Skip to main content
VIDEO FEATURE: Heck Debates Malcolm on Porn & Santorum 

a service of Attaboy Productions, Inc.

Friday, December 10 2010

Continuing my thoughts on the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT) controversy, I turn my attention to discipline. Most of my comments will probably refer to Navy instructions and doctrine since that is my area of familiarity. I am certain that there is not much variance between branches of service.


Each command is charged with preventing sexual harassment. As specified in the Navy's Policy on Sexual Harassment, SecNavInst 5300.26,

The Navy-Marine Corps team must be composed of an optimally integrated group of men and women who are able to work together to accomplish the mission. Each member of the team is entitled to be treated fairly, with dignity and respect, and must be allowed to work in an environment free of unlawful discrimination. Additionally, each member is expected to abide by the DON Core Values of Honor, Courage and Commitment. Sailors, Marines and civilians who model the Core Values do not engage in negative behaviors such as sexual harassment, and do not condone those behaviors in others.


The current policy is directed at sexual harassment between men and women. If DADT is dropped, there will have to be modifications that specify harassment between same sex situations. Such modifications can be made, but certain "gray-area" scenarios come to my mind.


In this highly charged political climate driven by homosexual advocates, what kind of charges will be made toward service members who do not acknowledge the legitimacy of same sex partners? What if a senior officer introduces a same sex partner at a command's social function, and a junior officer (JO) does not appear to engage in significant conversation? What if the JO does not agree with the homosexual agenda, is cordial and polite to his senior officer and partner, but tries to remain separated from them as much as possible? If the JO is later "taken to task" by the senior officer for ignoring him and his partner, does that constitute an act of sexual harassment?


Or if the roles are switched and the JO attends with a same sex partner and other members of the command, both senior and junior, do not interact much with them, can the JO make accusations of sexual harassment?


There is also a Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article (125) that states:


Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

Obviously, this will have to be altered. In spite of any alterations to the UCMJ, though, there still remain policies prohibiting sexual misconduct at military commands. Aboard Navy vessels, for instance, intercourse and other such sexual acts between members of the command or anyone else visiting the command are prohibited. Will homosexual advocates begin opposing the proper prosecution of violations of these policies if same sex members of the command choose to engage in sexual activity aboard ship or at any other command setting?


Again, these are significant policy decisions that I hope are being addressed by military and civilian leadership. Since they impact discipline, they also impact unit morale and readiness. They should also, in my opinion, be a part of the current public discourse on the matter. The fact that they are not leads me to believe that there will be a lot of frivolous and unjust accusations made by homosexual advocates if the DADT policy is dropped. More to come.

Posted by: TheOldSalt AT 08:26 am   |  Permalink   |  0 Comments  |  Email

Post comment
Email Address

(max 750 characters)
* Required Fields
Note: All comments are subject to approval. Your comment will not appear until it has been approved.

click between 3-5 pm ET