“Gay” Soldiers in George Washington’s Army?
by Peter Sprigg
July 24, 2008
One of the most bizarre aspects of the July 23 Congressional hearing on homosexuals in the military was the effort to read 21st-century political correctness back into American history.
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.) insisted, “We’ve had gays in the American military from the first unit that was ever formed.” Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) echoed this astonishing claim, saying that “gays have served in every conflict, every war” this country has fought.
In fact, Shays was even more specific, noting a patriotic event in his district at which they read the names of “everyone who lost his life in the French and Indian War–some of whom were gay.”
Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) declared that allowing homosexuals to serve would be an expression of the high value Americans place on the principle of equal opportunity. He even claimed the father of our country, George Washington, as an ally who believed that “the way to the top should be open to everyone.” In context, that referred to the respect Washington had for enlisted men in relation to officers–but Sestak apparently would have us believe that Washington felt the same way about equal opportunity for homosexuals.
Actually, though, we have some very precise evidence in the historical record of what Gen. Washington thought about homosexual conduct. It can be found in his General Orders issued on Saturday, March 14, 1778, toward the end of his army’s long, bitter winter at Valley Forge. Like today, his army was at war. Like today, his army had serious problems of recruitment and retention. Perhaps, like today, there might have been some people who would have argued that his army could not afford to lose a soldier over something like his sexual conduct.
But that argument carried no water with Washington. On the 10th of March, a General Court Martial was held to try Lieut. Frederick Gotthold Enslin “for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier.” Having been convicted, he was sentenced “to be dismiss’d the service with Infamy.”
That may have been the verdict of the court martial, but is there any evidence of what Washington himself thought? In fact, there is: “His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return . . .”
If members of Congress and homosexual activists want to argue for repeal of the existing law in order to allow homosexuals to serve openly in the military, let them make their case. But it is sheer nonsense to claim that such an action would be anything but a radical deviation from the unbroken practice of the American military throughout our country’s history.
Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.
Comments
Because founding fathers are *never* wrong, and if you say otherwise you must be an unpartiotic america-hating traitor?
Peter Sprigg’s commentary mentions “a General Court Martial held to try Lieut. Frederick Gotthold Enslin for attempting to commit sodomy.” Whether this act was consentual or coerced, it was CONDUCT unbecoming. And I would agree that any inappropriate CONDUCT, whether homosexual or heterosexual, ought to be punished. But sexual ORIENTATION should be irrelevant to one’s ability to serve. As National Review commentator Deroy Murdock put it, “Our enemies are Islamofascists who murder Americans, not Gay patriots who unravel terrorist plots and introduce jihadists to Allah.”
Nevertheless gay and lesbian people have always been a part of this country and have contributed to its greatness in many ways both large and small. We are also a part of the fabric of this nation and have done our share of bleeding and dying for it as much as any American has.
I realize of course, that your prejudice gets in the way of respecting that service, but thats your character flaw, not ours.
We need to stop glossing over the fact that the Bible condemns homosexuality as an abominable sin.
Anybody who practices homosexual sex is engaging in immoral activity, according to the Bible.
Immoral activity is shameful, not dignified. Immorality is not worthy of respectability by Bible-believers.
We too often preface our disagreements over homosexual political demands as, “STEP ONE DISCLAIMER: agree that persons engaging in homosexual sex are perfectly dignified and respectable in every way, including homosexual activities, of course, but we just disagree with this OTHER aspect of homosexual political demands only.”
We send a mixed message, that we want to nullify the homosexual influence in our culture, while NOT allowing ourselves to say homosexual sex is immoral.
It is infuriating when ANYONE changes history to push their agendas. That is lying and that IS a character flaw!

By: Peter LaBarbera | July 24, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Gee, I had no idea that our Founding Father George Washington was such a hateful, homophobic bigot!
Just kidding. Of course sodomy was taboo behavior in those more God-fearing days. Tragically, what’s happened is that since the time of Washington, America has largely left God on this issue. We have become far too “tolerant” — to use an abused word — of sexual misbehavior that is actually very unhealthy, even life-threatening. Great piece, Peter.