Retired chaplains speak out against DADT repeal

[Cecelia5578]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101029/ap_ ... _chaplains

Retired chaplains warn against 'don't ask' repeal
By TOM BREEN, Associated Press Tom Breen, Associated Press 8 mins ago

Dozens of retired military chaplains say that serving both God and the U.S. armed forces will become impossible for chaplains whose faiths consider homosexuality a sin if the "don't ask, don't tell" policy is thrown out.

If a chaplain preaches against homosexuality, he could conceivably be disciplined as a bigot under the military's nondiscrimination policy, the retired chaplains say. The Pentagon, however, says chaplains' religious beliefs and their need to express them will be respected.

Clergy would be ineligible to serve as chaplains if their churches withdraw their endorsements, as some have threatened to do if "don't ask, don't tell" ends. Critics of allowing openly gay troops fear that clergy will leave the service or be forced to find other jobs in the military that don't involve their faiths.

"The bottom line is religious freedom," said retired Army Brig. Gen. Douglas Lee, one of 65 former chaplains who signed a letter urging President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates to keep "don't ask, don't tell."

A federal judge threw out the policy this month, but it remains in effect while the federal government appeals the ruling. Under the 1993 law, the military cannot inquire into service members' sexual orientation and punish them for it as long as they keep it to themselves. Obama favors repealing the law but wants it done by Congress.

Opponents of the ban argue that military chaplains have a different job than ministering to a parish where everyone shares the same beliefs. They must respect all faiths and counsel all service members, from devout Muslims to atheists.

"My heart doesn't bleed for these chaplains," said Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. "If you don't like it, there's a very simple solution: Fold your uniform, file the paperwork and find something else to do."

Officials at North Carolina's sprawling Fort Bragg Army post and the Armed Forces Chaplains Board did not respond to requests to interview active military chaplains about the issue. The group of retired chaplains who wrote the letter to Obama and Gates said they were speaking out because active chaplains could be accused of insubordination if they publicly oppose repealing "don't ask, don't tell."

"Many (if not most) chaplains will confront a profoundly difficult moral choice: whether they are to obey God or to obey men," they wrote in the Sept. 16 letter.

The Department of Defense has not said specifically how it would address any potential conflicts with chaplains stemming from the end of "don't ask, don't tell," but Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez said the military would not force chaplains to keep their beliefs silent. "Chaplains are allowed to speak according to the dictates of their faith," she said.

"With great acumen, chaplains, throughout the Department's history, have found means wherein they could strike a balance between faith group requirements and Department of Defense needs," Lainez said. "Members who feel something is inappropriate may always utilize their chain of command, the inspector general or other systems already in place, to address their concerns."

Members of the clergy have been ministering to American troops since the Revolution. There are about 3,000 chaplains on active duty, most from theologically conservative faiths and organizations.

In the Army, the U.S. military's largest branch, the largest denomination is the Southern Baptist Convention, with roughly 450 active chaplains. Next is the Roman Catholic Church, with 270, followed by chaplains from the Full Gospel Pentecostal church; Presbyterian and Reformed churches; and Assemblies of God.

A spokeswoman for the Pentagon said chaplains must have the endorsement of their church or religious organization to serve the role. If a chaplain's church withdraws its endorsement, the military begins processing the chaplain to leave the military.

Several denominations have already threatened to take such a step, citing long lists of potential conflicts the chaplains could face with openly gay soldiers.

The Southern Baptist Convention, the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church in America, the Presbyterian Church in America, and the Rabbinical Alliance of America have issued statements or written to the Obama administration this year with their concerns that repealing "don't ask, don't tell" could force their chaplains to choose between serving God and serving the military.

The Orthodox Church in America, for example, condemns homosexuality and mandates that the appropriate action its ministers should take toward gay people who seek counseling is to steer them to repent and renounce the gay lifestyle.

"If such an attitude were regarded as 'prejudice' or the denunciation of homosexuality as 'hate language,' or the like, we would be forced to pull out our chaplains from military service," the church informed the Pentagon in May.

