GA Overtures Petition Government to Retain “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”

The Savannah River and South Texas Presbyteries have submitted overtures requesting the PCA General Assembly to petition the U.S. government to retain the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy that governs service of homosexuals in the U.S. military.

These overtures express concern that the removal of the DADT policy might jeopardize the free exercise of religion among military chaplains, as well as among PCA members serving in the military. The overtures outline the following potential consequences for military life:

• Chaplains may be vulnerable to charges of discrimination or command reprimand if they preach, teach, or counsel in accordance with the passages in the Bible which directly
speak of the sin of homosexual practice.
• Bibles in military chapels and on military bases will be under the threat of excision of all passages which speak directly to the sin of homosexual practice.
• Marriage retreats conducted by chaplains intended to strengthen traditional marriage may have to include homosexual couples, which may violate the faith tenets of chaplains and negatively impact the voluntary participation of married heterosexual couples.
• Homosexual couples may seek union ceremonies or marriages, which violate the beliefs and ordination vows of a large percentage of military chaplains.

The overtures state that any government decision permitting homosexuals to serve openly in our military services will interfere with the Christian ministry of evangelical chaplains in the Armed Services, particularly the nearly 200 sponsored by the Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel. Therefore, these presbyteries urge the PCA General Assembly to petition the relevant military and civilian authorities with a letter outlining the concerns of the denomination, and appealing to these authorities to uphold the current DADT policy.

 

Comments

All Fields Are Required:


Mike


Singenstreu


Victoria, TX


To repeal this would seriously threaten the role military chaplain in may ways. The truly religious chaplain will have to make a decision that would stand opposed to accepted military policy.

This law would also affect Islam, Judaism and other religions that are opposed to homosexual behavior. The problem then comes down to being cited for discrimination and then ousted from the military with a less than honorable discharge or even worse, a mass exodus of military chaplains that have faithfully served this country since George Washington first called them into service. Speaking of military readiness being impaired and our military weakened; repeal this law and watch the soul of the military disappear. Once that happens the resolve will be gone… since all people work on an emotional, spiritual and physical foundation...take one away and we are naturally weakened.

2010-06-03 14:55 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Noel


Weichbrodt


University City, MO


In the technology community, we call this line of argument FUD. Fear, uncertainty, doubt.

Let's look at the modifier clauses:
"may be vulnerable," "under the threat of," "may have to include," "may violate," "negatively impact," "may seek."

I say that the respective presbyteries "may be vulnerable" to over-reacting and "under threat of" failing to understand the issue.

2010-06-03 22:47 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Robert


French


Mountain Home AFB, ID


I consider myself a Biblically conservative Christian with generally conservative social views. Homosexual conduct is a sin, as the Bible strongly elucidates. That said, I'm not sure that the PCA's actions are the tactic Christians should be taking.

What it seems to me that these presbyteries are doing is implying that the secular laws of a pagan nation will restrict the spread of the gospel. Baloney! Jesus and His church will prevail. As good Calvinists, we should "get" this.

The problem here is that we seem to be seeking special treatment for ourselves either (a) to win state support of the gospel or (b) to ease our Christian lifestyles. Neither of those are gospel mandates.

I would urge Christians, in seeking political influence in a matter such as this, to utilize more "natural law" type arguments to avoid bringing derision upon ourselves for any other reason than the gospel proclamation.

2010-06-04 14:30 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Al


Lutz


Lookout Mtn. GA


Two major arguments against changing the DADT is this:
1. It is the Fed. Gov. changing in a major way the terms to which the people who have voluntered to serve in the miiltary have agreed. The nation as a whole is pleased that there is no draft and that all have volunteered to serve. What effect will the change have on retention and recruitment? Input that military leaders will get is not a yes or no, but input on how to implement the decision that the house and senate have already made. A very disrespectful way to treat the volunteers.
2. It is to be noted that the ones who have made the decision to remove the DADT do not have to live under under the new conditions. If they did, would they have acted as they did?

2010-06-05 16:52 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Rob


French


Mountain Home AFB, ID


Al,

Those, I think, are more reasonable arguments. I've voiced a similarly pragmatic argument against repealing DADT on the DOD survey website for military members. I'm less excited about the church trying to convince the pagan state to specially protect it for the advancement of the gospel.

Rob

2010-06-06 16:52 Permalink Reply

All Fields Are Required:


Charles


Preston


Bowlers Wharf, VA


I am disappointed that the 2009 GA did not take action, but I pray that it will this year. Apart from the problems of conscience that would face our PCA chaplins, the harm that repeal would do to military discipline, morale, retention and recruiting is incalculable and our military readiness would suffer severely as a result. As a retired Marine Corps officer, I can not imagine having to deal with the problems that my son, an active duty Marine Corps infantry officer, would face in the aftermath of a repeal.

Charles P Preston Jr
Col (USMC ret)

2010-06-20 16:26 Permalink Reply

Leave a Comment

All Fields Are Required: