Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Mikey Weinstein asked me to pass along this statement from an Army officer and West Point graduate about the constant problems he has faced in the military from aggressive Christian superiors who have badgered him relentlessly about his own religious views. The whole thing is worth reading.
I am a United States Army Captain. On a spring day at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York several years ago, I took a solemn oath to support and defend the United States Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic as an officer in the United States Army. I took a legally altered oath which omitted the words "So Help Me G-d." When I submitted my first signed copy, with those words neatly crossed out and initialed, I was informed that it was not valid. When threatened with the prospect of not graduating and being refused a Commission, I stood by my refusal to sign the Oath as it read. I could not in good conscience do so because I was deeply disturbed by fusion of religion and military service. I could not reconcile the suspicion that the Oath itself was establishing religion in a way which contradicted the spirit of the Constitution with the intensity of my commitment to defend same. I believed, and still believe, that my personal metaphysical experience of the universe must be separate from my role as a military professional. In the passing years, I have come to the unsettling conclusion that the sentiment in the Oath which so disturbed me is a practical reality in my United States Army.Based on my alteration of The Oath, you may be tempted to label me "non-religious." I find this odd, because religion has broadly influenced my life and values. I was born into a mixed Jewish and Catholic family. The family I belong to now is mixed Buddhist and Agnostic. I attended Catholic high school where I excelled in my religious studies. I was one of a literal fistful of non-Christian students voluntarily attending a religious institution, and I never once felt pressure to conform. In our mandatory religious classes we studied Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, and Quaker, Mormon, Jewish, Protestant, Wiccan, and other religions and we were taught that mere "tolerance" was abhorrent and basic "acceptance" was the absolute minimum standard. I learned during my second semester as a Plebe (freshman) at West Point that even lowly tolerance is a privilege not to be bestowed on all Soldiers in the United States Army.
During my second year at the West Point, my Squad Leader for summer training expressed disapproval on numerous occasions with my being Jewish, and, during one mission, he grabbed my MRE (a military meal) as we sat down for lunch and handed me another. He ordered me to eat the pork chop and I reminded him that I refrain from pork for religious reasons. He told me that I could eat the pork or eat nothing. One of his peers, a female Jewish cadet, urged me to obey him and not to make him angry; I declined. The next day, my cadet Platoon Leader presented me with a written counseling statement detailing my signs of "anorexia" and a "troubling" refusal to eat which was detrimental to my health and indicative of "incapacity for leadership." I was filled with righteous indignation. I went through the Cadet and Commissioned Chain of Command and my rebuttal culminated with a conversation with the Active Duty Major in command of the summer training. When I explained the events in detail, he told me that my Cadet Chain of Command was right to be concerned, and spoke words I will never forget: "the Army is not in the business of catering to people like you." Those words have haunted me throughout my career as an Officer. They were the turning point for me--when I finally understood the message several of my leaders had been expressing to me all along: the Army has no place for people like me: dissidents who stray from the unofficially mandated military religion; conservative fundamentalist Christianity.
Throughout my service, I have been inundated by reminders of the tenacity of this "Army Religion". On a regular basis, I am confronted with being forced/coerced to partake in involuntary prayer. At change of command ceremonies, promotions, retirements, banquets, mandatory Officer/NCO call, the list goes on. What do I do when this happens? I see no reason why I should have to bow my head to participate in this involuntary prayer. But if I stand at attention, I am still showing that I am subject to religion in my professional duties. I have discovered that any other movements or fidgeting are viewed as disrespectful to those who wish to pray. Army leaders send the message out that prayer is voluntary, and that Soldiers do not have to participate. As a Platoon Leader serving in Iraq, my Squad Leaders and I were ordered to attend a mission briefing with the Battalion Command Team's security squad. The briefing concluded with a Soldier being ordered to lead the group in prayer. I was disturbed because I knew that there were Soldiers on this team who did not share the specific, sectarian Christian religious beliefs being expressed. I was standing at the edge of the formation, and chose to quietly walk away. I was later counseled by my Commander and informed that the Battalion Command Team had heard of the incident and recommended I be relieved from my duties as Platoon Leader. My Commander explained that, by not bowing my head in blatantly Christian prayer with the others, I was sending a message that I "want my Soldiers to die." These words penetrated my core. What leader can imagine a worse accusation? Who wouldn't doubt herself or himself when confronted with this message? The threat of being relieved was completely overshadowed and, again, I was an outsider, incapable of leadership because I refused this unconstitutional perversion of Christianity synonymous with the Command.Could I not, would I not be an effective combat ready officer/leader/warrior without first very publicly and repeatedly demonstrating my singular loyalty to Jesus Christ? Could I not lead brave military women and men into combat for my country without being an avowed fundamentalist Christian? I stopped practicing my own religion; I disassociated myself from Soldiers who were similarly persecuted; I lost hope.
Who can you talk to about something like this? Certainly not my Chain of Command- my immediate supervisor/rater and senior supervisor/rater had threatened to relieve me. Obviously my counseling statement wouldn't address mandatory prayer, but what did it matter what it said if both my rater and senior rater agreed I was "unfit" and there were no other Officers who I worked with or around? I later contacted the Equal Opportunity Office to make an official anonymous report about the noxious, compulsive Christian, command climate. Shockingly, the NCO I filed the report with wasted no time in contacting my Battalion Commander directly, in complete violation of the privacy regulations and guarantees of protective anonymity attendant to such hyper-sensitive filings. I later became a member of an Installation Inspector General Team and observed firsthand the impotent, incapacity of the IG to affect any meaningful change. The difference between lower enlisted Soldiers and myself is this: they suspect that they have nowhere to turn in order to escape this unbearable religious persecution--in contrast, as an officer, I do not suspect. I know.
Looking back over all my time in the Army and at the United States Military Academy at West Point, I know that there were so many good memories, so many wonderful opportunities, and so many outstanding leaders of character I met along the way. Yet, the time is painfully tainted for me by a long shadow of bitter religious persecution by zealously righteous Christians essentially universally extant throughout the United States Army command structure.What has most surprised me about this struggle is how utterly powerless I am as a Captain- a Command level Officer- to stand up for my rights and for the Constitution and Country I love. I am a great Soldier, a great leader, and a great person, and I am a victim. It is not comfortable to admit one is a victim; I believe that admitting it takes a certain type of personal strength. The first day I met my current military superior/rater, he was playing Christian gospel music in his office while he called me in to talk. Perhaps it was an innocent oversight on his part, or perhaps it is another hint of the sinister nature of the current "Army Religion". There is no safe way to find out. My experiences have shown that the inundation of invitations for fundamentalist Christian prayer and fellowship, "spiritual growth" and "moral development" that target fellow Soldiers tends to thinly mask an undeniable and comprehensive underlying propensity for aggression, hatred, and ambition to subjugate the United States Army to an official religion; fundamentalist Christianity. The result for the American military is a total destruction of esprit de corps, teamwork, morale, good order and discipline. The result for the fundamentalist Islamic enemies we fight is an immeasurable bonanza of emboldenment for their recruitment, propoganda and insurgency efforts to maim and kill our soldiers down range in Iraq and Afghanistan. I was there. I saw it. I lived it. I am still living it.
When Mikey Weinstein and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation describe this catastrophe of fundamentalist Christian usurpation of the command and control of our armed forces as a "national security threat of the gravest magnitude", they are precisely correct. It is injuring and killing our brave military members, specifically. It is desecrating the magnificent Constitution we swore an oath to, generally. And it is destroying our military's solidarity of purpose and ability to accomplish The Mission, completely.
I'm sure JD will be along any moment to tell us that this officer is lying because his experiences don't match up to the pretend world JD lives in.
Politics
Comments
Wow, that is a very powerful piece. Thanks for sharing that. Even as a 'military brat', not having served, but just having grown up around it the first half of my life, I could see the tone of the military changing towards more and more religiosity.
It's scary how far it's come. Scary because one of the comforts I've always considered a safeguard when it comes to the possibility of a military coup in the US is that most soldiers wouldn't, in good conscience, fire on civilians, or their fellow soldiers who were upholding the constitution. But things like this make me worry that if it's prevalent enough, there are enough who see the constitution as a (distant) second to a 'higher calling' that would allow for such action, and I have no doubts that it would be very, very violent.
The second amendment is fairly worthless when it comes to this sort of 'defense' too. Very few people own the kind of armament that is comparable to the military/police, and when it comes to heavier stuff, there's no contest.
Then again, the insurgents seem to do ok when it comes to fighting.
I doubt it will ever come to that, and I hope I'm right.
Posted by: FastLane | August 20, 2009 9:49 AM
Was I just lucky with the units I was in? I've racked my brain to try and remember instances of discrimination or proselytizing that maybe I’ve forgotten. In 11 years in uniform, the only time I can remember a superior officer even talking about religion was a battalion commander explaining that he went to church every Sunday because "Most of the troops are Christian, and it helps them to see their leaders as Godly." I didn't necessarily agree with the sentiment, but even then it was clearly portrayed as "this is my choice," not as any kind of directive. In fact I found it oddly comforting, since he'd essentially admitted he wasn't a believer himself.
Posted by: WScott | August 20, 2009 10:07 AM
Ed - this link might get forwarded around a bit so you might want to fix the clerical error you made in your portion of this blog post ("officer", not "office").
I find an oath that includes the words, "so help me God" to be blatantly anti-consitutional. If the oath-taker wants to add on to the oath fine, but it shouldn't be either written or expressed by the person administrating the oath. Personally I would place my hand on the Constitution and take my oath on that, with no expressions of God either. In fact, I find the modern-day Christianists who emphasize their god in their quote to be the very people most apt to violate and promote the violation of our Constitution, its principles, and its ideals.
This officer's testimony resonates. I do have a comment about this portion of the Captain's statement:
The evidence I've observed has me agreeing completely with the Captain regarding the gross violations against the Constitution and our military's mission. However, this officer should provide some evidence of his claim such unconstitutional behavior is specifically killing and injuring our military members. That's an extraordinary claim and should therefore be substantiated with compelling evidence. Perhaps he can do so in an email to Mikey Weinstein and a subsequent update to the blog post.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 20, 2009 10:10 AM
It's time to make it clear to the military that those who can't keep their religion in their pants need to find another job. But, of course, with the spineless appeasers of religion in Washington -- half or more of them delusional religious fanatics themselves -- that'll never happen. Makes one understand why the Founding Fathers distrusted standing armies.
Posted by: Woody Tanaka | August 20, 2009 10:11 AM
I've decided that in the current climate of religious fervor, it's no longer prudent to call myself an "atheist" or "agnostic" or "non-believer." Henceforth I am an "Ultra-Protestant."