The Catholic Church likewise deems homosexual behavior a sin.

"This means that Catholic chaplains must show compassion for persons with a homosexual orientation, but can never condone — even silently — homosexual behavior," Archbishop Timothy Broglio said in a June letter calling for "don't ask" to remain in place. Broglio leads the Archdiocese for Military Services and is the church's chief liaison to the military.

"A change might have a negative effect on the role of the chaplain not only in the pulpit, but also in the classroom, in the barracks, and in the office," Broglio wrote.

Every officer in the military, including chaplains, is evaluated in an annual report. One criterion is whether the officer supports the military's equal opportunity policy. If gays and lesbians are included in that policy, careers of chaplains who criticize homosexuality could suffer.

"As a chaplain, on religious grounds, I could not support that, meaning that as a chaplain, I'm going to face consequences," said retired Col. David Upchurch, a former Army chaplain who is now a minister at Grace Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Lawrence, Kan.

The retired chaplains' letter raises numerous potential conflicts facing conservative chaplains:

• As the administrators of the Army's Strong Bonds program for marriages strained by military life, would chaplains have to begin including same-sex couples?

• Would a chaplain be forced to allow gay soldiers to assist with lay duties at religious services?

• If chaplains must be available to counsel personal problems for all soldiers, will they have to remain silent on their views about homosexuality?

Retired Navy chaplain Capt. John Gundlach, a United Church of Christ pastor, supports repealing the policy and doesn't foresee the problems envisioned by some of his conservative colleagues.

"They may run into some difficulties in not being able to speak out against those who are gay or lesbian in the military, because that would be counter to good order and discipline," he said. "But chaplains have the right to preach according to their tradition in worship services they hold for those of their own denomination."

A good military chaplain must minister to everyone, said Diane Mazur, a retired Air Force captain and University of Florida Law Professor who specializes in interaction between civilian and military law. "It's really very different than in the civilian world, and repealing 'don't ask, don't tell' doesn't really change that basic difference."

Lee, however, said homosexuality creates a conflict that does not exist for chaplains even when they work with members of radically different faiths. In those cases, chaplains help service members get what they need to hold religious services but do not perform any ceremonies outside their own religious tradition.

___

Breen reported from Raleigh, N.C. Associated Press writers Kristin M. Hall in Nashville, Tenn., Susanne Schafer in Fort Jackson, S.C., and Rachel Zoll in New York contributed to this report.

Quite honestly, the military would be a much, much better place without fundiegelical chaplains. Its the usual bigotry wrapping itself in the guise of religious freedom.

[Drone]

While some of that may be true, chaplains also act as the first line of psychological care in many units, at least giving you someone to talk to outside the chain of command in a confidential manner, and that would be an important and expensive gap that would need to be filled. As it is the military is short an enormous number of qualified therapists.

[Serafina]

While some of that may be true, chaplains also act as the first line of psychological care in many units, at least giving you someone to talk to outside the chain of command in a confidential manner, and that would be an important and expensive gap that would need to be filled. As it is the military is short an enormous number of qualified therapists.

Chaplains are NOT professional therapists. They might play a beneficial role, but they certainly don't replace professional therapy. Unless i am mistaken, they are also not accountable for any psychological damage they inflict - which can easily happen, especially reinforcing guilt complexes or not recognizing the onset of serious disorders and therefore assisting in repressing them.
Also, they are obviously not a good option for atheists or those of non-mainstream faiths.

While replacing them might be temporarily inconvenient, i don't see why it should be a bad thing in the long run. You don't need professional therapists in front-line units, you could instead train people as "field psychiatrists" - with actual basic psychiatric training, specialized on issues that soldiers will encounter, and with a similar vow of confidentiality. That would be similar to field-medics - they don't have to be fully trained doctors. Given that psychological health is almost as important as physical health, i see no reason why this should not be done.
It's certainly better than to rely on religious people without professional training or accountability.

[spaceviking]

The most surprising thing in this article to me was that a army chaplain can rise to the level of brigadier General.

