Reconciling Ministries Network

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

by Chett Pritchett

On Wednesday, President Barack Obama will sign into law the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." This momentous occasion is the culmination of years of hard work by activists, policies makers, former military members, and voters. The idea that members of the United States armed forces could be dishonorably discharged for the simple fact of who they love is a notion whose time is extinct.

Had you asked me my feelings on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" two years ago, I would have been ambivalent. In many ways, the current structures for safeguarding our nation perpetuate the military-industrial complex. I believe our nation has wandered down a slippery slope in the "war" on terror, while slashing funding on education, health care, and the environment. For LGBT persons who wanted to serve in the military, I could only ask, "Why would you want to do that?"

"Why would you want to do that?" It's basically the same question I had heard for years about my ordination process in the United Methodist Church. Why would I, an openly gay man, seek ordination in a denomination that claims that "homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching"?

I could have easily closeted myself and lived in fear that my Bishop or members of the ordination committee would discover the truth. I could have lied had I ever been directly asked about my sexual orientation. I could have become celibate in order to conform with the "self-avowed, practicing homosexual" clause in our Book of Discipline. I could have operated (and did for four years) under an all too familiar form of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" within the United Methodist Church.

I know many candidates for ministry within the United Methodist Church who have wrestled with these options. Some have been ordained and still live within the fear of the closet. Some manage to live within the tension of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".  Some have left the United Methodist Church and found a home in another denomination that affirms their call to ministry and their sexuality and/or gender identity. Sadly, many have left the Church altogether, hurt by the people of God and unable to trust structures that say “God loves you…but not that much.”

All of these are valid, understandable decisions. I have chosen another way – as an active, involved, out layperson who sees deep connection between the harmful policies of our denomination and decline in vitality of our local congregations. When pastors cannot be their authentic selves, we cannot expect parishioners to be their authentic selves in order to engage in radical hospitality, passionate worship, intentional faith development, risk-taking mission, or extravagant generosity.[1]

The repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the United States Armed Forces did not happen over night. It took many long years of grassroots organizing, policy work, relationship building, phone calls, emails, protests, prayer, meetings, educational trainings, and for people of good conscience, regardless of their political persuasion, to stand up and let their voices be heard. The same must happen in the United Methodist Church. We must tell our stories; we must work across denominational lines/political lines/secular-sacred lines; we must call, email, write, and have conversations with our Annual Conference and General Conference delegates; we must pray; we must sing and worship and protest; we must tell the stories of those who have left the United Methodist Church.

Will you join me in this work and repeal a long too accepted “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”?

[1] These marks of the Church are developed by Bishop Robert Schnase in his book, Five Practices of Fruitful Congregations (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press), 2007.

---

Chett Pritchett is Lay Leader at Dumbarton United Methodist Church in Georgetown. 

What Happens to a Dream Deferred?

by Rev. Gilbert Caldwell

The Senate inaction on Don't Ask Don't Tell last week brought to mind this poem of the African American poet, Langston Hughes;

"What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun? Or fester like a sore --
And then run?

Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over --
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?"

I paraphrase a bit of Scripture by asking this question; "What does it profit an elected official who responds not to his or her conscience, but to what they deem is the politically expedient thing to do in the moment? They may gain a few votes, they may even satisfy those within their religious institutions whose faith rests on the exclusion of Lesbians and Gay from the military. But, do they realize what damage they are doing to their souls?"

The damage the inaction of the Senate on DADT has done to Gay and Lesbian persons in the military and beyond cannot be calculated. Nor to those of us who allies and advocates. Many apparently do not care about this. But then I ask this question of their spiritual and patriotic self interests; "What about the inner explosion they must experience when they violate the principles of equality, fair play and freedom of the individual, that they speak of so often?"

Michael Jackson sang of the "Man in the Mirror". I wonder what some of the women and men in the Senate see in their mirrors this week?

---

The Rev. Gilbert H. Caldwell is a retired United Methodist Minister who lives in Asbury Park, N.J. He was active in the Massachusetts unit of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and participated in the civil-rights movement throughout the nation. In 2000, he, with others, organized the RMN Extension ministry United Methodists of Color for a Fully Inclusive Church (UMOC), an organization committed to the full inclusion of LGBT people in every aspect of church and society. His recent book, Something Within: Works by Rev. Gilbert H. Caldwell is available from Church Within A Church.

