Andrew Belonsky

Homophobic Conscientious Objection and The Irony of Lifestyle

Filed By Andrew Belonsky | July 19, 2010 7:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: conscientious objectors, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Iraq, News, politics, Religion, war

For all its anti-war origins, conscientious objection proves to be surprisingly volatile, not to mention unstable. vietnamprotestpicture.jpgOnce associated with scruffy hippies and peaceniks, military protest has been co-opted by conservative soldiers who object to the forthcoming Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal. It's a natural fit, actually, but that doesn't make it right. Or prudent. Not only are such arguments yellow-bellied, they come complete with an ironic SNAFU.

Military law experts and non-profits have reported an uptick in soldiers using the CO defense for their disapproval of a gay inclusive unit. Bob Jolly from the GI Rights Network in San Francisco recalls a letter written from a staff sergeant for a soldier who worried about a homo invasion. "The soldier is a very devoted Christian who believes that practicing homosexuality is a sin," he said. "With changes in the 'don't ask don't tell' policy, he is concerned that he will have to bunk and shower with homosexuals. He is concerned to the point that he is asking about ways to get out of the Army."

JE McNeil from the Center on Conscience and War has received similar correspondence. Both she and Jolly don't believe such a defense would go over well. "In the 'don't ask, don't tell' situation, they're not opposed to participating in war, they're opposed to who they're participating with," McNeil told the New York Times. The Army's conscientious objector guidelines are quite clear: the applicant must be adverse to "participation in war in any form or the bearing of arms." They can cite religious reasons, sure, but they must be "sincere." And that's where the irony enters the scene.

The Armed Services aren't softies when it comes to conscientious objection. Applicants are put through a series of tests and surveys to determine the veracity of their request. In the case of religious objections, the Army code specifies "the reviewing authorities must find that an applicant's moral and ethical beliefs oppose participation in war in any form and that the applicant holds these beliefs with the strength of traditional religious convictions." And that review includes a thorough examination of one's "lifestyle," so often used as a right wing euphemism for "homosexual."

"Determine sincerity by evaluating the applicant's thinking and life style in its totality, past and present," reads the Army manual when detailing how to judge a religious conscientious objection. Anyone who uses the CO defense to protest openly gay soldiers will thus find themselves under the same level of scrutiny gay people face under Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And if the soldiers exhibit immoral behavior, whatever that may mean, they may find that their religious defense bites them in the backside.

Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

Actually, the whole thing makes me laugh a bit. We volunteered to defend the rights and freedom only of those we approve of?

That said, two serious thoughts come to mind. First, wouldn't it be fascinating if the rules for conscientious objectors are molded to fit the situation? I don't expect such but it would be telling. Or separate but equal facilities? Oh right - that's against the law at least in civilian life. So how many courts martial will there be for straight soldiers who act out and assault a fellow soldier due to the stress of now knowing the guy protecting his back is gay and will the "gay panic" defense work in a military court?

That said, does anyone really expect that the bigot ratio in the armed forces would be any different than society at large? It will probably be worse as my neighbor doesn't have to bunk in the same room as me or use the same facilities! He just snarls from across the street.