How important are these guys to the average rank and file soldier, would the disappearance of army masses be harshly felt.

[j.eller]

I think that it's pretty bizarre that it is considered ok for servicemen to kill, be wounded or die for their country, but revealing their sexual orientation is not.
'Don't ask don't tell' can't be removed fast enough, and if the clergy don't like it, they can leave. As has been said above, a more than adequate replacement could be provided, one that is by definition unbiased.
It makes far more sense to have an organized, accountable mental health service available for those that need it (as well as veterans), instead of a fairly fragmented, unaccountable, non-secular, and in some cases highly bigoted system of support.

[Broomstick]

"The bottom line is religious freedom," said retired Army Brig. Gen. Douglas Lee, one of 65 former chaplains who signed a letter urging President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates to keep "don't ask, don't tell."

One person's religious freedom ends when it starts to oppress someone else.

[DrMckay]

It's really too bad that more Army Chaplains can't be like Father Mulcahy from MASH, but I guess the power and prestige of the uniform more often appeals to the lowest common denominator who wants to wield it, and in a manner that reminds me of a certain period in history:

"The Inquisition, What a show,

The Inquisition, here we go,

I know you're wishin' that we'd go away,

But the Inquisition's here and it's here to stay..."

[Drone]

While some of that may be true, chaplains also act as the first line of psychological care in many units, at least giving you someone to talk to outside the chain of command in a confidential manner, and that would be an important and expensive gap that would need to be filled. As it is the military is short an enormous number of qualified therapists.

Chaplains are NOT professional therapists. They might play a beneficial role, but they certainly don't replace professional therapy. Unless i am mistaken, they are also not accountable for any psychological damage they inflict - which can easily happen, especially reinforcing guilt complexes or not recognizing the onset of serious disorders and therefore assisting in repressing them.
Also, they are obviously not a good option for atheists or those of non-mainstream faiths.

While replacing them might be temporarily inconvenient, i don't see why it should be a bad thing in the long run. You don't need professional therapists in front-line units, you could instead train people as "field psychiatrists" - with actual basic psychiatric training, specialized on issues that soldiers will encounter, and with a similar vow of confidentiality. That would be similar to field-medics - they don't have to be fully trained doctors. Given that psychological health is almost as important as physical health, i see no reason why this should not be done.
It's certainly better than to rely on religious people without professional training or accountability.

I didn't say they were professional therapists. They are however someone you can talk to confidentially, with the exception that they're obligated to report planned criminal activity and I'm pretty sure a therapist can't without losing their license, and at least get stuff off your chest. Some of them push the God angle, others just listen and help you try to work through it yourself, if it's something you should be talking to a professional for, they send you to one. As for the basic psychological training you're talking about, US Army chaplains do receive a fair amount, though again it doesn't make them a psychologist or social worker. As for no accountability, that's just bullshit. Everyone in the Army has someone babysitting them.

[Cecelia5578]

While some of that may be true, chaplains also act as the first line of psychological care in many units, at least giving you someone to talk to outside the chain of command in a confidential manner, and that would be an important and expensive gap that would need to be filled. As it is the military is short an enormous number of qualified therapists.

OTOH, I think it'd be a good thing for the number of Protestant fundiegelical chaplains to decrease. As a reservist my only experience with chaplains was at TRADOC installations, but quite a few were of the sort that'd probably not be too happy with this. And given the corrosive impact Dominionists have been having on the military, that'd be a good thing too.

Besides, literally not every chaplain belonging to a conservative religious body will leave. And double besides, what about all of the non/ir/a- religious soldiers who live lives that are 180 degrees from that of Christianity? Are their civil rights being violated by government employed clergy who preach messages diametrically opposed to their worldviews?

[Drone]

While some of that may be true, chaplains also act as the first line of psychological care in many units, at least giving you someone to talk to outside the chain of command in a confidential manner, and that would be an important and expensive gap that would need to be filled. As it is the military is short an enormous number of qualified therapists.

