All I know is - Australia had a problem with Women getting pregnant while they were on duty. They had to be sent home from the Middle East because they had - obviously (unless that whole immaculate conception comes into play and arguable how long ago was that even an issue) been having sexual relations while they were over there. Fraternisation is apparently banned while on operations, so in the end it goes both ways - women aren't allowed to have happy happy fun time which could result in pregnancy and men aren't allowed happy happy fun which could lead to pregnancy either.
I think if a woman wants to get pregnant before she leaves, fine. If she wants to get pregnant after she gets back, fine. But I mean, if it's a rule not to get pregnant while on operations - then...you abide by the rules?
It just reminds me...I was about to say, You can't take away a womans right to get pregnant - however there are some circumstances where it's ill-advise. For a brief example, I was ...."recommended" to go on a medication...but in order to go on that medication, I'd have to sign a legal document to not get pregnant for an entire year whilst on the medication. So how does this apply? Well, I would have been aware of the rules, I was made aware of the consequences, I would have been agreeing to those terms, therefore I'd agree to abide by the rules. Which is what these women are doing, they know the rules before they go, they know what they are signing up for, shouldnt that mean sticking to the plan?
So Happy Happy Fun Time before operations - Yes. Happy Happy Fun Time after operations - Even better. Happy Happy Fun Times while ON operations - probably not wise.