court rules in favor of child sex dolls]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Five years ago, a US airman was discharged from service and jailed after a child-like sex doll was found in his room at an inspection.</p>
<p dir="auto">This monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces overturned this decision, reinforcing that the use of child sex dolls is constitutionally protected.</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">But the court sent the case back to the Air Force appeals court a second time, to address another of Rocha’s claim, that private sex acts with a doll are constitutionally protected conduct.</p>
<p dir="auto">The Air Force appeals court agreed. In January 2025, justices found Rocha had a “constitutionally protected liberty interest to privately engage in sexual activities with his doll,” according to court papers.</p>
<p dir="auto">Even “considering potential discredit to the service, we have found that (Rocha’s) conduct—masturbation, in solitude, in secret, and in private—should warrant” the constitutional protection afforded by the Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas. That landmark decision struck down a Texas law criminalizing sodomy between consenting adults.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">That being said, it was a close decision, and not everyone was happy with it.</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">But in a scathing dissent from the majority, the court’s top judge warned the decision lowers the legal threshold for deviant behavior among personnel and sends a message that the U.S. military’s justice system accepts “the unabashed sexualization of children.”</p>
<p dir="auto">“And so,” wrote Chief Judge Keith Ohlson, “hundreds of thousands of servicemembers who serve in the Air Force and Space Force are now authorized to penetrate … child sex dolls while on base and at their leisure. “</p>
<p dir="auto">“This result is indefensible,” he said, writing alongside Judge John Sparks, who joined in dissent.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Source: <a href="https://www.stripes.com/branches/air_force/2026-03-19/airman-child-sex-doll-conviction-reversed-21116363.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow ugc">https://www.stripes.com/branches/air_force/2026-03-19/airman-child-sex-doll-conviction-reversed-21116363.html</a></p>
<p dir="auto">Now lets hope that the German constitutional court comes to a similar decision. It would be bitter have less freedom and protection than people living in a country ruled by an egomaniac dictator.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.p-punkte.de/topic/290/us-military-court-rules-in-favor-of-child-sex-dolls</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2026 01:50:42 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.p-punkte.de/topic/290.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 11:00:18 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to US military court rules in favor of child sex dolls on Sat, 23 May 2026 15:10:31 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Interesting. 🥳</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.p-punkte.de/post/2260</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.p-punkte.de/post/2260</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[max]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2026 15:10:31 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to US military court rules in favor of child sex dolls on Fri, 22 May 2026 13:35:46 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">What I find interesting is that the guy won in front of the highest court of appeals for the armed forces. That is probably the most conservative court in America. However, It is not possible to transfer the reasons behind this ruling to German case law as the U.S court based it on Lawrence v. Texas.<br />
Whilst our supreme court and the highest EU court denied our equivalence of Lawrence v. Texas.</p>
<p dir="auto">There are also many more US Supreme Court cases that make a doll ban unconstitutional:</p>
<ul>
<li>Chiles v. Salazar (2026) in conjunction with NIFLA v. Becerra (2018)</li>
<li>Sewell v. Georgia (2008),</li>
<li>Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002)</li>
<li>R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992),</li>
<li>Robinson v. California (1962)</li>
<li>West Virginia v. Barnette (1943)</li>
</ul>
<p dir="auto">As well as a state supreme court ruling:</p>
<ul>
<li>Lewis v. State (2023)</li>
</ul>
<p dir="auto">Americas constitution is highly focused on an individual while Germany allows restrictions of an individual over the interests of society much more easily. The case of a texas man is also slowly crawling up the ladder to the supreme court, so a final say in this is not reached yet.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.p-punkte.de/post/2252</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.p-punkte.de/post/2252</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[katzenfutter_reloaded]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 13:35:46 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>