OTOH, I think it'd be a good thing for the number of Protestant fundiegelical chaplains to decrease. As a reservist my only experience with chaplains was at TRADOC installations, but quite a few were of the sort that'd probably not be too happy with this. And given the corrosive impact Dominionists have been having on the military, that'd be a good thing too.

Besides, literally not every chaplain belonging to a conservative religious body will leave. And double besides, what about all of the non/ir/a- religious soldiers who live lives that are 180 degrees from that of Christianity? Are their civil rights being violated by government employed clergy who preach messages diametrically opposed to their worldviews?

I completely agree with the first statement in your post, those who actively preach and attempt to proselytize being reduced significantly in number would be a very good thing.

As for the second part, yes it is a violation, and the good ones do realize that, and stick to preaching to their own congregations. Those who don't, there is a chain of command for a reason, and if more people would speak up things might get better, because one thing the Army is above all else is hyper-conscious of bad PR.

[Chris OFarrell]

Honestly, they're bluffing.

You might well loose some of the more fundie Chaplains, but that is more then fine by me. The vast majority won't want to leave, and will exert the required pressure on their churchs to shut up and let them keep serving, given the HUGE PR nightmare it would be for said Churchs to stop SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS if they did this.

There may be a bit of whinging at first, but given time, they'll adapt or be replaced easily enough. Hopefully by 40K Chaplains who charge into a Taliban filled cave with their men swinging a chainsword and reciting the 'Litany of Furry' at the top of their lungs as they smites the enemies of the United States...

[Highlord Laan]

I saw this one coming from a mile off. Religion is the last refuge of a scoundrel, after all.

[Anguirus]

Misleading thread title is misleading. Actually more like blatantly inaccurate without the word "repealing" stuck in there.

[Lord of the Abyss]

I don't like the whole idea of chaplains in the first place, but if they have to be there they shouldn't be allowed to promote bigotry between the troops. It's funny how that never seems to get labeled "bad for unit discipline", while just being the target of that bigotry supposedly is.

There may be a bit of whinging at first, but given time, they'll adapt or be replaced easily enough. Hopefully by 40K Chaplains who charge into a Taliban filled cave with their men swinging a chainsword and reciting the 'Litany of Furry' at the top of their lungs as they smites the enemies of the United States...

What, they'll all be Exterminatus Now fans?

[Cecelia5578]

Misleading thread title is misleading. Actually more like blatantly inaccurate without the word "repealing" stuck in there.

Yeah, I was typing it out really, really quickly while on lunch at work. It'd also be nice if I spelled chaplains correctly.

[Serafina]

I didn't say they were professional therapists. They are however someone you can talk to confidentially, with the exception that they're obligated to report planned criminal activity and I'm pretty sure a therapist can't without losing their license, and at least get stuff off your chest. Some of them push the God angle, others just listen and help you try to work through it yourself, if it's something you should be talking to a professional for, they send you to one. As for the basic psychological training you're talking about, US Army chaplains do receive a fair amount, though again it doesn't make them a psychologist or social worker. As for no accountability, that's just bullshit. Everyone in the Army has someone babysitting them.

So, how exactly are they held accountable?

Besides, if you already train them, then why can't you train someone without a religious basis? Got any evidence for the amount and type of training?
"Therapists can't breach confidentiality" is bullshit, because they actually can under certain circumstances, and i wasn't talking about professional therapists anyway.

You evidently didn't read what i wrote: The mental health of soldiers is nearly as important as their physical health these days. Chaplains can't ensure it - due to lack of training (AFAIK) and because they can easily get into a conflict of interests with their own religion. They are also not as approachable for soldiers of different or without religious faith.
Replacing those chaplains with soldiers who have actual psychological training, without religious baggage, who have the same position of trust that religious chaplains do - you can talk to them without a breach of confidentiality.
Those people would have actual training, no religious prejudice, would be approachable by anyone regardless of faith.

