Short Memories

Date Published: 12/16/2010

How soon we forget! When "don't ask, don't tell" was instituted, it was not a new restriction on homosexual people in the U.S. military. The policy at that time was that homosexual people were not allowed in the military (openly or secretly), and not only were they asked but anyone who suspected the sexuality of another military person was required to report them for disciplinary dismissal. So in a political environment in which overturning that policy was not possible, "don't ask, don't tell" was a step in the direction of increasing dignity and decreasing stigma while eliminating the witch hunt atmosphere. Contrary to current discussion, "don't ask, don't tell" was not a prohibition on homosexual serving in the U.S. military. That policy predated "don't ask, don't tell" for many, many years. "Don't ask, don't tell" was intended to be a softening and relief from that long standing policy. In a strictly literal sense, if "don't ask, don't tell" was repealed, it would mean going back to total prohibition, which is obviously not where the current debate is headed. So whatever change is actually made will have to change the previous policy and not just "don't ask, don't tell.

"I write this not to enter into the debate on either homosexual people in the military or in society or in the church. There is already more than enough material circulating there. As a Christian I have what I think are far more serious ethical/moral concerns about the military. My concern could perhaps be viewed as fussiness over how language and history are misused and distorted. I must admit I cringe every time I hear or read of"don't ask, don't tell" as the restrictive policy.

My concern has more to do with how polarization, dividing into rival camps, labeling with buzz words and distorting the discussion prevents worthwhile conversation that seeks solutions rather than winning contaminate the public dialog on this and may other issues.

I'd like to end with a distinctly Christian perspective. I think about the best I can do is to suggest that for the Church to be a role model of finding a unity in Jesus that trumps all other loyalties and causes could be an alternative in which we discuss our disagreements with an attitude of "how can we learn from each other, rather than how can we convince each other." Of course, expecting secular society to find unity in Jesus is not only folly, but far from anything Jesus or Paul would have expected. They had different goals, not the least of which was the unity of the Church. That we Christians still have a hard time with that, we need to be humble and cautious about what we presume to tell the world.