Can The Church Repeal Its Own DADT Policies?

by Rev. Gilbert Caldwell

President Obama in his State of the Union address, expressed his commitment to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the military that prohibits Gay Americans from being open about their sexual orientation as they serve in the military. His open declaration of "working with Congress and the military..." to repeal "DADT" prompted these thoughts:

1. I remembered, as I have done before, my relatives who in their efforts to avoid the legally enforced stigma of being black, "passed" as being white. The attitude of a society that limited the rights of persons because of their racial history caused indescribable trauma among those who were "passing" and family and friends who were expected to be silent accomplices to their deception. As the military begins its process of ceasing to exit persons because of their sexual orientation, will the UMC be led to do the same? Why does the Church keep denying persons when it says denying persons is wrong?
2. I thought of comic strip character Popeye, who said of himself; "I am what I am, and that's all that I am." How foolish that our society and our military would impose a Popeye-like limitation on military personnel who are Gay by suggesting, "That's all that they are and no more". Popeye may have self-limited himself, but how could a society, a military or a Church, deny themselves the opportunity of being enriched by the multiplicity of gifts of persons, by excluding and/or limiting them because of their sexual orientation?
3. And, I dare to remember those words in Exodus 3: 14, 'I AM THAT I AM", words ascribed to a God who provides a definition of Self, that is beyond debate.

The section of the State of the Union address that launched the official challenge of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" by President Obama brought forth a memory of racial history, a remembering of a comic strip that brought joy to many of us, and a continuing awareness of a God who must weep and sometimes laugh, in response to our human foolishness.

Many Congresspersons and others applauded enthusiastically when the President expressed his intentions. Many, many United Methodists are ready to applaud with enthusiasm when our denomination rids itself of our "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Book of Discipline language. What new voices will join the voices of those of us who year-after-year have said with our words and our actions; "It is time for the United Methodist Church to stop 'passing' as being OPEN, when it is not?"

---

The Rev. Gilbert H. Caldwell is a retired United Methodist Minister who lives in Asbury Park, N.J. He was active in the Massachusetts unit of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and participated in the civil-rights movement throughout the nation. In 2000, he, with others, organized the RMN Extension ministry United Methodists of Color for a Fully Inclusive Church (UMOC), an organization committed to the full inclusion of LGBT people in every aspect of church and society. His recent book, Something Within: Works by Rev. Gilbert H. Caldwell is available from Church Within A Church.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell--Public Attitudes

by Peter L. DeGroote

For the Record: The House of Representatives held hearings on July 23rd on the "don't ask, don"t tell" policies of the military. The following news story of a survey of public attitudes is summarized without commentary.

Source: The Washington Post, Acceptance of Gay People in Military Grows Dramatically. Authors: Kyle Dropp and Jon Cohen, Washington Post Staff Writers, with the assistance of polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta. Saturday, July 19, 2008; Page A03

The article reports a Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted by telephone between July 10 to 13, among a random national sample of 1,119 adults. The overall survey has a sampling error margin of plus or minus three percentage points. Error margins are larger for subgroups.

The full article can be seen at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/18/AR2008071802561.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Public attitudes about gays in the military have shifted dramatically since passage of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy 15 years ago.

• 75% of Americans said gay people who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the military—that’s up from 62% in 2002 and from 44% in 1993.
• Breaking it down between Democrats, Republicans and independents: Majorities of each group also agree. Compare this to the opposition President Clinton got in 1993 for his campaign pledge to lift the ban on gay people in the military: 67% of Republicans and 75% conservatives opposed the idea, as did 56% of independents and 45% of Democrats.
• Support for openly gay men and lesbian women openly serving in the military has doubled over past 15 years.  Support from Republicans has doubled, from 32% to 64%. More than 80% of Democrats and more than 74% of independents and 66% of self-described conservatives are supportive.
• 57% of white evangelical Protestants, 82% of white Catholics, and 80% of those with no religious affiliation now support allowing openly gay service members in the military.
• Three-quarters of both married and single people support the idea, both significantly higher than in 1993.
• While 71% of veterans said gay people who do not declare themselves should be allowed to serve, the percentage drops to 50% for those who are open about their sexuality. Non-veterans, by contrast, are as likely to support those who "tell" as those who do not.
• Women are more supportive than men. More than 89% of women support allowing openly gay soldiers, compared with nearly two-thirds of men. Fifteen years ago, half of women supported this stance; nearly two-thirds of men opposed it.