[Metahive]

It always strikes me as so utterly hypocritical to have field preachers belonging to a religion whose prophet/messiah taught things like "those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword" and "don't resist evil, turn the other cheek". 1984's doublethink's saying hello, or what? Has this ever been a problem for Christians, other than certain sects like the Quakers?
More on topic, not really surprising. Once a religion has reached a dominant status in a society, it will frequently become a force for social stagnation and reactionary attitudes. When I first read the title I was ready to let myself be surprised in a positive way, but alas, the title was misleading.

[Tiriol]

It always strikes me as so utterly hypocritical to have field preachers belonging to a religion whose prophet/messiah taught things like "those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword" and "don't resist evil, turn the other cheek". 1984's doublethink's saying hello, or what? Has this ever been a problem for Christians, other than certain sects like the Quakers?

It has been, that's why Augustine developed the prerequisites for justified warfare. The idea is to wage war only as a last resort and as defense of others.

[Thanas]

Misleading thread title is misleading. Actually more like blatantly inaccurate without the word "repealing" stuck in there.

Yeah, I was typing it out really, really quickly while on lunch at work. It'd also be nice if I spelled chaplains correctly.

Fixed it.

[Thanas]

It always strikes me as so utterly hypocritical to have field preachers belonging to a religion whose prophet/messiah taught things like "those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword" and "don't resist evil, turn the other cheek". 1984's doublethink's saying hello, or what? Has this ever been a problem for Christians, other than certain sects like the Quakers?

It has been, that's why Augustine developed the prerequisites for justified warfare. The idea is to wage war only as a last resort and as defense of others.

Of course, Augustine had no trouble himself with using the sword against heretics and other people he felt needed to be stomped out.

[Tiriol]

It always strikes me as so utterly hypocritical to have field preachers belonging to a religion whose prophet/messiah taught things like "those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword" and "don't resist evil, turn the other cheek". 1984's doublethink's saying hello, or what? Has this ever been a problem for Christians, other than certain sects like the Quakers?

It has been, that's why Augustine developed the prerequisites for justified warfare. The idea is to wage war only as a last resort and as defense of others.

Of course, Augustine had no trouble himself with using the sword against heretics and other people he felt needed to be stomped out.

Correct. Augustine seems to be a bit of dual-natured creature: he preached the love and mercy of God, but he was also very adamant that a majority of humanity would end up in hell and that it was proper and righteous. He was criticized for that pretty heavily, but his influence won over the more moderate ones', sadly.

[MKSheppard]

While some of that may be true, chaplains also act as the first line of psychological care in many units, at least giving you someone to talk to outside the chain of command in a confidential manner, and that would be an important and expensive gap that would need to be filled. As it is the military is short an enormous number of qualified therapists.

Also, AFAIK, there is a general perception in the military that going to a therapist or shrink and admitting you have a problem is a career ender or has potential to be a significant hindrance to your career.

Whereas going to the Chaps doesn't have that stigma, and is much more confidental, unless of course you admit you killed someone to Chaps.

[SVPD]

So, how exactly are they held accountable?

They are held accountable by the Commander (battalion or higher being the echelons at which Chaplains are found) and by Army (or other service in those cases) regulations. Regulations prohibit Chaplains from prostelytizing in the way that you seem to imagine, and require them to be available for troops of all beliefs. Commanders do not want Chaplains making the problems soldiers encounter in combat worse, they want to make them better, and Chaplains are not to use a soldier's need for assistance as an inroad to

Besides, if you already train them, then why can't you train someone without a religious basis? Got any evidence for the amount and type of training?

Chaplains must attain at least a 4-year degree, and many have Masters degrees since they do not usually become chaplains right after becoming ministers. Training in counselling depends on what institution they attended for their education, plus any addition given tot hem by the Army. Army training would include training on the requirement not to prostelytize or to deny services to any soldier or to use a counselling need as an excuse to push a certain belief.

There are several routes to becoming a chaplain. Here is one list of requirements for pastors intending to join the Army as a Chaplain, Goarmy discusses the requirements to become a chaplain following a different entry path for undergraduates.

