Recently President Obama hosted a gathering of homosexual leaders in the East Room where previous presidents celebrated the National Day of Prayer.  "Welcome to our White House," was his greeting to enthusiastic applause.  The crowd got quieter as the president addressed his administration's lack of progress on the gay lobby's key demands.  "There are unjust laws to overturn and unfair practices to stop," he told them. He alluded, in particular, to the Defense of Marriage Act, which he committed to reversing.  And, "as commander in chief in a time of war," Obama begged the group for patience in changing the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy regarding gays in the military.

The very next day, Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates told reporters he's considering ways to make that policy "more humane" towards homosexuals.  He said, "One of the things we're looking at is, is there some flexibility in how we apply this law?"  But the law regarding gays in the military has already been twisted almost beyond recognition. It clearly states that homosexuals are not eligible for military service. That law, which reaffirmed existing policy, passed Congress in 1993, and was upheld by the courts as constitutional several times.  President Clinton proposed a different law, 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.,' in which homosexuals could serve in the military as long as they didn't say they were homosexual. Congress wisely rejected this. But President Clinton, to keep a campaign promise, implemented the policy anyway.

Secretary Gates' idea, is to figure out how to "flex" the system to allow open homosexuals to serve until Congress actually overturns federal law. President Obama has asked Congress to pass, and send to his desk, H.R.1283, which, would allow open homosexuality in the military. But, there's a reason Congress has not taken this up. Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council says, "... the American public isn't there."  Neither are a majority of active duty military polled this year by the Military Times. Fifty-eight percent oppose efforts to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'  To the question on how they would respond if gays were allowed to serve openly, ten percent chose the answer "I would not re-enlist or extend my service,

 Secretary Gates floated a situation in which he'd like to make the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy "less restrictive." He said, "... we're given information from someone with vengeance in mind or blackmail, somebody who has been jilted."  But, to give the "jilted" party a break completely violates the spirit of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell. If someone has been jilted, they haven't exactly kept their homosexuality under wraps. A member of the military who is the object of an unwanted advance and complains to a superior, should, under current law, expect a remedy. But Gates wondered to reporters, "If somebody is outed by a third party, does that force us to take action?" 

 Under the current law, it does.  But, in this hypothetical Gates military, the homosexual hitting on another soldier becomes the victim. The one who outs him is the bad guy. If the young men and women serving our country have no recourse against unwanted homosexual advances, trust and unit cohesion will be broken.  Fewer young people will volunteer for military service.  Or their parents will refuse to send them.

The president told his Gay Pride audience, "There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones, who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes."  He's talking about those of us who cherish biblical truth that calls homosexual behavior sin.  There is no constitutional right to serve in the military.  Those who serve subjugate many rights in order to advance national security. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, though far from ideal, requires gays in the military to conceal their orientation and control their behavior to keep good order. We should strongly oppose using our armed forces for a misguided social experiment by allowing open homosexual practice in the military.