The final version of major Pentagon budget legislation includes
watered-down “conscience” language similar to the anti-gay provision
found in the House version of the bill, according to a top House
Democrat on defense issues.
Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), ranking Democrat on the House Armed
Services Committee, affirmed during a Capitol Hill news conference
Tuesday language along the lines of Section 536 of the House bill made
its way into the conference report for the fiscal year 2013 defense
authorization bill, although the scope of the language is more limited.
Other language found under Section 537 of the House bill prohibiting
same-sex marriages from taking place on military bases, Smith said, was
removed from the final version of the bill. Smith made the remarks in
response to a question from the Washington Blade.
“We struck the second provision,” Smith said. “There is modified
conscience clause language still in the bill … Basically, you can
believe what you believe and not be punished for it, but if your actions
based on those beliefs are counter to the Uniform Code of Military
Justice or counter to what’s necessary, that can be held against you.
But you can’t be punished solely for your beliefs. We modified that
first language, struck the second language.”
Asked whether the language applies to only chaplains or all service members, Smith replied, “Anybody.”
Following Smith’s remarks, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), top Republican
on the Senate Armed Services Committee, added, “Of course as chaplains
are concerned, they have the tenets of their faith.” Senate Armed
Services Committee Carl Levin (D-Mich.) then added, “It is conduct which
we’re going after on the part of the chaplains, not beliefs.”
Asked afterward by the Blade whether there was significant discussion
during the conference committee about the conscience language, Smith
voiced his personal opposition to the language.
“Just to be honest, I don’t support the conscience language that’s in
the bill,” Smith said. “Now they stripped it down, they made it to the
extent that it’s pretty neutral. It basically says you cannot be
punished solely for your beliefs, OK? It’s language that I don’t think
belongs in the bill.”
Smith added that it will have no substantive impact on service
members and he’ll support the defense authorization bill as a whole.
“I think that’s current law,” Smith said. “You can’t punish someone
based solely on their beliefs. It has to be actions. That’s current law.
I didn’t think that this language needed to be in it. If you ask me,
what the one thing I would take out of this bill, if I could, that would
be the one thing I would take out of this bill. Now, it’s significantly
neutered, if you will, to the point where I don’t think it’s going to
be a problem, and I’m going to support the bill, but that is a provision
that I did not support.”
No comments:
Post a Comment