{"id":7929,"date":"2010-11-03T00:10:40","date_gmt":"2010-11-03T05:10:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=7929"},"modified":"2015-06-19T15:13:31","modified_gmt":"2015-06-19T18:13:31","slug":"dont-ask-dont-tell-the-military-christians-perspective","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2010\/11\/03\/dont-ask-dont-tell-the-military-christians-perspective\/","title":{"rendered":"Don\u2019t Ask, Don\u2019t Tell: The Military Christian’s Perspective"},"content":{"rendered":"

The ongoing public debate over homosexuality and the US military (most often referred to as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) presents a unique conflict for Christians in the military.\u00a0 There are those who believe homosexuality is morally wrong and must be prohibited at every possibility, and there are those who believe people have the freedom to do as they please in their private lives.\u00a0 This situation has implications from both the Christian perspective<\/strong> and the military perspective <\/strong>(in isolation), though they must be integrated to form the military Christian’s perspective<\/strong>.\u00a0 Each of these three is addressed individually below.<\/p>\n

The Christian Perspective<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Christian faith considers homosexuality a sin, just as theft, adultery, murder, and lust are sins.\u00a0 Still, Christianity does not condemn the person<\/em> who expresses a homosexual preference.\u00a0 In addition, while many people in this world are tempted<\/em> to sin (as was Jesus during his incarnation), the temptation<\/em> to participate in sinful conduct is not itself wrong.\u00a0 Finally, man is a fallen creation and has a sinful nature; thus, succumbing to temptation and sinning are a common experience of many on this earth — even the stereotypically staunchest Christians.<\/p>\n

For a Christian, it is disheartening to see the culture, government, and now military move to end opposition to immoral behavior.\u00a0 This is a dramatic indicator of the direction of cultural morality in the United States:\u00a0 Few other issues have so rapidly moved from socially unacceptable (even illegal), to permissible, and then to protected.<\/p>\n

Consistent with the philosophy that society is best served when it is imbued with\u00a0moral character,\u00a0Christian citizens\u00a0should<\/em> advocate for<\/span> moral conduct and against<\/span> the acceptance of immoral conduct.\u00a0 This includes opposing the acceptance in military service of those who choose a homosexual lifestyle.<\/p>\n

Still, no mainstream Christian has ever suggested people with a homosexual preference be treated<\/span><\/em> in any other way than with respect, love, and gentleness.\u00a0 (To clarify, respecting<\/em>\u00a0a person who makes immoral choices does not<\/em> mean a Christian should\u00a0accept, advocate, or permit those immoral choices.)\u00a0 Consistent with the Constitution, a Christian is free to believe<\/em> (and express<\/em> the belief) that homosexuality is wrong, but that bears no relation to a Christian\u2019s Christ-like treatment<\/em> of another person created in God’s image.\u00a0 In addition, a Christian\u2019s disagreement with an individual\u2019s chosen behavior does not equate to mistreatment of that individual by Christians, despite melodramatic speculation to the contrary.<\/p>\n

Christians should always treat all<\/em> people with respect, love, and gentleness — even those with whom they theologically disagree.<\/p>\n

It is worth noting, however, that the Christian reaction to homosexuality — calling the conduct wrong, while respecting the value of the person — may still be criticized or even punished by society.\u00a0 It is not uncommon for homosexual advocates to call Christian beliefs “hate,” “bigotry,” or “homophobia.”\u00a0 Given the direction of the American culture, it is unlikely such a reaction will abate in the future, and Christians must be prepared to stand by unpopular beliefs.<\/p>\n

From a Christian perspective (in isolation), the acceptance of open homosexuals in the military service is a sad statement on the moral decline of American culture — and it should be opposed.<\/p>\n

The Military Perspective<\/strong><\/p>\n

The treatment of “private” conduct in the US military is unique to the military\u2019s structure, rules, and mission.\u00a0 The military leadership has the ability to restrict conduct permissible in civilian society, and with a single edict it can permit conduct otherwise restricted.\u00a0 The military is not a democracy, and military members are obligated not only to follow but also to actively support military rules and regulations.<\/p>\n

Does the US military have the authority to ban or allow open service by homosexuals?\u00a0 Consistent with the law, absolutely.\u00a0 US law currently bans homosexual conduct in the military; should the law change, military members would be required to obey and uphold those policies.<\/p>\n

The concept of military regulations is important to this discussion because military policies govern many facets of life some may consider the purview of “morality.”\u00a0 (In fact, “moral character” is still a requirement for entry into military service.)\u00a0 For example, living (in a marital sense) with a person who is not one\u2019s spouse is still restricted in the military, despite its common acceptance in the modern culture.\u00a0 Military policies also permit conduct religions might find immoral — including contrary religions.\u00a0 Worshipping another god or no god at all would certainly be sin the military not only allows, but protects.\u00a0 There is a significant difference, however.<\/p>\n

