DADT and Nonviolence

[kara speltz]

This week, in the Bay Area Reporter, a San Francisco Bay Gay Newspaper, and article I co-wrote appeared, offering a different look at some of the issues in DADT. While this is not a position supported by Soulforce, I believe it is something worthwhile in considering. Kara

Copyright © 2006 Bay Area Reporter, a division of Benro Enterprises, Inc.




Don't serve, don't promote

by Kara Speltz and Eugene McMullan

While all of us oppose the discriminatory policy known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," as people who take seriously the biblical injunction against killing (Ex 20:13; Deut 5:17) we are concerned about the lack of conversation in our community regarding the morality of military service. We recall that during the Vietnam era, the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. held that no one should join the armed forces while our nation was involved in an immoral and illegal war. In our view, the United States is presently mired in two unjust wars. Thus, no person of conscience should elect to serve in the U.S. military at this time.

Earlier this month we commemorated a horrific event – the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 65 years ago. Our country, the United States, is the only country in the world to have launched a nuclear attack on another country, resulting in a "butchery of untold magnitude" (Pope Paul VI). Despite President Barack Obama's achievements, in our own day we continue to finance nuclear weapons research, and continue to maintain a ready stockpile of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. The "defensive" capabilities of the U.S. military are all out of proportion to those of other nations. The awesome size, technological advancement, and firepower alone should make us question whether a decision to serve in the U.S. military could ever be justified.

Militaries exist for a legitimate purpose of self-defense. But the U.S. military is rarely used for that purpose. It is rather used to project power, secure U.S. interests, eliminate perceived threats to "the American way of life," and kill "terrorists." Dominating the globe, the U.S. military secures an unfair advantage for the U.S. in economics, politics, security, and culture. We are thus feared and resented the world over. Some believe that the U.S. is, of God, an "exceptional" nation. In our view, that is a self-serving myth. No nation is above the law, and no nation is exempt from just war criteria, and other obligations that derive from considerations of the universal common good (Pacem in Terris, 132).

Well in advance of the war in Iraq, the U.S. bishops warned that in the absence of "clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature," a war would be unjust, and likely impose "terrible new burdens ... on an already long-suffering civilian population." To date, thousands of civilians have been killed in Afghanistan, and more than a hundred thousand in Iraq. Countless others languish due to collapse of infrastructure, disease, starvation, and displacement. This should not be. Every life matters, and matters the same. The life of an Afghani child is just as valuable as that of an American soldier. Serving in these wars would be immoral, as would serving in the military of the country that has undertaken these wars.

Several years ago Soulforce dealt with these issues in connection with its Right to Serve campaign, which was discontinued. We respect our soldiers, and understand that they often elect military service for altruistic reasons, and/or to gain access to steady employment, health care, and educational benefits. They know not what they do. We have collectively failed them, allowing our government to saturate our culture with positive images of military service, while the awful realities and moral issues of war are swept under the rug. Who hasn't been appalled by the seductive military recruitment pre-show music videos that have played so long in our theaters? Patriotic feelings, which are natural and good, are being manipulated to lure our brightest and best into the service of evil. Make no mistake about it – the taking of innocent life is evil.

The true vocation of every person is peace. That peace comes from God, and passes understanding. It is a grace that changes us from the inside out. It "draws us into God, quieting our anxieties, challenging our old values and deepening wells of new energy. It arouses in us a compassionate love for all humanity." (U.S. bishops, 1993) This love engenders "peaceable virtues, a practical vision of a peaceful world and an ethics to guide peacemakers in times of conflict." These ideals are common to all of the world's religious traditions.

LGBT equality is an important social justice issue. But, at the same time we need to ask ourselves whether we believe that our equality in any way justifies the actions of the U.S. military. Are we equal to the shedding of innocent blood? The suicide rate among active-duty military and returning veterans is at an all-time high. Is that the kind of equality we want for our LGBT community? Or, can we, as a community, keep our eyes on the prize of peace and justice for all? So the next time someone asks you to jump on the bandwagon to repeal DADT, ask yourself these questions. Don't just automatically stamp it as a good cause because of anticipated gains for the LGBT community.