...I protest the continued existence of religion and its power over our everyday lives.
Posted by: Squiddhartha | August 20, 2009 10:16 AM
-one of the comforts I've always considered a safeguard when it comes to the possibility of a military coup in the US is that most soldiers wouldn't, in good conscience, fire on civilians, or their fellow soldiers who were upholding the constitution-
Bless. Such innocence.
Posted by: Richard Eis | August 20, 2009 10:31 AM
I agree that it's very likely anti-consitutional, and from my perspective it's definitely annoying. Let's be clear, though: you do not have to say the "so help me God" portion of the oath. You don't.
I recently returned to service after a long enough seperation that I had to take the oath again. I signed my contract and then headed off to take the oath in the presence of an officer. As we walked down this hallway toward where the flag was, the 18-Delta shepherding me through the process asked me what my thoughts were concerning the "so help me God" portion of the oath. I informed him that I had no intention of "using that part." He nodded. When the officer, a Captain, joined us, my friend told him that we would be omitting the "so help me God" phrase. The Captain made some disparaging comment. I don't recall exactly what he said, but it was something to the effect of "Oh what, we're allowed to just remove god from the Army now?" I responded with something along the lines of "Actually, Sir, this isn't my first time taking this oath, and god has never been part of my Army." No further comment on the issue came from the good Captain. I took the oath.
Posted by: Josh | August 20, 2009 10:45 AM
I am not sure what evidence could be provided that actually shows that evangelical Christians running the show drives new recruits for terrorists, but I don't find the claim a stretch -- for instance, reference the video Ed posted a few months ago that was circulated on Al-Jazeera showing an Army bible study where they make the claim that they're hunting Muslims for Jesus. That's not a sentiment you should ever see in the Army, and is very counterproductive when we try to claim we're not running a Crusade.
Posted by: Paul | August 20, 2009 10:50 AM
Josh @ 7 - did the oath administrator voice "so help me God" and you ignored it, or did he omit that phrase as well as you?
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 20, 2009 10:51 AM
Josh,
As I understood it the issue is you sign a contract with the oath on it, which includes the God verbiage. Is this in error? How is signing it any different than saying it? Call me old fashioned, I would not want to sign my name to something I did not agree with.
Posted by: Paul | August 20, 2009 10:53 AM
Shit--sorry. That wasn't clear, was it? No, the Captain omitted the "so help me God" phrase after we had our little pre-oath discussion. When I made my snarky reply to him, he nodded and we moved on. He omitted the line.
That's right. You sign the contract and then "swear" the oath verbally. I did essentially what the Captain in this post did; drew a line through the offending phrase and appended initials. I did that after I took the oath, though. It was the last thing I did before turning in the paperwork.
Posted by: Josh | August 20, 2009 11:03 AM
Josh:
Thanks for your service, and thanks for "enlightening" the asshat brasshat. I'm so happy that sort of nonsense was never an issue when I was in the military.
Posted by: democommie | August 20, 2009 11:09 AM
Who is JD?
Posted by: valhar2000 | August 20, 2009 11:15 AM
I'm happy you didn't have to deal with it, either. Although I should shut up--as I've said before, I personally can't complain much. My unit appears to be very lightly tainted. Aside from the oath swearing* there was really just the one medal ceremony with the obnoxious opening prayer, and that conversation about the age of the earth with the Major**.
*And the guy who swore me in wasn't one of us; he was just some REMF.
**Which I didn't see as offensive or out of line on his part. It was just...funny and sad.
Posted by: Josh | August 20, 2009 11:24 AM
Josh - yes, thanks for your service!
Democommie - how often do you have to school others in sensitivity? I admit I'm still in remedial training.
valhar2000 - JD is a blogger who is strongly opposses the Constitution's Establishment Clause, though like other Liars for Jesus, refuses to respond to pointed questions when we expose his opposition in practice and policy to this clause. JD likes to show up in this forum and attempt to rebut blog posts about the Christianist movement within the military. His efforts to date have been comedically weak. He's particularly annoyed about Weinstein and Chris Rodda exposing the Christianist movement within the military and atttempts to portray this movement as either benign or non-existent.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 20, 2009 11:28 AM
That actually wasn't very nice. Remembering him pissed me off a little is all. Let me retract that and amend to:
Posted by: Josh | August 20, 2009 11:32 AM
@16:
HEY!
-- Joe S
Posted by: Joe S, FCD | August 20, 2009 12:28 PM
I served in the Army Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg as an enlisted soldier and then as an NCO (non-commissioned officer) and my experiences with the evangelical pervasiveness tainted every aspect of my military service.
When I first swore in, I said "so help me god", not because I was capitulating to the statement or sentiment, but because I was very overwhelmed with the procedures at the time. Once the paperwork started, things moved very quickly.
At basic training, I was in the first group of soldiers being trained in the new 9 week course. During that time, the drill sergeants alternately prayed with us, set up after hours bible studies and according to regulation, allowed us to go to services on Sunday. After the second week, I noticed that the soldiers who chose not to attend the bible studies were encouraged to go. Not revealing to them that I'd grown up in a christian family and had read the complete bible several times, and I'd attended a church that was essentially a cult (by the time I'd had my 7th exorcism at age 14... I started to grow skeptical of the whole thing). I'd left that church and had been excommunicated, along with my sister (we became "dead" to the church and no member would be allowed to fellowship with). This experience, fresh in my mind, made me determined not to attend the bible studies. I did, however attend church services and the after church bible study, because those were the only two places I could get some sleep. If I hadn't attended church, I would be waxing the barracks floor alone, until they'd all return. When I got my dog-tags issued, my religious status said "none". The poor girl didn't know what to do, no one had ever not claimed a religion in her time printing dog tags. She was sure I'd made a mistake, and I had to repeat several times, I do not belong to any religion.
When I attended AIT (advanced individual training) on Sundays, a retired special forces officer held a bible study, I was invited and politely refused. Every other soldier attended. Again, I was singled out. My company commander was an evangelical fundamentalist who took it upon himself to convert me. So, I attended the bible studies, but I didnt shy away from the tough questions. My chain of command could not find any problems with my abilities, my studies or even the cleanliness of my room, so my skills were spotless, but they constantly counselled me on my lack of "group cohesion", which I pointed out, was based on my lack of religion. My CO flatly said "yes". "You cant be a good soldier if you're not a Christian". I responded: "Good christians are taught to turn the other cheek, help the poor, repay evil with kindness... it seems to me that the core of military service is at odds with Jesus' teachings".
The one bright spot was that one of my drill sergeants pulled me aside and let me know that he was an atheist, and would make sure that only my skills and abilities were recorded, that I was a great soldier and that's all he cared about. He lauded my ability to stand up for myself, but said continually doing so would destroy any military career. He'd chosen to be quiet about it and just go with the flow.
After training, in my regular unit, again... I was actively sought out for conversion, for targeting and for recruitment into religious organizations. I kept asking questions, I kept being skeptical and I always challenged respectfully the assertations that were being presented to me. Again, I found help in my First Sergeant. My commander was again, an evangelical. My Fist Sergeant, an atheist made sure any unjust wrath was tempered with the fact that my scores and skills were above average.
I was an atheist, a democrat and there were more gay men and women in my unit and my battalion than there were atheists and democrats combined. Fortunately, I've got a pretty quick wit and can turn around a conversation to the point where they realize that I'm not a bad guy and we generally want the same things. Only my glibness and excellent recall of the scriptures saved my ass. Nevertheless, there were many times when the persecution reached illegal levels. I was denied food unless I would acknowledge the faith, I was disciplined through exercize until I said a prayer to make it stop, (just made me stronger though). I was called all sorts of names by my commanders and sergeants, and was ordered to go to church, ordered to speak to a chaplain (who I ended up being friends with because I was able to show him the path to my non-belief, I was able to show him where in the bible I couldnt bring myself to accept, and ultimately, made him agree with me that the bible couldn't be the standard for ultimate and infallible morality for accepting slavery). It was only through my education and knowledge that I was able to defend the assault on my lack of faith.
In all, yes, the military is rife with militant evangelism. There are real consequences and brutal men and women who will try to force you to see things their way. And there are those who will, silently most of the time, support you in ways that they can. I loved my job in the military, and I've since left. It's very true, you're more accepted as a gay solder than as an atheist... they just boot you out if you're gay, if you're an atheist, they cant... but they can use their power to try to beat you down every single day.
Posted by: Architeuthis | August 20, 2009 12:36 PM
Reading #18 is one of the more depressing things that has happened to me this week. I'm an NCO in a National Guard combat unit within USASOC (Special Operations Command; the same command Architeuthis was referencing in #18) and I've never seen anything as extreme as he was talking about. In fact, I get way more shit from the guys on my team for being a liberal democrat than for my lack of a faith. The thing is, even if Architeuthis's experiences were on one extreme end of the spectrum and mine were on the other, the midpoint between these two datapoints would still represent a climate that I'm not comfortable with.
Posted by: Josh | August 20, 2009 12:58 PM
I'm very thankful that my 4 years in the Navy weren't anything like that. I have always been a staunch skeptic, but don't remember the oath bothering me that much. My dog tags said NO REL PREF, and that's all that mattered to me. We never had any group prayer and I never encountered any evangelism. But my rate was a predominately educated one, and the Navy demo is quite different from the Army or the Marines. There is a higher percentage of educated people in the enlisted ranks, which always means less religious bullshit.
Posted by: Fletcher | August 20, 2009 12:59 PM
I wonder if you could get away with being a "Former Unitarian Christian Kid", but that probably wouldn't all fit on a dogtag and they would have to use an acronym.
Posted by: democommie | August 20, 2009 2:34 PM
In general, lying is presenting false factual statements. This anonymous officer appears to recount only opinions and personal experieces from his own perspective. There's nothing wrong with that. I do think its irresponsible to make the leap to Christian influence in the military killing Americans, but he's free to make such unsubstantiated accusations.
I do question Brayton's summary, however, that says this shows:
The officer mentions only a single instance of Christian influence, that of a prayer; the response to his actions had nothing to do with the officer's own faith. How does that translate into a career of constant badgering by Christians?
Posted by: JD | August 20, 2009 2:46 PM
Aaaaaaaaaaand here he is.
Posted by: Rick R | August 20, 2009 2:49 PM
So, JD, like all theocrats you're a lying sack of shit. You didn't even bother to READ the damn thing! They persecuted this man for his religon, violated protocol, made false reports, and declared anti-semitism as official U.S. Army policy. They accused a soldier of wanting his fellow troops to die because he didn't participate in an unconstitutional cult ritual on government time! What kind of sick fuck are you that you think this sort of thing is okay? Or is it just that the promotion of your death cult matters more to you than the Constitution or the safety of our soldiers?
