It's DADT that's immoral - not homosexuality Plus One Comment from a Religious Father

Despite public and military support for overturning Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the legislation which bans openly gay service members, political, military and religious leaders cite a variety of objections to changing the law.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) worries that allowing gays to serve openly would impact troop "morale;" Marine Corp Commandant Gen. James Amos says that a policy change may affect "unit cohesion" and "combat effectiveness."Among the religious leaders opposed to overturning Don't Ask, Don't Tell is Catholic Archbishop for the Military Services Timothy J. Broglio, who fears that chaplains would be forced to compromise their principles in accepting "objectively disordered" homosexuality, adding that he "can never condone -even silently -homosexual behavior."

What beliefs are behind banning gays in the military? What's the role of religion in this debate?

I have gay friends who are serving in the military right now. The ones who have partners can't talk about them, can't have their photos with them when they are fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan, can't list their partners as "next of kin" if the worst happens, won't be able to provide for their partner's futures. The ones who are single live in fear that they might be found out and lose their rank or worse their livelihoods.

More than a decade of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has forced my gay friends to live in the military closet, even as they affirm their sexual orientation in other parts of their lives. My colleagues who are chaplains in the military are forced to compromise their religious principles in counseling young military people to stay in that closet rather than upholding their religious commitment that sexual and gender diversity is part of God's blessing.

Those on the right who use four to seven clobber texts in the Bible to buttress their support for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" violate the overarching messages of the Scriptures. As I wrote on these pages in mid-October, "using the Bible to exclude or condemn people violates the very spirit of our traditions. I choose to uphold those texts that recognize that there are many forms of blessed relationships, that invite us to welcome those who are different, and view all people as created in God's image." Further, these same religious leaders on some level understand that the Bible must be viewed in its historical context, for they too no longer rely on biblical texts that condone slavery, forbid divorce, or treat women as property.

Sexual and gender oppression can no longer be portrayed as virtuous and morally defensible, in the military or in civilian life. More than 3500 religious leaders from more than 50 faith traditions are members of the Religious Institute network, affirming full inclusion of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons, and millions of people of faith stand with them. To those who would use religion to deny LGBT people their rights, I say the sin is not homosexuality but homophobia, the denigration of our neighbors because they are physically and emotionally attracted to people of the same sex. The sin is heterosexism, the presumption that heterosexuality is normative for all people and morally superior. The sin is forcing people to deny their God-given gift of their sexuality and to suffer to try to live their lives in a way that is antithetical to who they really are - or to force them to live in silence. The sin is violence and discrimination against women and GLBT persons and denial of their rights. The sin is when any of us, whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual, violate our commitments to our partner and hurt our families.

It is time to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". The American people think so, the military chiefs of staff think so, and the rank and file service people think so. Other countries have openly gay and lesbian service people who serve with honor and without incident. The military and society will be strengthened when all people are able to live fully and express their gender and their sexuality with holiness and integrity. It's past time for that to happen.

BY DEBRA W. HAFFNER  |  NOVEMBER 16, 2010; 10:32 AM ET

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.

ABU_IBRAHIM:
“O Glade runner, ¿do you want a man gazing lustfully on *your* son's private parts in the barracks shower room or in a head on board ship? Huh???”
Troll or not, I’ll answer if only for the edification of others.
What goes on in another person’s head is not in my control. So if a person, male or female ‘lusts’ after me, or my son, well, there’s not really much I can do about that. But since lust is actually only a thought in someone else’s head, it really has no power over me either.
What am I thinking right now? How does it affect you personally?
See what I mean?
My son is smart enough, mature enough to handle the situation, which may not be a situation at all. And by ‘handle’ I don’t mean conduct a public or private beating. I mean that my son, like myself, if found in an uncomfortable situation would simply ask the offender to stop. I’ve done this myself in the workplace when the behaviors of a few of my co-workers seemed to be crossing the line from simple, benign banter to something a little too familiar. In each case I needed to do nothing more than point out that this behavior was flattering but unwelcome, problem solved. Women have to put up with this sort of thing all the time; it’s not exactly rocket science or divine revelation.

“According to Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, that is according to whom”
The Prophet did not show up for duty while I served. He was/is not in charge of the U.S. Military. 

POSTED BY: GLADERUNNER |The Washington Post| NOVEMBER 19, 2010 |11:46 AM