Let the Protests Begin!

The Senate voted to repeal DADT this past weekend, and President Obama has promised to sign the repeal into law this week. And conservative religious protests have begun, right on cue.

One Christian writer opens his protest thusly:

A former Army chaplain who now recruits military chaplains says by repealing the ban, Congress has redefined morality, with uncertain consequences. Retired Brig. Gen. Doug Lee tells The Associated Press that chaplains from the churches he represents could be forced to choose between their career and their calling to teach and counsel what the Bible says about homosexuality.

First of all, I fail to see how repealing DADT “redefines morality.” This legislation does not address the morality of homosexuality. It simply acknowledges that homosexuality is not a good reason to prevent willing and able men and women from serving in the armed forces.

Second, any Christian chaplain who feels compelled to forego a career in military chaplaincy simply because he or she would not be able to expound on the Bible’s objections to homosexuality – few as they are – is not paying attention to the whole Bible. The 66 books contained in that anthology explore many issues besides sexuality. Surely, chaplains can provide comfort to embattled soldiers without discussing their sex lives. Psalm 23, that perennial favorite of folks seeking comfort, doesn’t say a word about sex, gay or otherwise.

Citing Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, the author complains that Congress acted with “needless haste” (I kid you not – that’s a direct quote) in passing this legislation. Then again, given the pace at which this Congress, particularly the Senate, has accomplished anything over the past two years, perhaps the author could be excused for mistaking anything faster than glacial melting as something akin to the speed of light. Drawing from Donnelly’s work, the author cites several examples of issues that will have to be resolved in order to implement the new policy.

• A mandate to “prohibit the creation of separate bathroom and shower facilities based on sexual orientation” ….

• Mandatory “three-tiered” education program, focusing on resistant combat troops, to change attitudes and opinions on LGBT issues….

• Punishments for “resistance” — i.e., zero tolerance of anyone who disagrees for any reason, including “moral or religious beliefs”….

• Repeal of certain personal conduct provisions in the UCMJ….

• Unresolved issues involving marital status….

• Unresolved questions about morale and costs related to the retention of HIV+ personnel…..

Honestly, the way these items are stated utterly fails to mask the religious intolerance that prompted them. If these issues are among the most critical that federal rule-makers have to face, then their job, in this case, will be laughably easy. Since several of these items echo previous objections to racial and gender integration of the military, templates for resolving them may already exist. Moreover, since implementation of new legislation always requires re-working of existing systems to accommodate changes, I’m going to call this section of the piece a bloated, juicy, dripping red herring. These items reveal more about conservative religious homophobia than they do about actual hurdles to the timely implementation of this law.

You probably won’t be surprised to learn that the Alliance Defense Fund is already making noises about the matter. According to them,

The Senate’s cave-in to pressure from activists to impose homosexual behavior on our military will place our troops’ religious liberties in unprecedented jeopardy. Indeed, the first official casualty of this hurried vote may well be the religious freedom of chaplains and Service members. ADF litigation counsel Daniel Blomberg went on to say “no Americans, and especially not our troops, should be forced to abandon their religious beliefs.”

Notice the iteration of the “hurried vote” objection. Congress could have reached the same conclusion after studying the matter for another twenty years, and that still would have been too fast for homophobes. Perhaps others hear, as I do, echoes of objections that were made previously to women’s suffrage and racial equality. What I find even more incredible is the statement that activists are trying to “impose homosexual behavior on our military troops.” LGBT activists are not trying to “impose” their “behavior” on anyone. They’re simply trying to gain acceptance and equality in a society that has cruelly viewed them, at various times, as mentally ill, degenerate and sub-human.

Finally, the idea that chaplains and religious service members will lose their religious liberties or “be forced to abandon their religious beliefs” is ludicrous. Those people will still be free to believe whatever the hell they want to believe. They’ll even be able to exercise and talk about those beliefs – in appropriate ways, at appropriate times, and in appropriate venues. What they will not be able to do is impose their beliefs on those who think and behave differently than they do. And that, my friends, is the real reason this legislation infuriates religious homophobes.

– the chaplain

Advertisement