Get the fuck out of my country you traitorous swine!
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 20, 2009 3:05 PM
JD-
Your reading skills seem to have a serious deficiency. He mentions multiple instances throughout his career, beginning with having his initial oath signature refused because he crossed out "so help me God." After that he describes being:
1. Ordered to eat a pork chop despite being Jewish.
2. Being written up as anorexic for refusing to eat the pork chop.
3. Having his complaint about that outrageous behavior dismissed by a superior officer because "the Army is not in the business of catering to people like you."
4. Being "confronted with being forced/coerced to partake in involuntary prayer" on a "regular basis."
5. Being recommended to lose his position as platoon leader because he did not participate in prayer because this sent a message that he wants his solders to die.
6. Having an NCO at the Equal Opportunity Office rat him out to his commanding officer for having filed a complaint, in violation of military rules.
Yep, that's only a "single instance." And the commenter at #18 left several more examples from his own experience. And MRFF has received more than 10,000 such complaints from active duty military personnel, most of them from Christians. But there's no problem here, move along. Nothing to see here.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | August 20, 2009 3:08 PM
All this public prayer crap is not only unconstitutional, it's un-Christian. Ref. Matthew 6:5 - 7
I am so tired of Christians ignoring this most essential, explicit and basic instruction from Jesus regarding the practice of their faith.
Posted by: ag | August 20, 2009 3:26 PM
I'm sure glad that my Navy did not have this problem while I was a career vet and a combat veteran during Viet Nam. There were only a couple of chaplins that I ever saw and that was only a hi and then I moved on in 21 years. I sure hope that this problem has not invaded the Navy.
Oh yes, I did serve with the Army's Fires Recon for one tour in Viet Nam and never saw this problem
Posted by: James Funk | August 20, 2009 3:26 PM
Your strongest and most potent allies in fighting this bigotry are probably the Catholics in the armed forces. If you have a catholic chaplin, you should approach him and point this out.
Minority religions like Judaism and Islam have little chance. But, Catholics have enormous political clout. I also urge you to share this with the Chairman of the Senate Arned Services Comittee, Carl Levin. He's Jewish, and I assure you he will take this very seriously.
Posted by: Hesiod | August 20, 2009 3:26 PM
I really wonder what kind of response any military person would get if he/she responded to the pressure to be an evangelical "Christian" using Roman Catholic theology. I mean, the very concept of bible study is antithetical to the Roman Catholic religion (we study the bible through the priest), but I can't imagine a very positive reception to some version of "sorry, but you're a heretic and a blasphemer and I will go to Hell if I follow your religion."
Posted by: CPT_Doom | August 20, 2009 3:30 PM
Architeuthis, your post depressed me more than anything I've read since...well, since I finished the letter in the original post. May I ask you long ago this took place?
Posted by: WScott | August 20, 2009 3:30 PM
I think it's about time America in general grew up. This is the 21st century, we should have gotten rid of this witchcraft nonsense generations ago. It is frightening that the same people that control massive amounts of nuclear weapons in the name of "freedom" also believe in fairies. I don't see the difference between what we're reading here and any of the third world religious fanatics. And if you are ready to answer "Americans don't kill in the name of religion" I suggest you take a look down South.
Posted by: Peter Scargill | August 20, 2009 3:33 PM
Ed,
Let's talk about reading skills. For your examples 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6, when does the officer in question ever say that a Christian was responsible? I'll help you out: he doesn't. A member of the military is quite capable of, say, persecuting a person of the Jewish faith without having to be a Christian to do it.
You have applied to Christians something that even the author did not. Was he persecuted? Absolutely, but one does not have to be a Christian to persecute.
Your #6 is wrong. The Army rules regarding the complaint he filed do not allow an anonymous submission, and they specifically say they will be referred to the commander. See AR 600-20. It might not sound fair, but those are the rules. It has nothing to do with Christianity.
A careful reading of the missive indicates that the officer was ordered to attend a mission briefing in a combat area. That's not the kind of briefing you "quietly walk away" from. The officer characterizes the situation as one in which the only complaint was his failure to participate in the prayer, but that ignores the decision to leave a mission brief before being dismissed. We only have this author's characterization of the events. There is likely more to the story.Posted by: JD | August 20, 2009 3:36 PM
I was a Marine for 7 years, and as a rather tight nit group, while I had many discussions with my fellow Marines about my lack of faith, I was never put down or singled out for it.
If anything It was more of a mild curiosity.
I had a similar MRE pork incident when I was in boot camp, but my Drill Instructor was counseled for that not me.
However, when I spent a year with a joint task force run by the Army, I experienced a lot of problems.
Luckily I didn't face much in the way of "official" persecution, but there was plenty of tension in the air.
Interestingly, the one person I was able to go talk to and get these things off my chest was the chaplain, who actually had a really interesting take on Christianity: Aesthetics are more likely to get into heaven because the actions they take are for the sake of doing right instead of to score points for the afterlife, and doing the right is what it means to "take Jesus into your heart"
But that is another story for another day.
Yes religious persecution exists, and is entirely unacceptable but from my personal, and somewhat limited experience, it seems to be much more prevalent in the Army than the Navy and Marines. I have no idea where the Air Force falls in.
Posted by: Mini Marine | August 20, 2009 3:53 PM
JD@32,
There may indeed be more to the story and its very likely just as depressing. There's also more to the 10,000 other complaints too. Care to call all of them distortions too?
BTW, What part of studying the christian bible makes you not a christian? All these bozos pushing fundamental christian beliefs are, wait for it....christians ....and assholes. I guess you belong in that camp as well.
Posted by: MikeMa | August 20, 2009 3:53 PM
As a Christian, I am so sorry for the way this Captain has been treated. And I apologize to anyone who is being antagonized for their religious (or non-religious) belief. Jesus told us to spread His news to the world, and to live our lives in such a way that would reflect well on His name. We were NOT told to harass or intimidate anyone. If those "Christians" truly loved Christ, they would have gone the extra mile to be respectful to the Captain, not hateful toward him. I don't know what else to say, except that you are absolutely right to be angry about such behavior. Thank you for your service to this country, and again, I apologize for what you've been put through.
Posted by: VirginiaJeff | August 20, 2009 3:53 PM
I have to call "bullsh!t" on this, simply because none of it rings true to me.
This part, especially:
"What has most surprised me about this struggle is how utterly powerless I am as a Captain- a Command level Officer- to stand up for my rights and for the Constitution and Country I love. I am a great Soldier, a great leader, and a great person, and I am a victim. It is not comfortable to admit one is a victim; I believe that admitting it takes a certain type of personal strength."
Well, if you were any kind of an officer, you'd know that the Company Commander, in almost all cases, an O-3 or Captain, is the most important and most powerful leader in the entire United States Army--all other ranks, commands, and everyone else, is support.
It's called an Inspector General. If the religious aspect of serving in the military freaks you out that bad, you go talk to an IG. Or, you do what anyone with a lick of common sense would do, and you go talk to a chaplain of the Jewish faith--the IG and chaplain are some pretty powerful individuals as well within the United States Army. Oh, and every chaplain in the US Army has an enlisted man or woman in an assistant position who is trained to WATCH the chaplain and report any UCMJ violations--as in, tell the chain of command that Padre so-and-so is proselytizing and breaking regulations, and the like. No one gets that--NCOs keep officers from stepping on their you-know-what. Where was this good Captain's NCOs? Likely, rolling their eyes at what a freak show he was. There is no "conspiracy" to turn our soldiers into automatons of killing for Jesus. That's a construct of paranoid, misguided, ill-informed, never-served-in-the-military, anti-religious bias.
See, this is what no one understands about the US Army--it is NOT a top-down power structure. Everyone, from the private to the general, has real power to stand up to whoever is trying to get them to do something they don't want to do. Anyone with any kind of spine, or conviction of belief, or the ability to articulate what they believe in, can push back against the system, push back against their chain of command, and ultimately stand up for themselves.
Oh, and if the good Captain is still too stupid to have understood that, he could have written his Congressman. That works, too.
But, please. Spare me this anti-religious nonsense. Every time someone with the inability to be accountable for their own failure inside the Army runs up against something they don't like, everyone else is at fault, everyone else is the problem, and it was "my lack of being all religious" that prevented me from getting a good OER and getting kicked up to Major or prevented me from being "accepted." No, it was your own inability to serve alongside people from all walks of life. Subtract the "religious" aspect of this, and substitute being forced to eat "Mexican food" and you see how ridiculous this really is, as in, "if I didn't eat the taco, my supervisor promised me that the chorizo I would get next week would have a bomb in it." Cue involuntary shudder of horror!
Cowboy up, jackass. If you don't like the religious crap, you don't have to take it, period. Quit acting like someone was trying to spoon castor oil down your gullet. Actual soldiers who are in the know can spot this from a country mile away.
And, yes, I used to catch all kinds of hell for being a Democrat.
Posted by: Private Joker | August 20, 2009 4:01 PM
Wow, JD, so you are just going to deny that any christians were involved in all this? You're just going to pretend that the countless complaints about officially mandated christian prayers and persecution by explicitly christian officers never happened? Are you seriously trying to pretend there's some secret non-christian cabal running the military and trying to frame christians by persecuting non-christians in exactly the ways christian radicals have explicitly endorsed?
Your careful reading is nothing more or less than a complete denial of the actual circumstances. Anyone with a shred of honesty could see this is unconstitutional and wrong, but of course you don't have a shred of honesty, honesty is against your religion.
If the Captain who wrote this came here and explicitly told you that the people doing this were christians, labeled as such on their dog tags and explicitly invoking the name of jesus to defend their crimes, would you admit that there's a problem? Or would you just flee in abject terror from reality? I think the answer to that question is obvious. You will forgive any atrocity in the name of your cult, distort reality any way you can to promote your delusions, and you will never feel the slightest remorse, because you have torn out your conscience and empathy to make room for theocratic psychosis.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 20, 2009 4:06 PM
Private Joker, I'm guessing you completely missed the fact that he reported this to EOO, and they ignored protocol (and I suspect, federal law) to rat him out. Surely, you must not have read that part, because the only other explanation for what you say is that you're lying through your teeth.
This guy tried to push back against the chain of command. All he got for it was betrayal. The system is infested with sick bastards Lying For Jesus.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 20, 2009 4:13 PM
it makes perfect sense to me that the most hardcore "jesus lovers" want to run the world's most efficient killing machine.
