(05-05-2010 05:48 PM)T-Monay820 Wrote:  This is not at all shocking, nor is it without good reason. The potential problems associated with adding an individual with a highly controversial tattoo heavily outweigh the benefits of allowing him to enlist. They're stopping a highly volatile situation from going up in their face. I back the decision by Marines here. Service is not a right.

In general I know the military has been going back and forth on tattoos in their entirety. Each branch seems to be given the option of how to handle them, but they all seem to share the common theory that they are unprofessional in appearance, regardless of what is on them.

People have had confederate flag tattoos in the military for as long as I can remember. I don't remember one damn problem. This is nothing more than politically-correct bullsh1t.

I don't have a problem with tattoos in the military. But visible tattoos should eliminate you from embassy duty or honor guard, where you have to look professional, and not just badass. But I wouldn't bar them from serving in the infantry, armour, air, or boating fields. As long as they aren't flaunting the confederate flag around as intimidation, I don't see anything wrong.

If we have to live in an America where the confederate flag is still relevant we should at least let the quiet supporters live with it.

I honestly cant think of any reason I would want to decorate my body with something permanent. My grandfather had military style tats that he got in the Philippines during the war. I can understand that type of thing...but.. Some of the stuff I see done today seems to be done simply to try and be cool or outrageous. I bet that laser tattoo removal is going to be a big business in a few years when these people get tired of looking at what they have done to their bodies.