Navy Lt. Gary Ross and his partner were married at the stroke of midnight in Vermont,
at the first possible moment after the ban on gays in the military ended.
From the Associated Press:
The ruling announced Friday by the Pentagon's personnel chief follows the Sept. 20 repeal of a law that had prohibited gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.
Some members of Congress have objected to military chaplains performing same-sex unions, saying it would violate the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
The Pentagon says a military chaplain may officiate at any private ceremony, but isn't required if it would conflict with his or her religious or personal beliefs.
The Pentagon also says Defense Department property may be used for private functions, including religious and other ceremonies such as same-sex unions, as long as it's not prohibited by state or local laws.
Aside from my political leanings this strikes me as the only just and rational decision the Pentagon could make on this situation.
If a Chaplain wanted to perform such a ritual, and the soldier wanted to avail themselves of military facilities, what basis would there be to deny the Chaplain freedom to practice his or her religion, and the soldier use of a military facility?
Conservative objections from Congress that DOMA forbids it do not hold up to scrutiny.
Conservatives would like to believe DOMA is an ominpotent talisman that can ward off the gays at every turn, like garlic to a vampire. But letting someone use a facility is hardly constitutes the Federal government recognizing gay marriage as DOMA forbids.
The text of the Defense of Marriage Act reads:
`In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.'.
"Act of Congress..." "...ruling, regulation, or interpretation."
Nothing about forbidding gays the use of government facilities or forbidding Government personnel from assisting them in their personal endeavors. It would be punitive, petty and discriminatory to deny such an innocuous request.
The government and the military remains free to ignore these soldiers' marriages as if nothing of any consequence occurred in their own Chapels. And, unfortunately they will.
Update
I wanted to clear up some confusion I saw in the comments.
This decision relate ONLY to allowing wiling military chaplains to perform marriages in military chapels, and only in jurisdictions where marriage equality is the law.
From the Federal Government and the Department of Defense view, these marriages performed at these facilities are purely ceremonial. The military will be endowing the servicemembers with none of the benefits that heterosexual servicemembers enjoy. No married housing, no VA benefits for the partner, no support network, no help with relocation if the spouse is transferred. The decision to treat married LGB servicemembers as legally single, remains unchanged.