Posted by: ron | August 20, 2009 4:20 PM
JD:
I'm still waiting for you to answer my question about whether you are doing this shit from a gummint computer or on gummint time. Additionally; didn't I ask you if your bullshit apologia was being done, publicly, as a member of the U.S. Armed Forces? I don't really care that you're a lying rat, there's tons of you "Liars for JESUS" out there, but if you're doing it while you're in the same uniform that I used to wear, well that pisses me off a bit.
So, man up, dude, what's your answer?
Posted by: democommie | August 20, 2009 4:25 PM
(It's me, the Christian guy again.) To the posters here who think all the Captain needed to do was to report bad behavior up the chain of command: I never served in the military, but I've worked for a couple of large corporations, and I suspect the "group think" is similar. Corporations tell employees to take any complaints like his up the chain to our supervisors or to Human Resources. How well does that work? Well, just look at how many sexual harassment lawsuits have successfully gone to trial. The plaintiffs invariably testify they followed the complaint process, only to end up being driven out of their jobs! One HR person was honest enough to put it to me this way: "Employees think we're here to protect them. We're not; we're here to do everything in our power to protect the status quo."
Posted by: VirginiaJeff | August 20, 2009 4:27 PM
What a scary country
Posted by: Bob | August 20, 2009 4:32 PM
Thank God I was in the army 25 years ago. There was none of this shit going on then.
Now ahem:
PVT Joker you had better pull your head out of your ass before you are all 1's on your EER. I was A PSNCO (admin flunky)and the minute an IG or congressional inquiry would hit the brigade HQ and then down to the corresponding battalion and company the guy who filed it from then on out was persona non grata and doomed. This CPT would have had an officers evaluation report that guaranteed he would be counting blankets in Alaska until he resigned his commission.
I am pretty damned agnostic and generally hate organized religion but if you have been paying any attention the news you would read about constant proselytizing in the service academies and investigations about it on capitol hill.
Better brace up troop.
Posted by: Joel Titman | August 20, 2009 4:36 PM
@Private Joker
Have you actually served in the armed forces?
I'm not quite sure how you can call someone who has made graduated from West Point and made it to the rank of Captain a "failure" if that is a failure I'm curious as to what your definition of success would be.
Guess what its not quite as easy as you make it out to be to "push back" against the chain of command.
I actually got demoted for pushing back. I won't bother getting into the specifics, but when the scheduled my NJP, it was done specifically when all those who could actually testify on my behalf were away on other assignments.
I got my rank back eventually, but the entire incident is the reason I chose not to reenlist.
Posted by: Mini Marine | August 20, 2009 4:42 PM
To all reading who have and do serve: Thank you for risking all you care about so that I can freely exercise a faith protected by the US Constitution. You swore to uphold it, and you walk the talk everyday you show up for work. You would lay down your life to save mine, the same as Jesus did for all of humanity. I couldn't be more thankful to either of you. I hope you can forgive those who claim to represent Jesus, but treat you with anything but love. God is as disappointed in them as you are, but I would offer that none among us is without sin of some sort.
Posted by: Dumplin | August 20, 2009 5:00 PM
What? I dunno what Army you served in, sport, but whereas I agree with you about the top-down portion of your comment, here I don't know what you're on about. You have the ability to not follow an unlawful order*. That is a lot different from "pushing-back" against someone who is trying to "make you do something you don't want to do."
*And if you think that the line between a lawful order and an unlawful order is clear in combat, then I suspect that you've never been shot at.
Posted by: Josh | August 20, 2009 5:01 PM
I have a good friend that is a Chaplin in the Air Force Reserve. He is a very liberal Methodist pastor in civilian life. He has told me at length about the very real problems in the Chaplin corp. The fundies are taking over and seems to be part of a plan. There are far less Rabbis, Catholics and old main stream protestants than ever before. He has been told he is not christian enough, blah, blah, blah...several times and encouraged to resign. He has been to Iraq twice and Afghanistan once. On his last tour he opted for Guam as he was fed up with the religious politics.
Posted by: Haplogroup V | August 20, 2009 5:11 PM
This is disturbing to me. I am a nurse and am in the process of applying to a RN position in the USAF. I am an atheist. I have been wondering if the USAF will treat me fairly in regards to my atheism? Any ideas or comments?
Posted by: Apearoo | August 20, 2009 5:15 PM
A Fundamentalist Christian Military? This would be one of the major reasons President Obama has neglected his campaign promise to eliminate the restrictions on gay people serving. He was told the Christians (the very command structure) wouldn't accept it. And he said, OK. Nevermind then.
Posted by: Glenn I | August 20, 2009 5:20 PM
I am a nurse and currently in the beginning stages of my application to the USAF to be a RN for them. I am also an atheist. After reading this blog I am beginning to wonder if i will even stand a chance there. I am not willing to "go thru the motions" of pretending to be Christian. Any ideas for me? Can an atheist nurse thrive and advance?
Posted by: Apearoo | August 20, 2009 5:43 PM
J.D.
A "careful reading of the missive" indicates that the officer did attend the briefing as ordered and did not simply "quietly walk away from the briefing." The Captain says, "The briefing concluded with a soldier being ordered to lead the group in prayer." The briefing was over and I don't believe that anyone should be forced to listen to someone's prayer at the close of an official meeting/briefing. Furthermore, "a soldier was ordered to lead the group in prayer" -- I can only imagine what kind of prayer that might have been from a layperson who was ordered to produce an extemporaneous "prayer." Except where we choose to hear them, we all have a right to be exempt from listening to someone else's pre-prescribed holy noises (especially in a pluralistic, institutional, government environment). We Christians might fare better if we practiced the "less is more" concept of public conduct. Jesus said, "Let your yes be yes and your no be no." And, of course, he admonished us to go to our private place and pray. The explosion of an "in your face" evangelical fundamentalism is contrary to the core concept of the Gospel and it shows an ignorance of 2,000 years of mainline Church history.
Your attempt to relieve "Christians" of any responsibility for the Captain's dilemma smacks of a coquettish verbal playfulness and is disengenuous from beginning to end.
Posted by: CAPT Norm Holcomb, CHC, USN (Ret) | August 20, 2009 5:54 PM
Took a Private Joker to make such an hilariously true-in-utopia/delusional-in-practice comment.
Posted by: Foggg | August 20, 2009 6:01 PM
Dumplin @ 45 - your post would ring a little more true if evangelicals had pressure within their faith community to reform to acting with integrity. However, from my vantage point this community is becoming ever more strident, delusional, dishonest, and willing to use government power in a way in direct contradiction to the Constitution and its inherent principles. So while the sentiments are nice, the actions speak volumes, have been going in the opposite direction of your sentiments, and have been since at least the 1970s.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 20, 2009 6:07 PM
I really have to wonder if "private joker" is joking. When I served the idea of arguing or fighting just about anything short of shooting unarmed prisoners was almost laughable. Sure, you could do it, and I knew who to talk to, etc., but to do so, as has been pointed out, would make your life so miserable you might as well just give up and not reenlist.
The penalties for speaking up could be as simple as the worst duty sections, as bad as having your eval torched or reenlistment held up. Worse yet, you piss off the wrong person and your discharge could be held up by "accident" for weeks or months.
Fortunately for me, I never ran into anything like what the good Captain describes, but that was twenty years ago. It seems like a rather sad and sorry state of affairs in our current department of defense. I've run into some family friends and friends of friends who are truly obnoxious KKKristians and are in the military. I could see them, NCOs and commissioned officers, using their authority to try to convert the "unfaithful" given that they have tried to do so with me in random passing circumstances.
Back when I was in the military, odds are good I would have just kept my head down and plodded along. Today, I'd last about ten minutes before I'd likely tell the guy where he could stuff his invisible man in the sky.
Posted by: dogmeatib | August 20, 2009 6:19 PM
In my branch of service (USMC) and during my time (1979-2000) this insidious fundamentalism was not particularly prevalent, although there were certain obnoxious exceptions--including the only military chaplain I ever came to despise (a Catholic and a Navy 06...sorry, Capt Norm).
In an increasingly diverse US military, efforts to mandate a single religion, or any religion for that matter, can only be highly prejudicial to good order and discipline.
Posted by: Shay | August 20, 2009 6:19 PM
Shay:
No problem. I probably knew the chaplain of whom you speak and may have had a similar assessment. I was an enlisted Marine for 6 years and a Navy Chaplain for 30 years. Most of my time as a chaplain was with Marine units. Any chaplain who can't get along with Marines is a jerk. Marines love and take care of their chaplains. Even when they have a bad chaplain they don't mistreat him - they just ignore him and let him go his own way. By the way, there have been times that I was ashamed of being a chaplain because of the actions of another chaplain or chaplains. However, I can say without reservation that I have never been ashamed of being a United States Marine. Semper Fi!
Posted by: CAPT Norm Holcomb, CHC, USN (Ret) | August 20, 2009 6:30 PM
I was an Army enlisted man in the early 60s.
I recall a couple of Christian chaplains who were functional, but clinically insane.
Posted by: Gilrod | August 20, 2009 6:43 PM
Just as I thought--
Everyone is convinced something is happening, no one realizes that if this officer had been an officer with a spine, he would have been just fine in the long run. Did you stop to realize that maybe, just maybe, they were testing his mettle to see if he would crack? Funny how a SOCOM unit would do that.
EOO is a joke. EOO is laughed up and down the hall if the complaint has no merit. You go to POST IG or nothing. Unit IG accomplishes little or nothing. You use the chain until the chain blocks you, then you're left with the chaplain/congressman route. If you can't take the heat, get the fk out.
Last time I checked, the strip on the uniform said US ARMY. You know? The one across the tit? Somehow the idea that there is a secret Jeeeezus killing mosheen army don't ring true.
Yes, I did serve in the military, and no, my head is not up my ass. I have participated in the "pushback" which much weaker people here have obviously been to afraid to engage in and it worked wonders. Ever heard of how a chaplain was the catalyst for bringing soldiers who committed rape and murder in Vietnam to justice? Probably not--blows the whole "bias" against the military and the desperate, desperate desire to believe the absolute worst. Privates get NCOs and officers relieved all the time. Look it up.
In my brigade, as an example, a very highly placed female E-7 began a systematic campaign of proselytizing and posting information about the bizaare Christian/fundamentalist sect that she belonged to throughout the common areas, going to far as to "recruit" people and post the weird-assed quasi-profound religious material on the door of her office in Brigade headquarters.
