Homosexual Ceremony Conducted in Military Chapel Despite Law

A chaplain at Fort Polk, Louisiana, has reportedly conducted a same-sex ceremony within the military chapel despite Louisiana’s ban on homosexual marriage:

U.S. Rep. John Fleming, R-La., said in a statement Wednesday that the “marriage-like” ceremony performed for two women by an Army chaplain shouldn’t have been allowed because Louisiana law doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage or civil union. U.S. Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., claims the ceremony violates Defense Department policy.

Congressman Todd Akin called it a clear violation of state law and military policies, while the participants (and the chaplain) got around that little problem by using the technique of calling it a “commitment” type, non-civil ceremony:

A Fort Polk spokesman said everyone involved in the “same-gender private religious ceremony” at a base chapel understood it was not a marriage ceremony.

So the event was nothing more than a “private religious ceremony” between an enlisted woman and a civilian woman.

Which begs the question why it was performed in the chapel to begin with.  By law it could not be a civil ceremony, and homosexual unions are not a part of any mainstream religion.  Thus, it is not an issue of religious freedom, though the incident highlights the fact there are US military chaplains who come from theological backgrounds accepting of homosexual conduct.  In this case, it was reportedly a Disciples of Christ chaplain.

The Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty noted this carefully crafted “marriage-like ceremony” precisely defines the need for the laws Congress has already proposed as amendments to the 2013 NDAA — which some previously claimed are unnecessary.

6 comments

  • Yes. We must defend religious liberty by banning this religious ceremony.

  • It is part of the DC church’s faith. The first amendment applies to them, and Army regs are clear that chaplains can do the ceremonies of their endorsing agent. So, in the name of religious freedom these folks want to restrict religious freedom? I think this will be an easy one for the SC.

  • @BC
    Homosexuality is accepted within some congregations of the Disciples of Christ just like eating meat and going to church on Sunday; it is not a tenet of their religion. It is also inaccurate to generally label them as you did because they don’t have a central doctrinal structure, though they are generally a more liberal line of Christianity.

    If you think the Supreme Court rubber stamps everything people claims is “religious” then you haven’t done much reading.

  • BC: You don’t understand. You don’t get to decide what is a religious ceremony. Neither do the religious people involved. JD gets to decide that.

  • Pingback: God and Country » Activists Celebrate Same Sex Ceremony at McGuire AFB

  • Pingback: God and Country » Chaplains Report on Turmoil, or Lack Thereof, post-DADT Repeal