Kara Speltz (Kara4peace@aol.com) and Eugene McMullan (wmcmullan@ses.gtu.edu) are the co-editors of Communion, the monthly newsletter of Catholics for Marriage Equality in California. Speltz is also on the staff of Soulforce.


08/26/2010

[Alecto]

I have had very serious doubts and anger that of all of the big issues on the national level, THIS is the one most likely to be dealt with. Queer people will have the right to die for a government that doesn't really care a toss for them at home.

[drobs]

You mention Japan and Terrorists. In your opinion, what should've the US done, as a country, after Pearl Harbor?

What should've the US done in the face of Hitler?

What should the US have done after 9/11? Sit back and let our family members be murdered by religious zealots?

I served in the Army and came out toward the end of my commitment - contract. I finished my required service & I didn't re-enlist. I'm proud of that service.

I now work overseas supporting those troops. These troops volunteered to serve their country and protect us from aggressors such as those that attacked us on 9/11. These soldiers are out here in the desert waving a flag that says- "Here we are come and get us."

[kara speltz]

Originally Posted by drobs

You mention Japan and Terrorists. In your opinion, what should've the US done, as a country, after Pearl Harbor?

What should've the US done in the face of Hitler?

What should the US have done after 9/11? Sit back and let our family members be murdered by religious zealots?

I served in the Army and came out toward the end of my commitment - contract. I finished my required service & I didn't re-enlist. I'm proud of that service.

I now work overseas supporting those troops. These troops volunteered to serve their country and protect us from aggressors such as those that attacked us on 9/11. These soldiers are out here in the desert waving a flag that says- "Here we are come and get us."

Your response is pretty typical of Americans, and I'm glad you asked some of the questions you did ask, because while I don't have all the answers, some of the answers are obvious to someone who isn't blinded by patriotism.

"what should've the US done, as a country, after Pearl Harbor?" The Japanese bombed a U.S. Naval base - what we did, under the excuse of "ending the war," was bomb two civilian cities - not just with bombs but with Atomic bombs. Not just one civilian city, but a second one three days later. The radiation from those bombs continued to kill people for decades and decades. And yet today, we have the audacity to tell other nations that even though, we've used these horrendous, immoral weapons, we have the right to decide who may use nuclear power.

"How do we respond to terrorists? " Well let's remember, first that the vast majority of those involved in the 9/11 attack were from Saudi, Arabia, NOT IRAQ! But Saudi was our oil partner, and the Bushes were good friends being they were also oil barons. So did we attack Saudi? Nope, we manufactured an excuse of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and we attacked them. And the belief that we can deter terrorists with weapons, to me is absolutely absurd.

First and foremost it is vital that we understand that war is a LAST RESORT - certainly not to be used as a preemptory strike.

Your second erroneous assumption is that violence solves anything. Violence only creates more violence. The problem is, as I see it, that most people don't have the courage to stand up nonviolently and risk their lives, they'd rather risk the lives of others. Fr. Daniel Berrigan said it best during the VN war, that the reason we have failed as peacemakers is that the waging of peace is at least as costly as the waging of war.

I support the troops. I supported when I went to Iraq at the start of the war, and I continue to support them. I want them home, safe and sound able to live their lives constructively. What our soldiers have experienced throughout this war is so devastating, that the only option for many of them is suicide. Never in our history have so many veterans taken their own lives. Clearly something is wrong.

Kara

[BruceChris]

Toward the end of WWll, the suggestion was made to drop a nuclear bomb close to, but not directly on the Japanese Islands. Close enough to, well, GET THEIR ATTENTION. Looking back on the devastation that was caused, I believe it would have achieved at least that.

But in a wartime state of mind, and with the warning of 100,s of thousands of American casualties to actually conquer the islands, fear won out.

BruceChris

[drobs]

I am an American and I'm proud of it. I have seen a lot of the world and I will take America, with all of its flaws, any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'm starting to notice a common trend in society today - no one wants to make moral decisions or determinations. I don't know if that's the new psychology of the day or what.