She was able to do that just as long as it took someone with a pair to stand up to her and she was out of the recruiting for Jeeezus job within days.
What this is really about is personal failure. If you think a private in the Army has no power, ask the Drill Sergeants who are still in Leavenworth who took raw recruits and sexually harrassed them. Ask the bird colonel with the couch full of bribe money who got caught because someone had the temerity to start asking questions about his lifestyle.
Success or failure in the US Army is based on your ability to assert yourself properly before lawful authority, and bend that authority to your will. If you haven't got the skills to do that, you end up like a ring knocker who couldn't square being a soldier with not being a pain in the ass to be around.
I can't help it you're biased. I had a blast in the Army. I had NCOs and officers over a barrel because I remembered one thing I was told in basic training--I knew where the MOS library was.
Eat your tacos and STFU...
Posted by: Private Joker | August 20, 2009 6:46 PM
@joker
Sorry, "PVT" but you are the most uninformed brig lawyer I have ever heard rant.
How many congressionals were you involved in? What was your MOS? I watched 2 drills beat the shit out of a recruit and not damn thing happened to them. The recruit got his act together. How many IG inquiries did you lodge and then how many times did you pull motor pool waste oils pit duty for it?
Sorry man you are so full of latrine lawyer crap you forgot to flush.
Posted by: Joel Titman | August 20, 2009 7:01 PM
JD continues to make it clear that he is:
1) opposed to defending the Constitution, particularly government's (read: military) violation of the establishment clause in order to better market his sect's beliefs,
2) opposed to defending the Constitution, particularly government's (read: military) violation of the religious freedom clauses, where he freely supports violating military members' freedom of conscience rights in spite of the fact they're willing to lay down their life to defend our rights, and
3) a liar.
I find JD as contemptible of an American as a child abuser such as David Barton.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 20, 2009 7:14 PM
This (original) post has been making the rounds in the military/veteran blog-o-sphere, specially among the progressive and peace-mongering types.
My experience of eight years in the army leads me to believe the 'missive' part and parcel. Prayer was thrown about for every occasion - only christies spoke and then most often only fundie-flavored. No Jew or Muslim ever said word one of faith in a group setting.
I am a member of the church or the holy "no preference" and was almost always ridiculed by command and their minions whenever dogtags were issued or benefits forms filled out. Being a homo was a lesser evil than being a non-christie. That was a sin they could love you for - as opposed to being a 'denier' or a *quiet* cross-hanger-lover whom they could not tolerate.
Like other posters here I had a strong religious up-bringing. I was exposed to other faiths and was expected to accept followers of those faiths as my brothers and sisters. That expectation made me woefully under-prepared for the cruci-centric military I joined. I thought the uniform would unify and that we'd all act like we were part of the 'big green army family' at dawn and thru to dusk. I was wrong and I was never allowed to forget how wrong my non-out-loud faith was.
These same folksy folks are the ones shouting down our senators and representatives about health care. They are the same loud, vociferous, rude folks who follow 'mavericks' down memory lane. They are the ones who will wail loudest and cry foul against their own fellow citizens when the next attack against our country comes. They will point fingers and blame the people who tried to work facts and science and diplomacy back into the fabric of our republic. They will always win in the kingdoms of their tiny minds - because they are *right* and the rest of the world is made up of merely lowly sinners.
Luckily for them they believe in heaven and hell - and when their god finds out how truly terrible they've been to their fellows here on earth - they will burn a special smoky, charred sort of burn that the rest of us will not have to witness.
Posted by: A.G. Flynn | August 20, 2009 7:19 PM
NCO's and officers over a barrel? POG...try pushing back in the infantry. Actually I doubt you pushed back anywhere...well you might have, but I doubt you had much of a career.
EO complaints...most of the time they are a joke, because it's some sick call ranger or barracks lawyer trying to work the system. EO has to have much lower standards of evidence to start an investigation. They seldom go far though because while the initial standards are low, due to the commmon circumstances surrounding real EO complaints, they are just a thorough when it comes time to actual file paperwork. IG on the other hand can have higher standards when it comes to starting an investigation.
"Pushing back" against your chain of command and NCO support channel is not the way to an Army career, anyone who says different is a liar.
Posted by: Laen | August 20, 2009 7:23 PM
In case you all missed it, there was book published very recently titled "The Family" which documents why this shouldn't be considered an accidental thing. We need to be seriously concerned right now about a potential right-wing coup. It is VERY disconcerting to see how far this fundamentalist take-over of our military has gone.
It can happen here. And it will, if we don't stop it.
Posted by: tmaxPA | August 20, 2009 7:24 PM
Chaplain Holcomb-
Your belief is certainly valid, but it ignores the reality. A subordinate cannot leave a mission brief of their own volition. A mission brief, which likely covers combat operations, is not something you walk out of without authorization.
In some situations the officer's decision to walk out might be acceptable. In a mission brief, it is not negotiable. People get sent home for that kind of thing.
I make no such attempt. We can only base our conclusions on the limited text available, and in it the author does not assert that Christians were responsible for all of the mistreatment--he only asserts that the mistreatment occurred.For example, to assume or assert that a person who persecutes a Jewish soldier must be a Christian is as bigoted a viewpoint as that shown by the perpetrator himself. Christianity is not a boogeyman.
Ironically, I recently compared this situation to Klingenschmitt. He characterized his situation as one of persecution when secular issues were at play, and this situation is headed the same way. People are reading religion into what are not necessarily religious issues.
For example, leaving a formation without permission is grounds for punishment, irrespective of religion. The EO NCO appeared to follow the regulations, not violate them; there is no evidence he was part of a Christian conspiracy.
I don't necessarily disagree with your perspective on "less is more" with regard to Christianity, but that's not what we're talking about here. I am not defending the actions of the accused; I am merely pointing out the faulty conclusions of the accusers. It's amazing how easily we go from an "offensive" prayer to Christianity being responsible for the deaths of American soldiers.
Posted by: JD | August 20, 2009 7:24 PM
Discrimination happens. What makes this such a hot topic, like all the other pseudo-moral issues, is our (national)claim about being the champions of freedom and equality. There seems to be a lot of folks out there who think freedom means "recess never ends".
It takes a certain kind of rubbery spine to live comfortably as a hypocrite. Those of us who believe in the founding principles we served to protect, and like to read and think, are sometimes disappointed.
There's also a lot of folks out there trying really hard to be "not" stuff, like racist or misogynist. The intention is good, but other honorable goals like trying to be a decent open-minded, loyal, humble, person have gotten lost along the way.
Gustav Hasford is spinning in his grave over the use of his character's name by such an obvious pogue-lifer. And there can be no other term for someone who claims that a chain of command is not a top-down organ in a hierarchical institution. Only someone who not only drank the koolaid but bathes in it could deny the pitfalls and shortcomings of our military and just about any other organization.
The point of the oath for me was acknowledging that there's something out there much bigger than me, the Milky Way, democracy with a capital D, or even God-something deserving respect and hell maybe even worth dying for. Clearly, we need a subcommittee to come up with a list of terms that's inclusive and won't offend anyone.
Until we reconcile our rabid worship of individualism with our alleged concern for human rights (other than our own), the silliness will endure.
Posted by: Al | August 20, 2009 7:25 PM
How many congressionals were you involved in?
Two-1 involving abuse of a female NCO by supervisors at GITMO and 1 involving lack of basic hygiene/etc. in substandard barracks.
Both resolved in favor of 1. forcing chain of command to provide for care of said NCO and no further actions allowed to be taken against her and 2. barracks were squared away in less than 30 days, 1SG relieved, apologies were delivered to soldiers.
What was your MOS?
I was a soldier, pops. Calm down.
I watched 2 drills beat the shit out of a recruit and not damn thing happened to them.
Then YOU should be in the brig because you didn't protect your fellow soldier. It's called having a pair. Don't admonish me--I would have ensure that that troop would have gotten taken care of and the drills put in said Leavenworth. You FAILED in your basic duty as a soldier, which is to take care of your buddy. Your lack of character and absence of personal conviction translates into a raging, powerless little person incapable of doing anything right when it counts.
The recruit got his act together. How many IG inquiries did you lodge and then how many times did you pull motor pool waste oils pit duty for it?
3 IG inquiries, all related to preferential treatment and abuse of power by a Company Commander, whose career was ended because he lost over $30K in gear overseas because he didn't reconcile his hand receipts--Article 32 hearing took care of that.
I've been to chaplains, I've stood at attention for over an hour and been screamed at--it's hilarious. You have to have something to go to bat for. When you do, you go to bat for it. I'm not talking frivolous stuff like the Captain whined about above. I'm talking about stuff that counts, people being abused, mistreated and given unlawful orders and sensitive items going missing.
The other complaint centered around classified material. Won't talk about that.
Sorry man you are so full of latrine lawyer crap you forgot to flush.
It's called being a barracks lawyer, and if that's what you think, that's on you.
Had you had the balls to stand up for your fellow troop, you wouldn't be so impotent and full of rage. Me? Me, I'm all smiles. I don't wonder about nothing.
Posted by: Private Joker | August 20, 2009 7:27 PM
Oh yeah - to PJoker and the others here who hide out.... easy to talk/post/rant when your name is not an issue, right? Where's the spine you talk about? Only using it to hang your asshole upon?
Step up and post with your name/IP or similar spine apparatus.
Or stuff your pork, pork your stuff and STFU.
Posted by: A | August 20, 2009 7:30 PM
I just feel this way about it. If anyone has an issue with me being an atheist, then I'm sure, when it comes time for me to be deployed (again) I'm sure they can find some one else to go in my place.
I don't see that happening.
Yes, I too remember a time when these incidents would have resulted in the person pushing religion on someone to get a counseling statement. And if they continued to do so, be sent to counseling.
Sadly, those times seem to have passed.
However, should the US resort to a draft, as I feel it should have after 9-11, then with a broad mixture of people being brought into the military, these incidents would be greatly reduced.
Remember, during such things as Vietnam, Korea, WWII, you had a draft. People were there in the service who didn't want to be. It makes a different military.
And really, do you think a bible thumper really wants to O.S a troop who has a weapon, ammo, explosives and so on, with you, in a combat zone?
I think not.
But I also know there are those who wear their religion like a coat. They take it off when they walk through the front door of their home and hang it up.
Posted by: Rick Chester | August 20, 2009 7:32 PM
and you are claiming that you started these article 32 hearings and how in the hell would you have control of an O-3's hand receipts unless you were the company supply SGT?
Answer the MOS or branch question.
The 'cruit deserved the beating. In my army if you sassed an NCO you got what you deserved. What punk ass army did you serve in?
