A few months ago Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen told reporters

if there is either policy direction that someone in uniform disagrees with…and you feel so strongly about it — you know, the answer is not advocacy; it is in fact to vote with your feet.

The New York Times is reporting that those who oppose service by open homosexuals are beginning to wonder just how they can do that.  Unlike General Mixon, the impetus of Mullen’s commentary, most servicemembers cannot simply resign.  Many, even most, are serving commitments either from enlistment or perhaps a training or incentive.

The NYT article, entitled “Pleas by Conscientious Objectors Evolve,”  addresses those who wonder if they can exit the service as conscientious objectors.  The articles subject, J.E. McNeil, accurately says they cannot, since CO status is reserved for those who have a moral opposition to war.

Of greater interest, however, is the fact that military members are asking this question at all.  Even McNeil, a self-described liberal feminist Quaker, foresees a coming tide:

“This is just the beginning,” Ms. McNeil said. “When the other shoe drops and the policy actually ends, I think we’re going to get a lot of these.”

There are members of the military who disagree with the proposal to end the ban on open homosexual service in the military.  They can’t speak openly about that opposition, but the article certainly indicates they are investigating their options should the repeal succeed.

As noted at the Religion Clause.