In either case, the Army does not accept degrees from institutions that re not academically accreditted, nor do the other services.

You evidently didn't read what i wrote: The mental health of soldiers is nearly as important as their physical health these days.

It always has been, we are just advancing in our recognition of this fact.

Chaplains can't ensure it - due to lack of training (AFAIK) and because they can easily get into a conflict of interests with their own religion.

This is not actually true. Just because a soldier is upset about something or has a problem in their life does not mean they need some sort of mental health services. That is one of the main jobs of the Chaplain; identifying who does need further help, who is dealing with a problem that is mainly just practical, and who is just bellyaching.

More to the point, there is not a lack of training for Chaplains, nor is there any "conflict of interest with their own religions". Regulations already see to that. Chaplains cannot go about trying to convert soldiers. They can only discuss their own faith during a religious service (which is voluntary to attend) and when a soldier asks them a question about it. They cannot go out and proactively try to make converts.

They are also not as approachable for soldiers of different or without religious faith.

This is not actually true. Chaplains can be approached by soldiers of other faiths just fine. They are required to make themselves available and treat all soldiers equally. If a soldier does not want to approach a chaplain becuase the Chaplain is of a different faith, that is a problem with that particular soldier being a closed-minded bigot. If it's problem of the Chaplain not following regulations, the Commander should discipline him.

Replacing those chaplains with soldiers who have actual psychological training, without religious baggage, who have the same position of trust that religious chaplains do - you can talk to them without a breach of confidentiality.

You are assuming religious baggage that does not exist. Despite your apparent stereotype of clergy, they can, in fact, talk to soldiers just fine without having to inflict their own personal feelings on the situation, or having to relate it to some religious lesson.

More to the point, the U.S. military is overwhelmingly religious (see page 6; percentages of soldiers identifying a faith exceeds 65% in Active, Guard, and Reserves) and for those soldiers, having a person they can ask about their problems from a religious standpoint is a major benefit to their moral and mental fitness.

Not only that, but soldiers have a Constitutional right to free exercise of religion, and, legally, chaplains must be provided because in combat situations civilian clergy are not available to provide it. This is discussed in AR 165-1 Ch.1 Para 6

1-6. The Chaplaincy and the U.S. Constitution

a. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits enactment of any law "respecting an establishment of religion "or" prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Congress recognizes the necessity of the Chaplain Corps in striking a balance between the establishment and free exercise clauses.

b. The Establishment Clause forbids any governmental authority from mandating a religion or way of prayer. In the pluralistic religious setting of the military, Unit Ministry Teams (UMTs) provide opportunities for religious support (worship services, religious classes, prayers, and so forth) for individuals from all religious backgrounds. Chaplains cooperate with each other without compromising their faith tradition or ecclesiastical endorsement requirements, to ensure the most comprehensive religious support opportunities possible within the unique military environment.

c. The Free Exercise clause guarantees individuals the right to practice what their religion requires and conscience dictates. Soldiers, Family members, and authorized Department of Defense (DOD) civilians are entitled to Chaplain support. Chaplains are expected to advise the command on all matters pertaining to the free exercise of religion and to speak with a candor and urgency befitting the exercise of their religious duties. Chaplains assist the commander in providing for the accommodation of religious practices.
d. The Chaplaincy is an instrumentality of the U.S. Government to ensure that the "free-exercise" rights of religion are not abridged. This constitutional principle is deeply imbedded in the statutory foundations of the Army. The Chaplain and Chaplain Assistant are core and essential manpower at every echelon of the force and are both inherently Governmental in Nature (GIN) - military (Memorandum, HQDA, DAMO-FMP, 30 October 2008, subject: Decision Point 91, Unit Ministry Team ((UMT) Implementation Plan). In maintaining the balance between the establishment and Free Exercise Clause, Army Chaplaincy functions are exempt from conversion to civilian structures.

Those people would have actual training, no religious prejudice, would be approachable by anyone regardless of faith.