Neither one of those examples are "personal" to you. If you had substandard barracks the IG would inspect without naming any certain troop and hell I want to see any NCO that would stand around and take harrasment from anyone.
Sorry I think you are talking out of your ass.
Posted by: Joel Titman | August 20, 2009 7:53 PM
Despite the fact that the only reason why anyone knows what happened at Abu Ghraib is because a SPC went against his chain of command, risked his life, and did the right thing--everyone is convinced that sort of thing CANNOT happen in the Army.
Despite the fact that the only reason anyone knows anything about the murder, abuse, and torture of detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq is because soldiers stood up to their chain of commmand, everyone is convinced that CANNOT happen in the Army.
Despite the fact that proselytizing is against the regulations and is regularly stopped by simply filing complaints against it, everyone is convinced it CANNOT be stopped in the Army.
It goes on and on. The "widely-held convictions" of a few equals a bias you're never going to shake. And on a science blog, no less. Hilarious.
>>>Oh yeah - to PJoker and the others here who hide out.... easy to talk/post/rant when your name is not an issue, right? Where's the spine you talk about? Only using it to hang your asshole upon?
Step up and post with your name/IP or similar spine apparatus.
Or stuff your pork, pork your stuff and STFU.
Posted by: A | August 20, 2009 7:30 PM
...said the furious little man behind the letter A. Lighten up, Francis. You're going to have a stroke.
Wow. DO NOT CHALLENGE anything on a science blog. Orthodoxy rules, and anything you say or do that contravenes the accepted beliefs held by some really serious and violent practitioners of classic Internet Tough Guy posturing--yowza.
Sorry, been to Forts Drum, Hood, Benning, Jackson, Campbell and Myer and I've seen just enough of the Army to know that successful soldiers stand up to the chain of command, do the right thing, and believe in themselves. Failures rage against commenters on a blog thread.
Posted by: Pvt Joker | August 20, 2009 8:00 PM
J.D.
I certainly understand the importance of being dismissed from a formation, especially a formation where a briefing of combat importance is occurring. However, notice that the Commander did not complain/counsel the Captain for leaving the formation. According to the Captain, "My Commander explained that, by not bowing my head in blatantly Christian Prayer with the others, I was sending a message that I 'want my soldiers to die.'" We need more information to understand what that phrase means or intends to mean. Nevertheless, it appears that the Commander's disquietude was not with stepping out of the formation but with the Captain's failure to participate in the prayer by his presence. If the prayer was ordered by a Commander who was a Christian, and prayed by a soldier who was a Christian, it seems to me that it would be difficult to remove the influence of Christianity from this issue. At any rate, there is no suggestion that the Commander was concerned that merely leaving the formation was a primary disciplinary issue.
You are good at wordsmithing, J.D. and it is laborious to exchange ideas with you. Nevertheless, based on my many years of experience I know you very well. Are you/were you a member of Officer's Christian Fellowship? Chicanery and cleverly disguised obfuscation of obvious truth are not characteristics that I find flattering in a Christian. I am one who believes in prayer and has prayed every day of my life for the past 40 years; however, I boldly state that there is no place for prayers of any kind in command directed, non-voluntary military events. They serve no purpose and are mere rituals that have long since lost any meaning. Moreover, they represent an arrogance that fails to respect the dignity of those claim no faith or who claim a faith other than that represented in someone's sectarian prayer.
Posted by: CAPT Norm Holcomb, CHC, USN (Ret) | August 20, 2009 8:03 PM
I served in the army for five years and attended West Point Prep (USMAPS) at Fort Monmouth for a year. (Opted out of going on to USMA at the end of that year.) I loved my time in the Army and USMAPS in particular, but this officer's experiences strike me as pretty honest. And to be honest, if I were his friend serving with him at the time I would have just advised him to quit causing himself so much trouble fighting these battles he can never win.
At USMAPS, I vividly recall that some of the cadet candidates discovered one of our peers was a (gasp!) Wiccan. Word quickly spread about how this young woman was a devil worshipper and she was more or less drummed out of there pretty quickly.
As far as the overt Christianity, I always found it fairly irritating as well. You're just expected to go along with it and shut your mouth no matter how inappropriate it is to have prayers all the time. Personally I could deal with respectfully standing by while my fellow soldiers and more often the civilian staff felt compelled to pray at some event. The only problem was that I knew how downright shady and completely immoral so many of these bible thumpers were in their every day lives. I've never met a more scandalous bunch of adulterers in my life!!! hahah.
Posted by: jk | August 20, 2009 9:17 PM
I was a Submarine vet and this kind of forced religious coercion didn't really exist on the boat or even on the Sub base. Sure there were your religious zealots but the strong science and engineering backgrounds required of Sub officers and nuclear qualifed enlisted men seemed to screen out most of those yahoos.
However in boot camp in the early 90s - the religous crap was crammed down your throat. As a borderline agnostic/aetheist, it was strongly encouraged that I attend a religous service of my choice, and no choice wasn't an option. So I chose the jewish services because on Sundays they held "religious study" by watching Jewish themed movies (Gentleman's Agreement, An American Tale, Yentl, etc) and having a coffee klatch - latkes, gefilte fish, bundt cakes, fresh fruit, etc. And real coffee. I liked it so much I started going to services on Friday evenings as well. I can still recite my jewish prayers. My going to services on Friday nights created some friction but I was older and a college graduate so I just stared people down. Eventually I made several of my company mates aware of the situation and they too stopped going to the Protestant services and became Jewish for Boot camp. Once boot camp was over so was the overt religiosity. Although I continued studying with two great Rabbis - one of them a Navy O6.
Maybe it was because of the psychological testing required for submariners and maybe it was because we weren't under combat stress but other than some simple group/command prayers it wasn't an issue. Sure fellow enlisted guys hassled each other a bit on the topic but no more than hassling each other about being a Yankees fan. And it was usually the really religious guys who got hassled the most. I can't imagine dealing with life and death stuff every day and having to deal with that kind of overt religious pressure. BTW, I also omitted so help me god from my enlistment oath. Thanks for telling your story.
Posted by: Sub Vet | August 20, 2009 10:03 PM
So does Private joker's agument centre on the idea that if you feel you are being bullied in the military it's probably because you're a wuss? And is his idiotic rant about questioning orthodoxy grounds to issue a troll warning?
Posted by: Ramel | August 20, 2009 10:06 PM
I used to work with the Air Force. Religion generally didn't come up, except at retirement ceremonies. These were strictly voluntary, so long as by "voluntary" you mean "mandatory". Mostly I didn't mind (I figured that whoever it was had earned whatever kind of retirement he wanted), but some made my teeth grind more than others. I nearly walked out of one when the speaker started going on about "the religious values that founded America", though I managed to restrain myself.
Posted by: Nightsky | August 20, 2009 11:42 PM
I did some pretty idiotic shit when I was in the AF and nearly got my ass in the wringer a few times, but I absolutely didn't give a fuck because I knew there was no chance I would re-enlist.
I had a run-in with an E-8 who told me he would "get my stripes" for complaining about the quality of services offered at a military owned leisure facility. Another time I complained to my division commander about some nonsensical crap that was going on in our barracks (overnight G.I. Parties and ludicrous white glove inspections). In both situations the people who were making my life miserable stopped doing it. One got shitcanned, the other got his ass handed to him by a 60 something bird who had been in the AF since Billy Mitchell joined. At the time I didn't give a rat's ass about my stripes and was willing to take whatever punishment was handed out, but I was young and stupid. If I had contemplated a career I'm fairly certain I would have had some obstacles in my "jacket".
I cannot imagine being in a military where the religious observance became mandatory.
Capt. Norm Holcomb:
J.D. = heddle in a flight suit.
Posted by: democommie | August 21, 2009 12:04 AM
Private Joker, please use quote marks as others here do. It's painful to read comments that run together like that.
Besides, why do you assume there's an orthodoxy here? This man presented his experiences, we expressed dismay and wished it were not so. Some have chimed in corroborating his experiences. Some have said they did not experience anything like it, but stopped short of calling him a liar: no, it's up to you and JD to do that, without any evidence.
You don't make a good case, either with testimony or plain manners.
Posted by: Tikihead | August 21, 2009 12:22 AM
@democommie: Unfortunately officers are coming out and saying that the religious nuts have infiltrated the USAF as well. Time to watch "Dr. Strangelove" again.
Posted by: MadScientist | August 21, 2009 2:57 AM
Pvt J - you still lurk. (Sadly and in dimly lighted room, no doubt.)
While you skulk,rant, and berate other posters my A stands, as do I, behind my posts. At #67 a mere slip of the 'tab' published only my A. A-ccept my a-pologies though I've no good reason to offer same to lowly, nameless you.
My A has been on the line for your A-nonimity. I gave that right to you with my life 24/7/365 X8.
As for you name-calling me Francis - well he is one of the cruxi-followers who walked the talk. I would be happy to carry the name of the man from A-ssisi.
That's not 'sissy' either. Plenty of those boys serve a-dmirably everyday. Double curse for them if they bow their heads only to give it.
My A has stood next to A-thletes, A-theists and A-gnostics, and the occasional A-esthete.
My A has suffered at the hands of men who believe and proclaim themselves A-1 (like you do no-name PJ) while acting as A-bhorent bringers of A-rmageddon instead of soldiers of peace and tolerance, their cross of Jesus going on and on and on before and after many a military event thereby trampling my right to be free from such bullying nonsense.
You, Puppet Joker, remain nameless - perhaps only to cover your A. Not proud enough of your work to sign it? That is not a-typical for boys of your ilk.
Anybody got a spare spine for the a-sinine PuppetJoker?
Posted by: A.G. Flynn | August 21, 2009 3:02 AM
As a side point:
In Germany something like this is regularly brought up as the main pro-draft argument:
If the military turns into a undemocratic/fundamentalist group, the regular military might not be able to do much about it because they will damage their carrers.
But a draftee can complain all they want. And because they come from all backgrounds, they will.
Posted by: Tobias | August 21, 2009 5:10 AM
It's not just that non-fundies in our military shouldn't have to take this sort of guff about it.
It's also that the non-fundies outside of the military shouldn't have to pay for it.
Seriously, this is my tax dollars at work? I--a non-believer (but for these purposes, I could be anything)--am being forced to pay for this? Jews are forced to pay for this? Catholics are forced to pay for this? Oh, they must love that!
I've noticed that members of the religious Right commonly labor under the illusion that not being allowed to proselytize on the the public dime is a form of religious persecution (martyrdom, to hear them tell it), but someone really should set these assholes straight.
