THE Ministry of Defence is said to be fighting a losing battle over the ban on homosexuals in the armed forces.

It is believed to be only a matter of time before the policy is outlawed by the European Court of Human Rights.

But it will be odd indeed if, in the name of fairness, the demands of a minority are to prevail over the views of the majority.

And that, it seems, would be the case.

For, in upholding the ban on gays in the services, Defence Minister Michael Portillo draws on a specially-commissioned survey showing overwhelming support for it among troops themselves.

In fact, just three per cent felt there would be a more comfortable environment in the forces if gays were accepted.

How justice might be served by shoving aside such massive opposition in the ranks - let alone that of the service chiefs and elected ministers - is something for which gay rights campaigners and the European Court will be hard-pressed to find a convincing explanation.

True, intrinsically, a person's sexuality may have nothing to do with their ability to do a job and other countries may allow homosexuals into their armed forces.

But if Britain's ban is deemed by gay activists to be an unjust contradiction of these seemingly-valid points, it is, perhaps, worth considering the reason for the ban in parallel with a similar proscription on sexual behaviour in the armed services which no-one disputes because of its innate common sense.

To lift the ban on gays, the MoD argues, would be bad for discipline and morale. And, as we see, the vast majority of troops themselves agree.

However, when heterosexuality, not homosexuality, is the consideration, it is accepted without demur that unmarried men and women in the services are kept apart in their living quarters.

But, though the answer may be staggeringly obvious, let us ask why they are not mixed or free to mix.

Is it not because the forming of personal liaisons among them would create all kinds of problems and tensions that would undermine discipline and morale - destructive factors that no military machine wants at work in its ranks?

And is that not precisely what would occur if the ban on gays were lifted?

If, then, there are no good reasons on moral or humane grounds for outlawing homosexuals from the forces - though, we are sure, millions would dispute that - it would certainly seem that there are eminently practical ones that strongly support the ban and its retention.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.