Free the Military of ‘50s Prudery

In his hilarious account of life in Paris in the 1920s, Waverley Root tells of one young American who fell in love and innocently asked the proprietress of his small Left Bank hotel if he might have permission to entertain his lady friend in his room.

“Monsieur,” she responded, “I am running a hotel, not a monastery.”

It’s a distinction the Pentagon hasn’t learned. No longer having wars to fight, the military has decided to fight the devil instead. Our Army and Air Force generals have become America’s new bedroom police, destroying the careers and reputations of outstanding men and women simply for the “crime” of making love.

The most notorious example is the case of Air Force Lt. Kelly Flinn, condemned by her puritanical male commanding officers and--consider this logic--judged incompetent to fly a B-52 bomber because she had sex with a married man and wouldn’t own up to it. Are they serious? Has no commercial airline pilot ever committed adultery? What about bus drivers? Sadly, not even a female secretary of the Air Force would repudiate this stupidity.

But Kelly Flinn is hardly alone. She is only one of hundreds of soldiers and officers targeted by military censors. Like American ayatollahs, the generals are on a moral witch hunt. In the last five years, the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps have court-martialed almost 900 men and women for the “crime” of adultery.

This is the new American Inquisition. And the parade of condemnation continues.

Last week, Army Brig. Gen. Stephen N. Xenakis, in charge of all military hospitals in the Southeast United States, was relieved of his official duties for having an “improper relationship” with the civilian nurse who was caring for his sick wife.

This week, Maj. Gen. John E. Longhouser, commander of the Army’s Aberdeen Proving Ground, announced that he would retire from active duty rather than face charges for having sex with a civilian woman when he was separated from his wife more than five years ago.

Imagine! This is the same general who responded swiftly and strongly to punish those guilty of rape and sexual harassment at Aberdeen. He graduated from West Point. He served two tours of duty in Vietnam. He’s been awarded the Distinguished Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star and the Meritorious Service Medal. And now, instead of being commended for an outstanding career, he’s condemned and run out of office for having consensual sex with another person while separated from his wife. Where’s the outrage?

In 1951, at the request of the Pentagon, Congress adopted the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 134 of which makes adultery a crime in the military. Clearly, that statute was aimed at maintaining discipline. Its purpose was to prevent the breakdown of order on a base resulting from extramarital affairs between one officer and another officer’s wife. It was never intended for cases involving civilians.

Congress should now act, with or without the Pentagon’s request, to clarify the law by omitting the prohibition of sex with civilians--or, better yet, to revoke Article 134 altogether. As long as an officer is satisfactorily performing her official, military duties (if not, she can be disciplined on other grounds), her sexual activities are no business of the military.

There is one positive result of all this controversy. It has made me appreciate the attitude of the generals way back in the ‘60s.

I was one of millions of young Americans who marched in protest against the Vietnam War, carrying banners that urged the military to “Make Love, Not War.”

Now I understand why the generals ignored us. It wasn’t because they preferred to make war, after all. The generals just knew more than we did. They knew, way back then, that making love instead of war could get them into a whole lot more trouble.