I am so contacting my congressman/senators.
Posted by: Molly, NYC | August 21, 2009 5:53 AM
Great thread. It's been a long time since I read one through like that. Odd to say, but the interplay between Joker and the other folks with military experience kind of reassures me. I'm always impressed by the diversity (intellectual and philosophical, not the other kind) in the military. It's easy for hippie wimps like me who never served (or considered it) to write the military off as conscienceless and homogeneous ("Is that a PLEDGE PIN?") but that's lazy thinking. Also interesting to note the prevalence of the opinion that it's not religiousness that seems to be at work here (JD's utterly unconvincing claims aside) but something else, something more scary even than that hackneyed old cliche of the robotic soldier. Many of the religious folks were simultaneously thoughtful and accepting; it was the modern American fundagelical hypocrite we should fear.
And Joker, I appreciate your perspective, though I'm not convinced.
ice9
Posted by: ice9 | August 21, 2009 7:10 AM
Lost sleep over this thread last night...I guess I woke up this morning determined to exercise my religious freedoms while I still have them in the US. Sounds like ultimitely the "solution" to Christianity offending anyone will be the outlaw of all religion. This won't bring about tolerance of any sort; but rather it will bring about INtolerance for all religions. However, the fact that Mr. Weinstein can't even spell out the word "God" to use objectively in a sentence - a quotation, even - should indicate the power behind such a name.
"I took a legally altered oath which omitted the words 'So Help Me G-d.'"
Christians have given themselves a bad rep, I'll agree. But God is still on the throne and still loves us all, whether we embrace Him or not. I pray you can muster up the nerve to speak his name, Mr. Weinstein....you'll be amazed what He is willing to do for you.
Posted by: Dumplin | August 21, 2009 8:26 AM
Dumplin, #83: However, the fact that Mr. Weinstein can't even spell out the word "God" to use objectively in a sentence - a quotation, even - should indicate the power behind such a name.
Actually, writing the name of their deity as "G-d" is common among observant Jews like Weinstein. It isn't meant to me disrespectful; just the opposite, in fact.
Posted by: Chiroptera | August 21, 2009 8:31 AM
Wow. Another wannabe martyr, you do realise that stopping one group of people using threats and coersion to push their beliefs on another group is not actually opression, right? And that making everyone who wants to serve their country take an oath that includes references to a deity that not everyone believes in makes a mockery of the oath?
Posted by: Ramel | August 21, 2009 8:51 AM
Chiroptera #84: Thank you for the education!
Ramel #85: Certainly not a martyr. And you make a valid point about the oath. No argument. Maybe you can help me understand how the Armed Forces could officially put a stop to this proselytising by Christians without ruling the practice of ALL religion unacceptable? And then, if religion becomes illegal in the military, how could it possibly remain legal for civilians?
Posted by: Dumplin | August 21, 2009 9:10 AM
Dumplin stated:
Perhaps the biggest 'whoosh' of the week.
Dumplin - No one is attempting to deprive you of your religious freedom rights, in fact it's quite the opposite. Weinstein's group is attempting to defend religious freedom rights, including those of many Christians who come to them.
Our framers were far wiser and able to think more critically than you. They realized that merely expressing our 'right to conscience' through a religious freedom clause and a prohibition against religous tests was insufficient. Instead they also needed to prohibit religious sects from leveraging the power of government to promote their religious ideas and movements. That if a sect did gain control, that people's freedom of conscience rights would be compromised or outright prohibited as a matter of practice. That's what we see here, Christianist officers grossly misusing the power delegated to them as government agents by using that power to promote their religious views while denying the free expression of individual Americans in the military, members who are putting their lives on the line to defend all our rights.
So I highly recommending taking off the fake martyr's robe, you in fact appear to part of the group enabling the violation of others' freedoms, not the opposite.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 21, 2009 9:13 AM
No one is complaining about the beliefs of individuals or the existance of Chaplins in the military. The problem is when anyone in a position of power uses that position to apply pressure to subordinates to convert, or attempts to create an environment which is diffucult for those who follow other faiths (or none) to function in.
Posted by: Ramel | August 21, 2009 9:16 AM
@Dumplin:
Proselytising != practice. There are already adequate regulations - starting with the oath to uphold the constitution - to prevent proselytisation if they were enforced. The problem seems from this side of the water to be the attitude of a certain type of Christian that the rules don't apply to them. The situation could be sorted out by simply enforcing the rules properly; if a Christian (or Muslim, or a Jew etc etc etc) breaks them, bust him.
Posted by: Robin Levett | August 21, 2009 9:17 AM
"Lost sleep over this thread last night...I guess I woke up this morning determined to exercise my religious freedoms while I still have them in the US. Sounds like ultimitely the "solution" to Christianity offending anyone will be the outlaw of all religion."
Do you need some smelling salts after that rant, Scarlett?
Tax exemptions for houses of worship. A church on every frickin corner. Politicians of every stripe falling all over themselves to pander to the goddists. Battles in school boards over sectarian creationist beliefs being taught as science. Laws oppressing whole groups of American citizens based on nothing but passages from bronze age holy books. Not to mention the subject of this very thread.
And you want to whine about "intolerance" to christians?
Where do you even start with someone like this?
Posted by: Rick R | August 21, 2009 9:20 AM
@Rick R: Parachute them into Afganistan.
Posted by: Ramel | August 21, 2009 9:22 AM
I think JD = heddle in a flight suit gives more credit to JD than he deserves.
New term: JD is Franking: Acting like Barney Franks dining room table woman and therefore not worth dealing with.
Posted by: MikeMa | August 21, 2009 9:33 AM
While David Heddle could be exasperating on some subjects or some dialogues, he wasn't consistently dishonest as JD nor do I remember him advocating we disregard the Constitution or its principles like JD always cowardly infers.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 21, 2009 9:41 AM
Well, this has been insightful. We'll watch and see what happens in the coming years. I'm still grateful to you all for chosing such a brave line of work as to save the skins of the rest of us. I apologize for teetering on disrespecting that. Religion belongs in the hearts of man, and not in the workplace. Lesson learned.
Posted by: Dumplin | August 21, 2009 9:43 AM
Dumplin, showing off his raging persecution complex:
They could say "If you want to promote your religion, do it on your own damn time, out of uniform, asshole! Uncle Sam ain't paying you to spread the gospel!" And then give a dishonorable discharge to anyone unable to follow this simple and reasonable order. And throw anyone who pulled bullshit like force-feeding pork to a jew, or falsely accusing a soldier of treason for failure to participate in an unconstitutional cult ritual, or vandalizing someone's house with a swastika in federal prison.
Dumplin, why, oh why, are so many christians incapable of understanding that not being allowed to force your beliefs on other people is not persecution!!!! Really, if you've got a single functioning brain cell this shouldn't be too hard to understand. So why does your cult constantly whine and scream about how persecuted they are because they aren't given free reign to murder anyone who disagrees?
Dumplin, do you support people being forced at gunpoint to kneel on a prayer mat facing Mecca and offer prayers to Allah? Well how do you prevent that without ruling the practice of Islam unacceptable?
Do you think it's a good idea for people to be allowed to wander the streets and inject random strangers with insulin against their will? Well how do you prevent that without outlawing insulin and condemning all diabetics to death?
Do you think it's okay for businessmen to forcibly strip people naked, put a new set of clothes on them, then steal a corresponding amount of money from their wallet? Well how do you prevent that without criminalizing the entire fashion industry?
Do you think McDonald's employees should be allowed to hold people down and shove hamburgers down their throats until they choke? Well how do you prevent that without making it a crime to run a fast-food restaurant?
If you think the above examples are insane, there's a good reason for that. They ARE insane. Just as insane as your persecution complex. You're allowed to believe what you want. You're allowed to perform whatever absurd rituals your imaginary friend demands, so long as doing so does not interfere with the rights of others. You're NOT allowed to force other people to participate. You're NOT allowed to practice human sacrifice, even if your imaginary friend really, really loves to drink the blood of freshly-slaughtered children, because that would be murder. You're NOT allowed to use taxpayer dollars and government time to promote your cult. You're DEFINITELY not allowed to use the authority of the government to force your beliefs on a captive audience through intimidation and fraud. Until you can understand and accept this, you will never be able to make any sense out of the concept of religious freedom.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 21, 2009 10:04 AM
Dumplin':
REAL martyrs don't piss and moan. REAL martyrs go to places that HATE, HATE, HATE and, by their example (offering up their very lives) lead those who HATE to turn to LOVE and march hand in hand through fields filled with wild flowers, swaying in the breeze that is the sigh of a LOVING GOD where the delusionponies romp in play, before being slaughtered and turned into delusionponyburgers.
Does all of that seem, I don't know, NUTS!!? Well, it's about the same level of fantasy as you babblical based idiots are trying to FORCE on other folks. Get over yourselves. If you want to be christians, instead of KKKristians, try to at least live up to the precepts of your (most probably fictional) Lord and Redeemer. Mmm,kay?
Posted by: democommie | August 21, 2009 10:18 AM
Since the days of George W. Bush when has the Constitution or peoples rights mattered?
Posted by: JIm | August 21, 2009 11:05 AM
Thank you for sharing. This was very enlightening.
Posted by: Kenneth Mark Hoover | August 21, 2009 11:09 AM
@ Dumplin #94.
Good to see the glimmers of knowledge about this subject in your post. Your thoughtfulness is not unnoticed.
However - -
PLEASE do not just "watch and see what happens in the coming years." TAKE action. Onward to your senators' webpages to write of your new-found concern. Onward to the townhalls where you can aid your fellow-followers-of-faith in understanding and being joyful in your magnificent enlightenment to stop the oppression of fellow-citizens in uniform.
Call, post, print, attend NOW - don't wait, 'watch and see what happens in the coming years.' Be the change.
Posted by: A.G. Flynn | August 21, 2009 12:06 PM
Wow,
It took me a while to read all of the comments. I was in the Army from 1998 to 2002, served well and served happily. I loved my job and learned a lot. One thing that I did notice was the polarization of religion after the attacks on the Pentagon and NY. It wasn't even a "you're with us or against us mentality". it was a "you're one of us, or your against us".
Generally, I found that if I could talk to someone one-on-one, an understanding could be reached. But with people in powerful positions, sometimes you have to balance disrespecting them as a leader, and communicating your disbelief in their system. It's a fine line and one that I crossed a few times.
The good thing is that my experience is that when I was kicked out of the church, I had no support. I was afraid of those "baby eating satan worshipping atheists (and i was unaware of that irony at the time). Now, Ive found a fantastic community of support, my wife is more of a deist in the founding fathers' sense. While I'm still fighting the demons of my past, I have support, friends and places like this to be challenged.