Chaplains already have all of those things.
From Chapeter 3, para 2.b.2:

(2) Chaplains will minister to the personnel of their unit and/or facilitate the free-exercise rights of all personnel, regardless of religious affiliation of either the Chaplain or the unit member.

You are assuming problems that really do not exist except on certain individual basis, and we have regulations to deal with those problems.

[Broomstick]

Serafina, I get the impression that you are assuming all military chaplains in the US are Christian. That's not true. While the majority certainly are, "chaplain" in the US military encompasses a wide range of religious faiths and practices, not all of which encourage proselytizing and not all of which are Abrahamic religions. A Unitarian chaplain is going to be very different than an evangelical Baptist one. The US, in addition to Jewish and Muslim chaplains in the military, also has had at least one Buddhist and one Wiccan chaplain that I'm aware of, as examples of non-Christian chaplains. If I recall correctly the US chaplaincy program has representatives of something like 200 religions. Yes, most of those slot into the Christian-Jewish-Muslim categories but certainly not all of them. That is why the The U.S. Army Chaplain's Manual contains quite a few chapters giving an overview of world religions from major to minor including how to minister to their adherents including methods of worship, dietary restrictions if any, what members consider offensive, how religious beliefs intersect with illness, injury, and/or death, and funeral practices. Also, tips on how to accommodate religious beliefs they are unfamiliar with. It is also my understanding that there are atheists who wish to include "secular chaplains" to accommodate their non-belief though honestly I'm not really up to date on that effort.

Yes, the fire-breathing bigot Bible-thumping Christian chaplains ARE a problem in my view - but I suspect that they are not the majority even if they get a lot of press and call a lot of attention to themselves and are colossal pains in the ass for soldiers who don't share their beliefs or who don't believe in god at all. However, whether you agree with it or not, religion is important to most of the US military and free expression of religion is also important (and mandated by our core government document). The chaplain program is intended to allow warriors to practice their religion, whatever it may be, while they are on active duty. It's not a perfect program, but in recent decades there has been considerable progress in making it truly pluralistic. That is, of course, why the bigots are screaming so loud.

Chaplains usually are not psychologists or psychiatrist, though it's my understanding that there is no inherent bar to one having those credentials. I've long maintained that religion serves the emotional needs of people rather than rational needs, and thus would have a role in military service not so much to treat mental illness (though they may serve as a means of screening for it and referring people to assistance of that sort) but to tend to the emotional needs of the troops. Let's face it, war sucks. But it does seem valuable to hold funeral services for the dead comrades rather than just chucking them into an open pit, and religious clergy tend to have some training in conducting such services, or helping people sort through ethical dilemmas, and the like. You don't need a psychology degree to do those things, and indeed, such a degree may have little relevance for such matters.

Ideally, you don't need to share someone's beliefs to respect them. I don't have to be a Christian to understand that the cross can give comfort to a Christian (even if I personally find veneration of a torture and execution device repugnant) and digging one up for a wounded/ill Christian to clutch to in a time of horrible distress is a kindness whether I'm religious or not. Ideally, THAT is what the US military chaplain is supposed to do - find a way to accommodate the religious beliefs of the troops - even those beliefs he personally disagrees with - in order to tend to the emotional/faith needs of the troops, whether that's finding a copy of the Koran for a Muslim or avoiding religious terminology when listening to a dying atheist dictating a final letter home. I imagine it can be a tough job at times, and I imagine chaplains occasionally screw up, and there are no doubt people who shouldn't be chaplains who are. Nonetheless, it seems unfair to tar the whole group with the sins of their worst members.

[Gil Hamilton]

But Broomstick, doesn't all that run contrary to the OP? These retired chaplins are arguing that they can't function in their capacity as chaplins if they are forced to accept gay people because of their personal religious beliefs. The argument is that since homosexuality violates most of the chaplins in the militaries personal religious beliefs, then repealing DADT and allowing gay men and women to serve actively impairs their job function. If your description is accurate, then it wouldn't be an issue because their personal religious beliefs are irrelevant to their service to a hypothetical gay soldier, but they are arguing that this is clearly not the case.