Enlarge By Web Bryant, USA TODAY USA TODAY OPINION USA TODAY OPINION Columns In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes a variety of opinions from outside writers. On political and policy matters, we publish opinions from across the political spectrum. Roughly half of our columns come from our Board of Contributors, a group whose interests range from education to religion to sports to the economy. Their charge is to chronicle American culture by telling the stories, large and small, that collectively make us what we are. We also publish weekly columns by Al Neuharth, USA TODAY's founder, and DeWayne Wickham, who writes primarily on matters of race but on other subjects as well. That leaves plenty of room for other views from across the nation by well-known and lesser-known names alike. Contributors Board

How to submit a column Efforts to abolish the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and instead allow open homosexual behavior in the military have left the U.S. armed forces in a strange state of limbo. NO: The mission is to serve all troops One of the most obvious disruptions on the horizon: the uncertain impact to the chaplaincy and the increasing concern about the effect on religious liberty if the policy is dismantled. More than 40 high-ranking and distinguished veteran chaplains signed a letter to the president and senior military officials in April outlining how the suggested changes would likely harm the ability of the chaplaincy to do its job. This harm includes limitations on the right of chaplains to preach, counsel, or teach according to their faith when doing so requires identifying homosexual behavior as sinful or detrimental. The harm also includes restrictions on the ability of chaplains to freely conduct religious services without being forced to allow people who engage in homosexual behavior to take positions of leadership or receive sacraments, for example. And it would include forcing chaplain-administered programs, such as the Army's "Strong Bonds" marriage-building program, to modify their teaching if same-sex couples participate. Chaplains are committed to ministering to everyone but cannot allow the government to dictate how religious ministry takes place. These concerns are not mere speculation but are based in both the practical realities of everyday chaplaincy life and numerous precedents showing that the danger to religious liberty is real. Cause for concern In the late 1990s, for instance, the Clinton administration tried to silence military chaplains from speaking out against "partial-birth" abortion, even banning speech in the pulpit. Similarly, chaplains who oppose the normalization of homosexual behavior in the military will likely face direct orders — potentially in the form of non-discrimination laws — and subtle pressure to keep their opposition silent, while chaplains who support the change will be free from such limitations. Another case particularly illustrates the effect on the chaplaincy. In 2002, prison chaplain William Akridge was punished by Ohio prison officials for denying an inmate the privilege to lead chapel worship services because he actively participated in homosexual behavior. Federal courts later denied Akridge's argument that the First Amendment should give him the freedom to hold religious services according to the dictates of his faith. If that could happen in a prison in Ohio, what should we expect in a politicized military? An increasing number of religious bodies — including organizations that directly supply the military's chaplains — have been raising this concern. These groups include the Southern Baptist Convention, the Roman Catholic Church and more than 800 Orthodox Jewish rabbis. In addition, Professor John Martin at the Army War College has identified the religious liberty concern as one of several "significant issues" raised by the tearing down of the military's existing policy. Quieting dissent Already, constitutional rights are taking a beating. When Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon recommended that servicemembers speak out to Congress regarding the dismantling of "don't ask, don't tell," he was swiftly rebuked by Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Unsurprisingly, some active-duty chaplains are mum against this censorial backdrop. Why risk such censure? Even lawmakers on Capitol Hill have dismissed the concerns of the chiefs of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines, who pleaded that any changes wait until a comprehensive review is completed so that we can ensure that our military's ability to fight and win wars — its primary duty — is not undermined. Congress has refused to even consider adopting statutory language that would provide some protection for religious liberty. At best, then, Congress is risking the rights of our servicemembers. At worse, they're sacrificing them for a partisan political agenda. These political efforts have already disrupted the military mission by placing the military in a state of limbo. They should not also destroy the free religious exercise rights of those who fight and die to protect our own right to worship. Daniel Blomberg serves as litigation counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal alliance seeking to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage and the family. Guidelines: You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read more