Won't someone think of the chaplains?
USA Today offers some column inches to the mouthpiece for the Alliance Defense Fund to spout ridiculosity about homosexuals in the military.
My favorite bit of tortured logic: "The harm also includes restrictions on the ability of chaplains to freely conduct religious services without being forced to allow people who engage in homosexual behavior to take positions of leadership or receive sacraments, for example. And it would include forcing chaplain-administered programs, such as the Army's "Strong Bonds" marriage-building program, to modify their teaching if same-sex couples participate. Chaplains are committed to ministering to everyone but cannot allow the government to dictate how religious ministry takes place."
So chaplains are committed to ministering to everyone, except for the people they don't want to minister to. Ah, perhaps exclusion and shunning is a form of ministry!
Second favorite bit: "chaplains who oppose the normalization of homosexual behavior in the military will likely face direct orders - potentially in the form of non-discrimination laws - and subtle pressure to keep their opposition silent, while chaplains who support the change will be free from such limitations."
This is like saying that, because I don't steal things, I'm free from the limitations of the laws against theft.
There's no question chaplains are in a difficult position, representing a particular faith group, but being required to minister to all. But the Army is clear about its requirements for chaplains: Chaplains are to be "[s]ensitive to religious pluralism and able to provide for the free exercise of religion by all military personnel, their family members and civilians who work for the Army." If you have a problem with that... don't join the flippin' Army.
My favorite bit of tortured logic: "The harm also includes restrictions on the ability of chaplains to freely conduct religious services without being forced to allow people who engage in homosexual behavior to take positions of leadership or receive sacraments, for example. And it would include forcing chaplain-administered programs, such as the Army's "Strong Bonds" marriage-building program, to modify their teaching if same-sex couples participate. Chaplains are committed to ministering to everyone but cannot allow the government to dictate how religious ministry takes place."
So chaplains are committed to ministering to everyone, except for the people they don't want to minister to. Ah, perhaps exclusion and shunning is a form of ministry!
Second favorite bit: "chaplains who oppose the normalization of homosexual behavior in the military will likely face direct orders - potentially in the form of non-discrimination laws - and subtle pressure to keep their opposition silent, while chaplains who support the change will be free from such limitations."
This is like saying that, because I don't steal things, I'm free from the limitations of the laws against theft.
There's no question chaplains are in a difficult position, representing a particular faith group, but being required to minister to all. But the Army is clear about its requirements for chaplains: Chaplains are to be "[s]ensitive to religious pluralism and able to provide for the free exercise of religion by all military personnel, their family members and civilians who work for the Army." If you have a problem with that... don't join the flippin' Army.