Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
The Worldnutdaily is throwing a fit about this and you can expect more howls of outrage from the religious right over the next few days about it. A military base in Kosovo has apparently made the perfectly reasonable decision that since military chapels are used for services by all of the many faiths with adherents in the service, they should not have crosses permanently affixed to them that are only for the Christian faith. Cue the weeping and gnashing of teeth.
U.S. soldiers stationed at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo may be stunned to find three wooden crosses stripped from the exterior grounds of their chapel in coming weeks - and many never saw it coming.Several high-ranking officers have met behind closed doors to discuss plans for the crosses. They have decided to remove, and perhaps destroy, the Christian symbols located outside Peacekeeper's Chapel in the name of free exercise of religion.
In fact, this decision was made by the chaplain for the unit, who is almost certainly a Christian. And it's required by Army regulations:
Lt. Col. William Jenkins, 35th Infantry Division's Kosovo Force 9 command chaplain, told WND, "The removal of the crosses ... is bringing the chapel into line with long-standing regulations and policies that apply to every U.S. Army chapel around the world and that are supported by all faith groups in the U.S. Army."Jenkins cited the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as validation for the cross removal, saying it guarantees every American the right to the free exercise of religion. He also referenced an Army directive that bans religious symbols from chapels:
Distinctive religious symbols, such as crosses, crucifixes, the Star of David, menorah, and other religious symbols, will not be affixed or displayed permanently on the chapel exterior or grounds. (Army Reg. 165-1, 13-3.d)
Army chapels are also required to be devoid of religious symbols on furnishings, such as altars, pulpits and lecterns.
"This is not a new regulation and exists to protect the free exercise of religion of all soldiers," Jenkins said. "Army chapels are for all soldiers of all faith groups."
Following a secret vote, several officers decided to take down the crosses as part of a "relandscaping" project. Only one person present at the meeting voted against the measure.
So a Christian chaplain and his fellow officers decide to follow longstanding Army regulations and the Worldnutdaily decides to pound that story until it fits into the square hole of their usual narrative - they're trying to destroy Christianity! And you have to love how they make this out to be "secret" plans decided "behind closed doors" - where do they expect the officers in charge of a unit to discuss and make decisions, in the middle of the road? Out on the shooting range?
The soldier expressed agitation at a perceived double standard after an American sniper accused of shooting a Quran for target practice faced disciplinary action and removal from Iraq for desecrating the religious property."It is very discouraging as a Christian soldier to see our Army punish him for destroying a Quran, but then it pays a private company to destroy some crosses," the soldier said. "I feel it is a slap in the face to me, my Lord and my freedom."
That's because you're an idiot with a fake persecution complex. Just imagine this dolt's reaction if he had to hold Christian services in a chapel covered with Jewish or Muslim symbols.
Politics
Comments
Loving it
Posted by: Dennis N | May 29, 2008 9:44 AM
Paging Gordon Klingenschmitt
Posted by: Rev BigDumbChimp | May 29, 2008 10:32 AM
I guess I'm surprised to see WND spell "Qur'an" with a Q. Didn't Jesus spell it with a K? Well, at least they left out the apostrophe.
Posted by: Dave M | May 29, 2008 10:40 AM
I remember attending a religious ceremony on base in an old hanger that was also used for PT and for "coke and smoke" boxing nights. 'course that was back when I was even nominally pretending to be Christian.
Just imagine this dolt's reaction if he had to hold Christian services in a chapel covered with Jewish or Muslim symbols.
I've tried pointing this out to these people when I've run into it. They seem to have a complete lack of empathy in this case (perhaps others). They simply cannot even imagine a world where there aren't crosses on everything and they aren't the majority ... oh, wait, persecuted victim majority.
Posted by: dogmeatib | May 29, 2008 10:51 AM
Posted by: Mikado | May 29, 2008 11:02 AM
Dave, at least they aren't calling it "the alKoran".
Posted by: Joshua Zelinsky | May 29, 2008 11:06 AM
Regarding the soldier who used the Koran for target practice - that was in Iraq, you dumb nitwits at WND! The place where such things become large issues and actually, you know, place other American soldiers at risk. You just can't desecrate the Koran in a Muslim country, even if you have the biggest guns and the mightiest air force, without their being some blowback. This soldier put all of his army brothers and sisters in grave danger.
Posted by: BC | May 29, 2008 12:34 PM
So the Army is protecting religious freedom at the chapel and at the firing range and somehow that's a double standard? They're upset that the Army "pays a private company to destroy some crosses." Given their apparent irreverence for religious symbols, based on the lack of outrage for the Qur'an treatment, I'm curious as to what exactly are they advocating here. Should the Army destroy the crosses themselves? Perhaps they think they'd make good targets for mortar practice.