Let's take the idea of Evil. Does Evil exist? Yes it does. We can look at examples from history to see Evil. Hitler is an example of what Evil is. It was up to the world to stand against his actions. The US faced that Evil head on. The US put its young men and boys against that tyranny.

On that point, something to consider with Japan, Germany, and Iraq is the US has always built its enemies back up into free nations with democracy. The US doesn't colonize or exploit its former enemies.

No one wants to see lives lost, people hurt etc. But there has to be consequences for actions. The gloves come off in war. When war is necessary it’s not pretty. It’s awful and it needs to be done swiftly.

I don’t agree with the reasons we invaded Iraq but I have talked with many an Iraqi citizen. All are happy that Saddam is out. Saddam is no longer torturing, mass murdering, or gassing his own people. They are happy that American came here to fight for them & make them free.

As I mentioned before, our Soldiers are here with a target on their backs for those same terrorists (or religious fanatics) that attacked us. They are the reason there have been no attacks in the US since 9/11. They are the reason we are free to have our own dissenting opinions.

[kara speltz]

Originally Posted by drobs

I am an American and I'm proud of it. I have seen a lot of the world and I will take America, with all of its flaws, any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'm starting to notice a common trend in society today - no one wants to make moral decisions or determinations. I don't know if that's the new psychology of the day or what.

Let's take the idea of Evil. Does Evil exist? Yes it does. We can look at examples from history to see Evil. Hitler is an example of what Evil is. It was up to the world to stand against his actions. The US faced that Evil head on. The US put its young men and boys against that tyranny. The US doesn't colonize or exploit its former enemies.

No one wants to see lives lost, people hurt etc. But there has to be consequences for actions. The gloves come off in war. When war is necessary it’s not pretty. It’s awful and it needs to be done swiftly.

I don’t agree with the reasons we invaded Iraq but I have talked with many an Iraqi citizen. All are happy that Saddam is out. Saddam is no longer torturing, mass murdering, or gassing his own people. They are happy that American came here to fight for them & make them free.

As I mentioned before, our Soldiers are here with a target on their backs for those same terrorists (or religious fanatics) that attacked us. They are the reason there have been no attacks in the US since 9/11. They are the reason we are free to have our own dissenting opinions.

I try to avoid getting into one on one's in the forums, and would love to hear what others have to say about the issues I raised in terms of nonviolence and DADT. But I also found your remark about no one wants to make moral decisions to be absolutely outrageous, because that is exactly the point I raised. As people of nonviolence how can we support the repeal of DADT during these two immoral wars.

It seems to me that for many patriotism is more important than trusting in God. Money and power American style are the new icons that we worship. And God forbid we ever acknowledge that America has done something wrong. And the suggestion that America doesn't colonize or exploit is so far from the truth.

Dr.Orbs, you need to stop and read Howard Zinns book, The People's History, and you'll get a whole different view of what America has done over the years.

Interestingly this morning one of the reflections on the scriptures I received, I think is very appropoe, and I'll share it below.

It is the most dangerous claim when "if it had not been the Lord who was on our side" means that God is on my side because of my religion or because of the nation I belong to. God is not the sole property or possession of one people or one nation or one nationality. (Multiple wars have been fought in the name of this claim.) It is the most dangerous claim when it encourages us to think we are superior to others in the way we think, act or believe, or because of the circumstances of our birth.

Let us once and forever know that God is only on one side: the side of humanity, living in God's creation, as one human family. Let us now say, "God bless the whole world."

Prayer: O God, now teach me to be on your side.

Pride seems more of a problem for those who already enjoy privilege. And when we hear some of this week's lessons speaking of God enthroning the lowly in place of established rulers (Sirach 10:14), we may feel justice is finally being served. But Charles Allen points out that turning the tables, or changing places, can't be the last word. If we do not pay attention to the systemic ways some of us are placed on the margins, we remain addicted to a system that always demeans someone. We also hear about a power that undoes this addictive cycle with the celebration of mutual love, which we have come to believe is the very nature of God. When status-seeking gives way to mutuality, we find even more reason to "Say with confidence, 'God is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can anyone do to me?'" (Hebrews 13:6).