US Military Don't ask Don't Gay

By Kelli Busey

A CBS special titled "Military Soft On Don't Ask, Don't Tell? 60 Minutes: Is Military More Tolerant Of Gay Members In Wartime?"

I am sure that the title of this series could easily lead people to believe it's content would pander to the homophobic agenda. Instead it presents a human insight to the conundrum facing many of us who served. How can I serve my county faithfully as a LGBT person? To openly admit your sexual affinity to your commanding officer could set into motion a series of events that even the most loyal of officers cannot stop: General Court Martial Article 15 of the United States Military Code. I know this code like an old friend. It can be used as a gentle nudge to remind a slightly errant soldier of minor infractions or as a trial by a General Officer where the people stand accused and convicted  by a single person, only waiting sentencing.

As a non commissioned officer, I was ordered to witness this mock justice performed on my section Sergeant. What was once a brave and wonderful man was stripped of his dignity and reduced to a crying and pitiful shadow. I could not help but believe that this show was performed in part for my benefit so I could pass what I had seen on to my fellow soldiers.

Instead what happened almost cost me my stripes and freedom, but I kept my self respect and the respect of my fellow solders to include the very people who where being forced to perform this mockery of justice.

My Sergeant and I served in units who's isolated mountain top operations required it to be far from any official brigs. Our jobs required high levels of security and technical training, not a highly desirable position mainly filled by people like us. So in this capacity I was ordered to insure that my Sergeant remained in a barracks lock down under armed guard.

Since it was a weekend and I didn't want to burden my troops with this despicable extra duty, I remained to stand watch.

My Sergeant and I had discussed our positions. He fully understood that I would honor my oath of allegiance and use all means at my disposal to prevent him from escaping. We also talked about the mock justice we were a part off. I cried when my friend cried. I felt the loss of belief in god and country as my sergeant did. So when he asked me if his girlfriend could spend the weekend with him before he went to Leavenworth, I made sure they were not disturbed. When he asked me if he could have beer, I sent my runner to fetch it.

My Sergeant was in no condition for duty on the Monday morning he was scheduled for movement. Now it was my turn to "stand on the carpet" and "see the old man".

I did not fear this because my Commander was a good man, and I felt the indiscretion was fair treatment for an unfairly condemned man. I also took great pride in this blatant act of defiance. My Commander asked me if I knew of the brevity of the situation and I replied yes sir. I received an administrative Article 15, a slap on the wrist.

What we see in the Army's reaction to LGBT people is in fact a reflection of the strong race bigotry that is unofficially condoned. As a person who was "different", I became very close to others who did not exactly match the Aryan picture uncle wanted. These people became my life blood. Sometimes I would be questioned as to why white people acted so offensively and to this I can only shrug my shoulders. I was not born with a active bigot bone.

What we are witnessing in the different reactions that the population is demonstrating in IRAQ to the European approach and ours is not exclusively a demographically universal response of the indigent population.

It mirrors my response to intolerance. I too stood and waved my finger in a act of defiance as did my commander in his jurisprudence to my participation in the highly prosecutable weekend activities.

The military can help to end the conflict the politicians created by becoming willing participants in RECONCILING with humanity. We can learn from the worlds inclusion of GLBT people into their military. Contrary to the US ARMY'S official response the consequence of allowing LGBT people to disclose their affinity will not be fatal to our soldiers and would not adversely affect a units readiness. Quite the opposite. My friends knew me much better than I did, but if anything my candor made our bonds of trust unbreakable. Dear Elgin, the man who patiently dragged me, an unwilling student into understanding friendship, Rufus my running partner, James my pudding head best bud and everyone. Thank you.