The Christian faith acknowledges\u00a0choice<\/em> in belief — a person must choose to accept or reject the Gospel; their decision cannot be made for them.\u00a0 In a manner of speaking, the New Testament Christians were the first advocates for religious freedom, believing each person has the freedom to choose — even the freedom to choose to be wrong.\u00a0 Thus, the active support by the US government of non-Christians in military service is not<\/span> inconsistent<\/em> with the tenets of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n

Notably, the exercise of religious freedom in the military is mutual<\/em>.\u00a0 Any military member is free to believe and express the belief any other religion is “wrong.”\u00a0 While respectful treatment is required, military policies do not obligate a military member to acknowledge, support, or advocate the truth claims of other beliefs.\u00a0 A military officer is responsible for protecting the religious freedom and free exercise of his subordinates, and he retains those freedoms himself.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, religious freedom and the proactive support of homosexuality are potentially mutually exclusive<\/em>.\u00a0 If the exercise of one\u2019s faith includes the belief homosexual conduct is wrong, and homosexual conduct is a protected class, then either religious freedom must be restricted or the protection of homosexual conduct modified.\u00a0 To simplify, the statements “homosexuality is evil” and “it’s illegal to say homosexuality is evil” cannot co-exist; one or the other must be supported by the leadership, and the other must fail.<\/p>\n

This controversy has the potential to present a conflict between personal conduct and the religious liberty of a majority of servicemembers for the first time in the US military\u2019s history.<\/p>\n

Still, from a military perspective (in isolation), the military retains the authority to set its policies, and they must be obeyed — whether they ban or permit service by open homosexuals.<\/p>\n

The Military Christian’s Perspective<\/strong><\/p>\n

A variety of Christian responses have been suggested to the plan to repeal DADT, and they vary from supporting it wholeheartedly to outright disobedience.\u00a0 Some have suggested litigation to assert the Constitutional protection of religious freedom; others have indicated Christians should resign from the military rather than support an immoral policy.<\/p>\n

When considering the\u00a0military\u00a0Christian’s perspective in\u00a0responses to conflicting military policies on sexual conduct (or any other military policy seemingly in conflict with the Christian faith), there are some important points.\u00a0 First, wanton disobedience to military authorities is not generally an acceptable course of action.\u00a0 As noted in Christian Fighter Pilot is not an Oxymoron<\/a><\/em>:<\/p>\n

There are too many Biblical examples of God\u2019s people living in ungodly conditions — without either rebelling or surrendering — to advocate disobeying those in authority.\u00a0 An American [military Christian] is neither Peter nor John, and the military is not the Sanhedrin ordering him not to speak the name of Christ — yet (Acts 4). A Christian must live within the rules of those in authority so long as they are not contrary to God\u2019s Word (Hebrews 13:17, Acts 4). Ultimately, though, only God can say that one course of action is more just than the other.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The second half of the quote is significant.\u00a0 While the mere<\/em> repeal of DADT has a primarily passive impact on the military Christian, the policies implementing it may not be so indirect.\u00a0 Depending on the specific policies enacted, there may be circumstances when a Christian is required to take an action or position inconsistent with his faith.<\/p>\n

Should a military Christian publicly oppose the proposed repeal?\u00a0<\/strong> The military leadership has already made it abundantly clear such opposition is not acceptable.\u00a0 While Christian tenets encourage participation in the culture, they do not necessarily demand<\/em> such participation.\u00a0 In that regard, a Christian is not explicitly obligated by his faith to publicly oppose the repeal.\u00a0 If a Christian feels compelled by his faith to speak out against the change while in the military, he should be willing to accept the repercussions, which might include official sanction or dismissal.<\/p>\n

Should a military Christian quit the military?<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Despite the occasional feeling of nostalgia, the military environment has never<\/em> been\u00a0completely reconciled to the Christian faith.\u00a0 Long before DADT became a four letter acronym, Christians in the military struggled with a culture they may have considered challenging, even hostile, to the Christian faith.\u00a0 However, nowhere in the Bible does God or His inspired speaker direct His followers to leave their professional roles, whether as government officials, hated tax collectors, or members of the occupying Roman military.\u00a0 In fact, the opposite encouragement is given: to remain where they are.<\/p>\n

While it is possible a military Christian may experience a direct moral conflict as a result of changes to DADT, it is also possible a military Christian may never<\/em> experience such a conflict.\u00a0 Despite reservations about what the future may<\/em> hold, Christians should not preemptively abandon the military in anticipation of what may come.<\/p>\n

Resigning from the military over the potential<\/em> conflict of policies with the Christian faith is not a commendable course of action.\u00a0 Granted, some\u00a0will sincerely feel it is inconsistent with their faith to serve in an organization supporting what they believe to be immoral conduct;\u00a0those people must act in accordance with their beliefs.\u00a0 For most people, however, such dramatic recourse should not be taken to avoid what might<\/em> be a future<\/em> conflict.\u00a0 For perspective, consider that Christians are commanded to “go into” the world — they cannot be salt in it if they abandon it in the face of perceived difficulty.<\/p>\n

What about specific policies implementing DADT repeal? <\/strong>\u00a0Each policy — none of which have yet been publicized — will have to be addressed on its own merits.\u00a0 Even then, the appropriate response to a specific policy may vary by person and situation, as there are legitimate reasons for different responses to moral challenges to the faith.\u00a0 (Compare and contrast the Biblical stories of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego with Naaman the Aramean, for example.)<\/p>\n

