Liberal Democrats and apologist Republicans alike are calling for the head of Marine Corp General Peter Pace. General Pace, who also happens to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has come under fire for his irresponsibility. His “irresponsible” behavior had nothing to do with a lack of body armor or the disgraceful treatment of wounded veterans at Walter Reed. General Pace drew the ire of the left for something much more important than the safety of our soldiers: he made “irresponsible” comments regarding the Clinton administration’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy and homosexuality in the military.
In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, General Pace stated, “I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts.” He later went on to defend the armed forces’ Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, saying, “I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way.”
Liberal groups, gay rights advocates and the Democrats were, of course, quick to react. Claims of bigotry and “hate-speech” were hurled from all directions. Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, denounced General Pace’s remarks as “irresponsible, offensive and a slap in the face to the gay men and women who are currently serving their country with honor and bravery.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (yes; she does hold the gavel, although I still do not have any idea why) slammed General Pace for having the audacity to express an unnecessary “moral judgment.” Moral judgments, you see, are reserved for the Democratic Party, activist judges and college professors; military men and clergy need not apply.
One can expect such judgments and condemnation from the Democratic Party. What is surprising in this affair is how quickly apologists from the Right were able to ally themselves with their leftist counterparts. Virginia’s Republican Senator John Warner rebuked General Pace saying, “I respectfully but strongly disagree with the chairman’s view that homosexuality is immoral.”
Senator Warner, who once served as Secretary of the Navy, in the wake of the Walter Reed scandal and the War in Iraq, is evidently backpedaling from his conservative past. He is under the delusion that liberals will actually forget that he was resistant to even allowing gays in the military. Warner, in protest to the Clinton Administration’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, argued against telling “[young service members] that [the homosexual lifestyle] is right, and that they must accept it.” Oh, how the times have changed.
The issue, however, remains the same. The Left is pleased to twist the debate into an issue of pro or anti-gay. The real basis, however, for the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy lies in preserving order and discipline among the ranks of our soldiers.
General Pace, in launching his condemnation of homosexual acts and the lifestyle that accompanies it, made sure to enunciate that the views he was expressing were his own “personal views” that were influenced by his upbringing. They had nothing to do with the military’s policy in regards to homosexuality.
Liberals want you to think that homosexuals are the only subject of “moral judgment” and persecution in the military. But the basis for policies like Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is found in Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Article 134 “simply prohibits conduct which is of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, or conduct which is prejudicial to good order and discipline.”
This article is the basis for prosecution of adulterous officers, fraternization among the ranks and other crimes that threaten the cohesion, effectiveness and order that are necessary in the armed forces.
In July 1998, 10 United States naval personnel, seven male and three female, participated in an orgy in a Hong Kong hotel room. Every sailor, regardless of their sexual orientation, was charged, indicted and found guilty of “adultery, sodomy and fraternization.” No one had any problem with the moral judgment that was cast down upon these sailors.
Fraternization is an especially interesting military regulation. If a military officer is involved in a heterosexual relationship with a non-commissioned soldier he can be charged with fraternization. In fact, if that same officer were to marry a soldier of a lower rank he could be charged with fraternization if that marriage were to detract from the American military.
I know what you are thinking: “But, Billy is there any kind of proof that sexual intercourse of any kind is a threat to unit cohesion and order in the armed forces? Why should we let you and other fascist militarists prod into the bedroom?” What an adorable thought. Three words: crazy astronaut lady. Sexual relations between two astronauts led a previously sophisticated and talented astronaut to don diapers and a brandish a gun at a rival female astronaut. You’re right, sex doesn’t complicate anything.
In 1999, Major General David Hale was court-martialed for having “improper relationships” with four of his colleague’s wives. This led to three divorces (talk about a threat to unit cohesion). There was no crusade on behalf of General Hale’s “unjust” judgment.
A military cannot operate without order and discipline throughout the ranks. Policies like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell are meant to prohibit behavior that threatens the order among the ranks. Members of the military do not determine policies regarding sexuality and adultery, they only enforce it. Think about that the next time you protest the ROTC or the Solomon Amendment.
Billy McMorris is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be reached at wjm27@cornell.edu [1]. John Manetta Once Told Me appears alternate Wednesdays.
Links:
[1] mailto:wjm27@cornell.edu