Derek Sparks works at an insurance office in downtown Seattle, a military man out of sorts in a civilian world.

Three and a half years ago, he was a petty officer in the Navy, midway through a career he believed held great promise and from which he'd hoped to retire.

Today, Sparks is among 12 former servicemen and servicewomen — one of two from the Puget Sound area — who are plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the military's ban on openly gay, lesbian and bisexual personnel, commonly known as "don't ask, don't tell."

He was discharged in April 2002 after he was questioned by an officer and acknowledged he was gay.

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network last December filed the suit, Cook v. Rumsfeld, in federal court in Boston on behalf of Sparks, five other men and six women, who represent all branches of the military except the Marines. All are asking for their jobs back.

While other pending suits also challenge the policy, this is the first to base its arguments on a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down state laws against sodomy.

The military, under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, can discharge anyone who acknowledges being homosexual, marries someone of the same sex or engages in homosexual acts.

Sparks, 36, said he joined the suit because he believes the policy forces gays to live out their military careers in hiding.

"I served for 14 years and a lot of it was uncomfortable," he said. "Some of my crewmates knew about me and it wasn't a big deal. I think the policy is wrong and it needs to be repealed."

Recruiting worries raised

Last month, a federal judge in Boston heard arguments in the military's motion to dismiss the case. Government lawyers argued the court should not second-guess Congress, which passed the law after months of study, hearings and debate.

A decision in the case — being closely watched by gay-rights organizations and the military — is expected any day.

"Men and women like Derek Sparks have served and they've done so honorably," said Steve Ralls, a spokesman for the legal defense network, a Washington, D.C., organization that advocates on behalf of gay servicemen and servicewomen.

"At a time when we are at war and not able to meet our enlistment goals, we need to bring men and women with their qualifications back to the armed forces," he said.

But Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a Michigan conservative public-policy organization that concentrates on military personnel issues, said homosexuality is incompatible with military service and people such as Sparks should not be allowed to serve.

"If we really want to hurt recruiting, all we have to do is stand by and let the federal court strike down this law and open the military to homosexuals," Donnelly said.

"That would have a tremendous negative effect on recruiting and would hurt our volunteer force and dissuade young people from joining the military."

Policy attacked

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy started as an executive order signed by President Clinton and was adopted by Congress in 1993. It allows gays and lesbians to serve in the armed forces as long as they do not disclose — and officials don't ask about — their sexual orientation.

In the years since, nearly 10,000 gay servicemen and servicewomen have been discharged from the military.

A Gallup Poll in December found that 63 percent of Americans favor allowing openly gay people to serve in the military. Shortly after the policy was enacted in the early 1990s, public support hovered around 40 percent, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.

In recent years, the policy has come under attack. Two other lawsuits are pending in federal court, and a measure in the U.S. House of Representatives would repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. Six previous lawsuits challenging the policy have been unsuccessful.

In its motion to dismiss the Cook case, the government argued the policy is conduct-based, not discriminatory.

Arguing that military life is fundamentally different from civilian life, the government's lawyers said a law banning open homosexuality in the military is necessary to maintain unit cohesion, reduce sexual tension and promote personal privacy.

No evidence of harm

Every federal appeals court that has heard the claims being made in the Cook case, the government argued, has taken the position that congressional judgment for regulating the armed forces "deserved utmost judicial deference."

Donnelly, of the Center for Military Readiness, said she believes gays simply should not serve in the military: "It's a matter of good order, discipline and morale.

"To imply that sexuality doesn't matter, shouldn't matter in the military ... is not fair to the majority of young people who want to serve."

Attorneys for the legal defense network argued that gay and lesbian service members have served the country with distinction in places such as Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, with no evidence that their presence harmed unit cohesion.

Judi Carey, president of American Veterans for Equal Rights, Puget Sound, said it's ironic that the United Kingdom, Australia and other countries serving alongside the United States in Iraq allow openly gay and lesbian service members.

"The United States is selling itself short by saying gays and lesbians are not qualified or don't have the right to want to serve their country."

Carey, who retired after 20 years with the Coast Guard and served as a recruiter for years, said the battle for gay rights in the military is reminiscent of those fought by women and minorities in the services.

She said that she believes more people would stay in the military if the ban were repealed and that most people signing up don't care if there are gays in the military. "When you're depending on the person next to you, [you] don't care what his sexuality is," she said.

"You're more concerned about doing your job and getting back home alive."

Half-truths and lies

Sparks was born in Tacoma and moved to Alaska with his family when he was 9. When he was 19 and out of high school, he joined the Navy in search of a career that would allow him to see the world and help pay for college, too.

At the same time, he was struggling with his sexuality.

"I knew I was attracted to men from a very early age," he said. "I don't think I actually ever really accepted it within myself. I knew I had these feelings, but I wasn't sure what was going to happen with them."

In the nearly 15 years he served in the Navy, Sparks said, he was careful to keep his personal and professional lives separate.

"You find yourself discussing pieces of your life, past relationships. But you can't come out and say, 'I met this guy.' You have to lie. So maybe you tell half-truths and change the gender of people."

Sparks, who today works as a computer network administrator and lives in Seattle, planned to stay in the Navy for 20 years, qualifying for retirement at 39. He also was considering whether to re-enlist after that.

His discharge from the Navy, a step below honorable, allows him to receive benefits of the GI bill, which he's using to take classes online.

"The military was something that I enjoyed," he said. "It was more than the travel; it was more than the great people I got to meet. I felt like I was doing something important and making a difference."

His career essentially ended one evening three years ago aboard a Navy ship, deployed to help support U.S. troops in Afghanistan, when an officer looked through a peephole and claims he saw Sparks and two other sailors engaged in sexual activity.

Sparks said he and the two men had been watching a movie together in his office, which was next door to that of a senior enlisted officer. He said he left about 10 p.m. to go to bed, leaving the two men behind.

He learned the next day that the officer, observing the two through an opening in the wall, had seen them in "inappropriate sexual contact with each other."

Later, the officer suggested Sparks was also in the room with the two other men, despite witnesses who could put him in his sleeping quarters at the time.

During later questioning, Sparks acknowledged he was gay. "It didn't seem like a big deal," he said. "They already knew."

Looking back, he said he's surprised it took him that long to reveal it: "The Navy's core values — honor, courage and commitment — don't go along with hiding who you are."

Lornet Turnbull: 206-464-2420 or lturnbull@seattletimes.com