[Gennee]

Kara, I'm a veteran and served during the Vietnam era. I'm no war monger but I'm very proud of having served. We do need a strong military but I don't believe that we should mettle in other countries and their internal affairs. If this country faced an attack I would be involved.

The premise for going into Iraq was false to begin with. I figured all that out a week or two after 9/11. I was 1 1/2 miles from the attacks. I also became a Chrsitian while in the service. Men and women were able to serve in the military and still be faithful. It could be tough and I expereinced some of the ridicule and taunts. It was worth it though because it made me stronger.

The point to remember is that the military is made of men and women who serve honorably. The reasons are various but still they do it.

Gennee

[kara speltz]

Dear Gennee: I have the utmost respect for our soldiers and veterans who have risked their lives. My co-author has been following the discussion, here on the forums, but is not a "member," so he asked if I could post this for him:

I am myself a veteran, and am concerned that perhaps our piece could be mis-read to denigrate soldiers, or put most of the moral
responsibility on individual service members. I don't think a soldier
who was serving her/his country in WWII was morally responsible for
the decision to drop the atomic bomb. It's not as if they were
consulted. Most of the responsibility for what our country does with
its military lies with the President, Congress, and the American
people who elect both. That being said, I do believe that a decision
to serve in the military has a moral dimension that is rarely
considered.

One young man from my alma mater went to Iraq; he became a
conscientious objector [see Aidan Delgado, "Sutras of Abu Ghraib"]. I
myself served in the late Cold War, and did not become a conscientious
objector, though the presence of nuclear weapons on my ship was an
occasion of moral reflection. To be clear, even though I think the
present wars are unjust, I am not advocating immediate withdrawal. I
think that to "cut our losses" and just get out would add to our
guilt. Although I continue to be an Obama supporter, I regret that he
continues to pursue most of the policies (without the language) of the
war on terror, which I view as an over-reaction and a mistake that
makes us less safe. Even if it did deliver, the ends would not justify
the means. Extraordinary renditions, torture, and the state-ordered
murder of suspected "terrorists" (including a U.S. citizen) are
violations of the international law, and the law of God.

As we said at the beginning of our article, we do in fact support the
repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, but are concerned by the implied
endorsement of the U.S. military that sometimes accompanies
repeal-related activism.

Eugene

[BruceChris]

In Mpls and St. Paul, they're Rep. Keith Ellison, 612-522-1212
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, 612-727-5220
and Sen. Al Franken, 651-221-1016

The President is at Barack Obama <president@whitehouse.gov>,
"President Barack Obama" <president@messages.whitehouse.gov>

and probably other addresses.

So you can call their staffers, no charge/local call, and ask for an end to DADT, and any other not gay friendly federal laws. For other states, Google or use the phone book.

Sexual orientation is a Condition of Birth, but gender, and skin color are also Conditions of Birth. I hope we're not going back to racism, or sexism.

Good luck, BruceChris

[drobs]

The more I think about this article the more it continues to insult me.

This article is akin to telling African Americans in the 60's to not ride the bus but to stay home & walk.

This article strikes me as going against what we Gay Americans stand for.

We Gay Americans need to stand against discrimination in every form and in every place.

I find it further reprehensive the use of the suicides of amongst our military members to justify the views of the authors.

That's just sickening.

[bnmoore]

Originally Posted by drobs

The more I think about this article the more it continues to insult me.

This article is akin to telling African Americans in the 60's to not ride the bus but to stay home & walk.

Fruit salad. Not riding the bus, staying home, or walking does not harm disinterested parties.

This article strikes me as going against what we Gay Americans stand for.

I am a gay American and it doesn't go against what I stand for.

We Gay Americans need to stand against discrimination in every form and in every place.

DADT is unjust and inequitable. That is enough to demand it's repeal. The same goes for ENDA and DOMA.

I find it further reprehensive the use of the suicides of amongst our military members to justify the views of the authors.

That's just sickening.

All I've seen reported is numbers. If the military members left notes they weren't shared with the civilian public. I can have an opinion but that's all it is.