It is possible the military will enact policies\u00a0to minimize the moral challenges of DADT repeal to the Christian faith.\u00a0 It is also possible\u00a0polices will be put in place that are, passively or proactively, a direct conflict with the Christian faith.\u00a0 Should the latter occur, as with Nebuchadnezzar and Naaman, each person will have to prayerfully consider their ability to continue under those policies without compromising their faith.<\/p>\n

Notably, few if any policies will likely be explicit, proactive support of immoral conduct.\u00a0 For example, should a policy demand respect and fair treatment regardless of sexual preference, Christians would likely be first in line to support such an environment even absent a specific policy.<\/p>\n

Still, there may be one significant avenue for recourse if a military Christian is confronted with a professional conflict with his faith: a request for religious accommodation<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Though most often associated with getting time off for religious observances, the military has long had a system in place for general religious accommodation (see DoDD 1300.17<\/a>), even when such accommodation might otherwise be construed as discrimination.\u00a0 For example, in the late 1990s a Christian Air Force officer sought and was granted religious accommodation <\/a>preventing him from being assigned to an alert crew with female officers.\u00a0 In another example, it is generally accepted that military physicians are granted accommodation when they are not required to participate in procedures that violate their consciences, including abortion or the dispensing of controversial “emergency contraceptives.” \u00a0Religious accommodation is not guaranteed, and it is predicated on mission accomplishment.\u00a0 Still, there may be unique cases in which a conflict between faith and military requirements may be resolved through religious accommodation.<\/p>\n

How should a military Christian respond to policies accepting open homosexuals?<\/strong>\u00a0 The most reasonable course of action is for Christians to continue to serve with excellence, courage, and moral leadership\u00a0in the military.\u00a0 When opportunities are given, they should make their opinions known, but they should not agitate unnecessarily or preemptively act based on potential outcomes.<\/p>\n

By the same token, military Christians must not<\/em> compromise their faith — even as they are\u00a0“in the world”\u00a0to be a light to the world.\u00a0 To the extent they are able to maintain the integrity of their faith — something only they, in concert with the Holy Spirit, can ascertain\u00a0— Christians should continue to serve in the military with excellence, even in the face of spiritual challenges.<\/p>\n

In the unlikely instance a military Christian is required to affirm the virtues of a homosexual preference, a Christian may have to take a defiant moral stand.\u00a0 If they are placed in a position in which they are forced to choose to obey God or man, Christians must<\/em> obey God.<\/p>\n

Conclusion, and Encouragement<\/strong><\/p>\n

From a Christian perspective, the decision to repeal laws banning military service by open homosexuals has the result of normalizing immoral behavior.\u00a0 Such an outcome is disheartening, but it is not an unforeseeable result in a fallen world.\u00a0 From a military perspective, Christian officers must obey and support the policies instituted by military leadership; the current controversy represents the first time policies may conflict with a majority of sincerely held religious beliefs, so its future is uncertain.\u00a0 For the military Christian, the as-yet undefined future policies may present a unique challenge to the integration of faith and profession.<\/p>\n

The challenges of living a life for Christ in what is perceived to be an “immoral” environment demand, more than ever, the fellowship of believers.\u00a0 Military Christians should rely on the guidance of the Holy Spirit through prayer, the counsel of Chaplains, the guidance of fellow military Christians, and the advice of leaders in the faith, particularly those with military experience.\u00a0 Many para-church groups, like Officers’ Christian Fellowship, the Navigators, Campus Crusade’s Military Ministry, and other related military ministries are staffed with members who can provide unique insight from both Christian and military perspectives.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, even if the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” fails, the culture within the military — indeed, within the United States — will be forever altered.\u00a0 While the conflict and even potential hostility of the culture will certainly present a challenge for the military Christian, it is likewise an opportunity to demonstrate the love and power of the Christian faith.\u00a0 The coming changes may present a unique opportunity in history to impact the world and stand for Christ.\u00a0 It will by no means be easy, but God has commanded His followers go into the world, and He will equip them for the task to which He calls them.<\/p>\n

Pray without ceasing, and walk by faith.\u00a0 When you feel challenged in your attempts to persevere as a servant of Christ, serving in the military, consider: Who knows but that you have come to this position for such a time as this?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The ongoing public debate over homosexuality and the US military (most often referred to as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”) presents a unique conflict for Christians in the military.\u00a0 There are those who believe homosexuality is morally wrong and must be prohibited at every possibility, and there are those who believe people have the freedom to do as they please in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":32167,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5136,28],"tags":[23,5284,4,82,219,2,11,17,10,171],"class_list":["post-7929","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-commentary","category-government-and-religion","tag-bible","tag-chaplain","tag-churchandstate","tag-constitution","tag-dadt","tag-military","tag-prayer","tag-religious-expression","tag-religion","tag-religious-freedom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7929","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7929"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7929\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32167"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7929"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7929"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7929"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}