Pentagon Instructs Military Recruiters: Allow Openly Gay Applicants

The Pentagon has instructed military recruiters on Tuesday that they should allow openly gay and lesbian people to sign up for military service, with the caveat that applicants must be told that the current injunction barring enforcement of the military's openly gay personnel ban, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" or DADT, could be overturned at any time and that the DADT policy could once again be enforced. From the CNN:

The Pentagon has advised recruiting commands that they can accept openly gay and lesbian recruit candidates, given the recent federal court decision that bars the military from expelling openly gay service members, according to a Pentagon spokeswoman.

The guidance from the Personnel and Readiness office was sent to recruiting commands on Friday, according to spokeswoman Cynthia Smith. The recruiters were told that if a candidate admits he or she is openly gay, and qualify under normal recruiting guidelines, their application can be processed. Recruiters are not allowed to ask candidates if they are gay as part of the application process...

Read More

This is my biggest concern with lifting this policy. The Uniform Code of Military Justice. This, for anybody who is unfamiliar with it, is the Congressional Code of Military Criminal Law and it is applicable to all members of the United States military around the globe. As with most laws published by congress, the UCMJ is vague in many of its descriptions. This provides the flexibility to those who enforce it to be able to apply it how they see fit. There are some articles of the UCMJ that are very specific, but with regards to sexual acts, they are flexible in their meanings. The UCMJ, at no point in time, states that homosexuality is against the code… BUT, on more than one occasion, the code does state that certain acts of sexuality are. I know that homosexuality involves a lot of emotions and isn’t just about the physical aspect of love, but animal instinct drives love in passion and lust toward the pinnacle of the relationship (at that level) and that is the physical and intimate act of sex.

UCMJ Sec. 920, Art. 120 deals with rape and carnal knowledge and it states, “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who commits an act of sexual intercourse with a female not his wife, by force and without consent, is guilty of rape and shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct. (b) Any person subject to this chapter who, under circumstances not amounting to rape, commits an act of sexual intercourse with a female not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years, is guilty of carnal knowledge and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

This particular code can be applied without prejudice against sexual orientation because it deals with a person’s age (section b) or forceful sexual intercourse (section a). The long and short of it is this – Rape is rape regardless of a person’s sexual orientation and this is how the UCMJ defines it.

NOW before we get on with my point, let me be clear that I don’t necessarily agree with the following UCMJ article, but it’s important to understand it is written and it is enforceable.

UCMJ Sec. 925, Art. 125. deals with Sodomy and it states, “(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.”

This is where my concerns come in. By the terms of the UCMJ, anybody who engages in any sexual activity other than man/woman penis/vagina intercourse is guilty of Sodomy. I know it sounds funny because the way the UCMJ defines carnal copulation, this would include oral sex as well. Since homosexuals do not have a means by which they can engage in natural carnal copulation (penis/vagina sex), then if they want to engage in sexual activities, this would limit them to oral and anal sex only – the two sexual acts that are explicitly singled out by this article.

That being said, lifting the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy forces openly homosexual members into a Catch-22 situation. While they are free to openly express their homosexuality – without fear of retribution, they must still conform to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and not engage in homosexual acts. Now, does the military enforce it? Generally speaking, no... But it is written law that is enforceable, thus creating the catch-22 whereby open homosexuals would be forced to not engage in homosexual activities – still an infringement of their personal liberties. BUT without addressing this article, lifting Don’t Ask Don’t Tell still does not lift the veil of the root of the problem — Being homosexual is not the problem — engaging in homosexual activity is according to the UCMJ. If a superior knows their subordinate is a homosexual, and catches that person engaging in a homosexual act (ie, surprise inspection in the barracks or something), then that superior is obligated through their bound duties to still hold homosexuality over that person’s head.

So, to that end, I would caution all these liberal judges trying to "make history" by lifting the policy without making sure ALL ducts are in a row. For the policy to be lifted, the pentagon needs to remove ALL barriers and restrictions on the homosexual lifestyle.