General: Immorality not Allowed in Armed Forces

Maybe you’ve seen the uproar this story has created. Here’s the introductory paragraph from the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, March 13 — Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declined today to apologize for saying that he believes homosexuality is “immoral” and that he therefore supports the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military.

I’m not going to criticize his belief; rather I’m going to criticize his logic. It doesn’t matter what you believe about homosexuality, the key to Gen. Pace’s statement is that being “immoral” presents grounds for being banned from the military. This case to me isn’t about homosexuality at all, which is probably one of the most compelling reasons why he is wrong, and ought to be viewed as wrong by everyone. Let’s break his argument down:

If a man or woman is immoral, he or she should therefore be banned from serving in the armed forces.

What should define morality and immorality in our government? And to what level should morality be policed? Homosexuality is easy to pick on in this regard because it has a higher profile; but what about all the men and women in the military who are addicted to pornography or who smoke incessantly? What about those with chronic anger issues? Should they all be banned from the military as well?

If you’re going to have a “morality” litmus test for potential soldiers it ought to be about general character traits and should require behaviors such as honesty and responsibility. After that you fall off the bad side of a slippery slope.

This is my gut reaction; so I haven’t spent too much time developing an extensive case–but I’m pretty confident I’m “right” on this one. What do you think?