No? Who has the double standard again?
Posted by: Abby Normal | May 29, 2008 1:03 PM
This soldier put all of his army brothers and sisters in grave danger.
Indeed. The real sad part is that if this guy was an actual sniper (as opposed to some guy the media is calling a sniper (I haven't seen any article on this) because he was on a range or was shooting for distance or something), he should have fucking known better.
Posted by: Josh | May 29, 2008 1:12 PM
So, in other words, Wing Nut Daily is on record supporting flagrant disregard of law, as long as it's in favor of their religion.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | May 29, 2008 1:26 PM
I have led worship services in many different locations that were of multi-purpose. (Which I would consider a multi-faith worship space to be). You make do with the space you have. It becomes "church" by the people who are gathered there and the fact that God's Word is being read. One option they have is bringing in a cross with them for their worship service and then removing it to another location afterwards. Or perhaps the Army could give them some storage containers in that space to store items for the differing faiths that worship there.
Posted by: Rev. AJB | May 29, 2008 2:13 PM
And, in other news, water is wet.
As weary as I am of reading about these events and the people who create them, I wanted to de-lurk long enough to thank you, Ed, for writing on them. It's important that these things are brought to the surface. As my favorite bumper sticker says, "If You're Not Angry, You're Not Paying Attention."
Posted by: PuckishOne | May 29, 2008 4:00 PM
Writing about, not writing on. Jeepers.
Posted by: PuckishOne | May 29, 2008 4:01 PM
We hear so many instances of religious proselytizing and discrimination by the Christian officers, it's very nice to see a Christian chaplain actually doing his job and realizing that not all soldiers are Christians.
Posted by: paul | May 29, 2008 4:25 PM
"Qur'an" is the more precise transliteration. For all that Arabic and Latin letters look so different, they are of common origin. Q and K transliterate the respective Arabic letters that have common origin to them.
The apostrophe stands for a glottal stop. Imagine "little bottle" pronounced in a working-class English accent as "li'le bo'le".
Posted by: Ray C. | May 29, 2008 5:32 PM
Oh jeez. Where have these people been all these years? I mean, the armed forces have long had various "diversity regulations", and is just about the most "equalitarian"(at least as far as accepting all fit military personnel, regardless of race, color, creed, etc) in the US. These "religious-neutral" regulation flow out of that tradition, which began essentially when Harry Truman issued an exective order desegregating the military. And that, I believe, was back in 1948!
Anne G
Posted by: Anne Gilbert | May 29, 2008 11:29 PM
And this morning we hear of a soldier in Iraq passing out bible coins at checkpoints.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 30, 2008 9:30 AM
...and is just about the most "equalitarian"(at least as far as accepting all fit military personnel, regardless of race, color, creed, etc) in the US.
You might be amazed though to see first hand how hard some of that assimilation comes about on the ground. When I was like 20 or something, right after I got promoted to Corporal, I had to go attend, well, essentially "Sergeant School." Primary leadership development. We had a guy in my squad from a Mississippi National Guard unit who was a full blown racist. He had Rebel flags tattooed all over him and I shit you not, the first time we spoke he walked up to me, shook my hand and said something along the lines of "I'm Specialist so and so from such and such unit. I was raised in the Grand Ol' South with that Rebel Flag and everything it stands for." We had two black kids in my squad and there were...some incidents. It wasn't good. I actually had to come between two of them at one point and almost got a busted nose for it. Officially, the only color in the Army is green, but apparently this kid was on KP the day that gave that class in Basic Training.
Posted by: Josh | May 30, 2008 9:49 AM
And this morning we hear of a soldier in Iraq passing out bible coins at checkpoints.
Not really surprising when we have upper level Army brass running around saying that we're the Army of God.
Posted by: Josh | May 30, 2008 9:52 AM
And we wonder why we keep hearing references to the war being a new crusade?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 30, 2008 10:18 AM
IF the Christian religion is the ONE true faith, then God will prevail, by definition; so why are the Big Rightous Right worried about their faith being destroyed? How can it be destroyed if it is the one true faith? Would God, the one true God, allow their faith to be destroyed? I think not, not if their faith really is the one true faith. Maybe they're worried that it isn't?!?!?!? That it isn't the one true faith? And how many places in the Bible does "God" tell the believers not to fear? If they fear, then aren't they insulting God? Just wondering....
Posted by: dieselrain | May 30, 2008 8:31 PM