Posted by: Architeuthis | August 21, 2009 12:36 PM
What's scary is that scum like these fundies have the guns and can take over and make us all be Christian in the population at large, even as society moves away from the nonsense of Christianity.
Why won't fundamentalists support the troops (who don't agree with them) and support freedom? Why do conservative fundamentalists hate America so much?
Posted by: Tom Soppe | August 21, 2009 12:46 PM
I have never been in the military, or any quasi military enterprise. I have been an iconoclast all of my life, and aware that my propensity to speak my mind is simply incompatible with chains of command of any sort.
I will stipulate to the positive achievements of military organizations, as I will stipulate to the positive achievements of religions.
It remains however, that military establishments, no matter the underwriter, are themselves religions.
In order to partake, in fact in order to want to partake, one needs to make the leap of faith that it is the right thing to do.
If there were no soldiers, there would be no wars. Yes I understand that some one always will be a soldier, or an aggressor, and defenses must be mounted.
I see kids coming home short a leg, an arm, or in a body bag. They went away sold on the concepts of duty honor and patriotism all of which are continuously reinforced in the popular culture. How similar is that to god gospel and religion? I venture to say it is even more difficult to argue the emperor has no clothes when it comes to the military establishment than it is to the religious establishment.
If any one reads this post, I think that proposition will be demonstrated.
The utter folly of conceiving that the military is there to protect and shed blood for our freedoms is demonstrated every day by the military abrogation of sexual, religious, and individual rights, conscientious objectors and as demonstrated in this string, total intolerance of any liberties that do not line up with military doctrine.
How different is it really from religious intolerance of other religions, gods, faiths or lack thereof?
I am neither surprised nor particularly concerned that the military is antagonistically intolerant of any sort of deviance. It has always been so, and always will be. Still people flock to it in search of guidance, career, skills trade, community or patriotism, in exactly the same way they flock to religion. The catholics would hardly tolerate a jewish priest, and jewish holy men would never do their own work on the sabbath, leaving the prohibited to some gentile.
Wring your hands in woe if you like, but still you collect your stipends from the government that employs you.
While you are doing so however, please remember the sufferings and long histories of the selected groups and adulterated rights of those people whose freedoms have been conveniently forgotten by those who serve.
You could not possibly have an effective military without some kind of hypocritical religious protocol to keep the followers in line, just as you could not have an effective religion without same.
Discuss.
Posted by: Joe | August 21, 2009 1:26 PM
This is disturbing to me. I am a nurse and am in the process of applying to a RN position in the USAF. I am an atheist. I have been wondering if the USAF will treat me fairly in regards to my atheism? Any ideas or comments?
Posted by: Apearoo | August 21, 2009 1:43 PM
Something to think about:
This shit can only happen if the rot starts at the top. Every single one down the chain of command, starting with the Commander in Chief, could bring the hammer down -- and none of them do. Is it because they don't see this as a problem?
With the accounts we have already, there's plenty of grounds to start a covert investigation. Put a ringer in Basic, transfer in someone to damn near any unit. The FBI used to do that kind of thing on a routine basis.
Now? See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | August 21, 2009 1:46 PM
Take the CPT's testimony for what it's worth. The Army has a system for such problems, one that starts with the Inspector General, and he should voice his complaint to them instead of airing his dirty laundry on a political site - a choice that will do nobody any good. When cowardice such as this is done I lose respect for you, Captain, because you're still supposed to be a leader above reproach, and what you show your subordinates is that it's okay to complain about the Army to those outside of the Army. This is an in-house problem and if you love the Army much as you make it sound then you should have kept it in-house.
Posted by: Ryan | August 21, 2009 1:57 PM
When cowardice such as this is done I lose respect for you, Captain, because you're still supposed to be a leader above reproach, and what you show your subordinates is that it's okay to complain about the Army to those outside of the Army. This is an in-house problem and if you love the Army much as you make it sound then you should have kept it in-house.
Are you fucking kidding me? What is this, a fucking playground? Whatever happens, you don't squeal?
Go stand in the corner. Don't speak. You've totally sacrificed your right to talk to grownups.
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | August 21, 2009 2:37 PM
Can't hurt to bring it up before induction. Who knows? You might get warned off, or the word might start to filter up that this crap is hurting. Last I looked, the Services had a critical shortage of nurses.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | August 21, 2009 2:41 PM
Ryan the iliterate:
It's obvious from this statement that your reading comprehension is so poor as to make you functionally illiterate. Since you clearly didn't bother actually reading the captain's testimony before dismissing him as a coward, here are some excerpts:
So, Ryan, on the off-chance you're capable of reading those words that were already right in front of you the whole time, how the fuck do you justify your sick compulsion to blame the vicitm?
Ryan, enemy of the Constitution:
And here you show your true colors. No matter what happens, no matter what evil is done, no matter what laws are broken, no matter how many soldiers are victimized, all you care about is that those responsible are never exposed and punished. Why do you hate America so much, Ryan? Why do you defend religious fanatics trying to undermine our Constitution, while insulting the soldiers who dare try to uphold their oath to defend it?
Ryan, you make me sick. Get the fuck out of my country, you traitorous swine!
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 21, 2009 3:28 PM
Joe:
"You could not possibly have an effective military without some kind of hypocritical religious protocol to keep the followers in line, just as you could not have an effective religion without same.
Discuss."
Okay, you're full of shit.
Ryan:
What Phantomreader42 said--AND go fuck yourself.
Posted by: democommie | August 21, 2009 4:25 PM
Oh, did I leave out the "go fuck yourself"? I thought that was implied :P
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 21, 2009 5:01 PM
phantomreader42:
I am afraid that when teh Stoopid is a burningly hot as that displayed by Joe and Ryan (and several other recent trollturds) that you can never say it enough.
Posted by: democommie | August 21, 2009 11:30 PM
I agree 100% with your perspective, and mandated religion is bullshit - but in the military there is no room for individual - you take orders or people get killed.
Posted by: Sydney | August 22, 2009 9:07 AM
I agree 100% with your perspective, and mandated religion is bullshit - but in the military there is no room for individual - you take orders or people get killed.
And this has to do with eating pork and participating in public prayer - how?
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | August 22, 2009 9:49 AM
Sydney:
"I agree 100% with your perspective, and mandated religion is bullshit - but in the military there is no room for individual - you take orders or people get killed."
You obey LAWFUL orders; if you truly cannot tell if an order is lawful (one that doesn't involve killing people) you might want to obey it and then call the AG, IG or whoever.
"Let us pray" is not a lawful military order.
Posted by: democommie | August 22, 2009 11:30 AM
I served in the Navy from '88 to '99 as an Officer in the Aviation community, and agree with most of the other Navy/Marine posters that this behavior really wasn't an issue where I was. This has been said a few times: I got a lot of crap from being a Democrat, but never for being agnostic. But I have heard my two friends who are still in the Army talk about this behavior. One of the problems, as I see it, is that this enculturalization of evangelical Christianity into the Army (and I use that branch specifically) seems to have been going on long enough that the majority of the top officers/enlisted share this viewpoint. Short of decapitation, fixing this is going to be long and difficult.
Posted by: C.Calico | August 22, 2009 12:02 PM
And given that mandatory, government-enforced prayer is a flagrant violation of the First Amendment to our Constitution, the supreme law of the land, which all members of the military and all civil servants swear to uphold and defend from all enemies, foreign and domestic*, an order to pray is by definition an unlawful order.
*the christianist fanatics pushing their cult on soldiers at taxpayer's expense would qualify as domestic enemies of the Constitution
Posted by: phantomreader42 | August 22, 2009 1:54 PM
In your debt, sir.
Posted by: tisiphone | August 22, 2009 2:00 PM
phantomreader42@ 116 - I agree. Wouldn't it be great to see a media event where a soldier in uniform was able to express such fealty to the Constitution. Where they also received as much attention as ex-Col. Oliver North did disparaging the Marine code of honor when he lied to Congress during the Iran-Contra hearings.
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 22, 2009 2:16 PM
Where they also received as much attention as ex-Col. Oliver North did disparaging the Marine code of honor when he lied to Congress during the Iran-Contra hearings.
Ain't that the truth? And he's still a cultural hero to these people. Fundies, conservatives, they're all the same - as long as you validate them by subscribing to the belief system, everything else is secondary, if it even matters at all.
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | August 22, 2009 4:24 PM
Private Joker,when I was in the army,you couldn't push back,regardless of wether or not you were actually given an order or just told to do something by anyone that out ranked you.During my basic training at Ft.Polk,I stood up for myself,against one drill sergent.I got a Battalion lervel Article 15,got my mosquito wings taken away and for the next eight weeks I didn't get any weekend passes,spent most of my "free"time either in the mess hall scrubbing pots and washing dishes,on guard duty either walking the company perimiter or on guard duty at the moter pool.My bunk was usualy the one tossed across the barracks,my foot locker turned upside down so I would have to spend 1/2 the night getting it ready for the morning walk through inspections.If I wasn't on guard duty I ended up on fire watch or being the runner for the C.Q.I had drill sergents from other platoons messing with me when ever I was in their platoon areas,like one D.S. had me give him 50 push-ups every time I saw him (even if he didn't see me),for my patch 82nd.Airbourne),I would have duty when no one else did like on "wet bulb" days (when heat and humidity were a health factor so no training),there was always dirt found on my M-16/M-203 so that by the time I turned it in to the armourer at the end of basic the black was almost nonexistant on my weapon.I was not permitted to walk anywhere in the company area I had to run.Even if I was only goingfive feet away,I had to run those five feet.I was constantly harassed by all the D.I.'s in our company,and by three of the platoon leaders.I was made a squad leader,so if any one f'ed up during training it would be my fault.I was also marched to church services every Sunday morning,wether I desired to go or not.I was told I needed something to believe in.There so many ways you can be retaliated on for standing up or trying to work the chain of command.And when I got to my A.I.T. unit I was counseled and informed that it would go badly for me if I attempted anything similar during my next eight weeks there.It also followed me to Jump School,but I had a "black Hat"(that's what the instructors at Ft.Benning are called),told me he could disappear that page from my file,depending on my performance while there.By the time I got to Demolition School four weeks later,I was an SP-4(I had made PFC by the end of A.I.T.).So it wasn't that I was a slack troop,those D.I.'s were trying to show me that I belonged to them orders or no orders.Just STFU and do wht ever I was told by anyone that out ranked me.I had a D.I. tell me that he wasn't always right,but he was never wrong.I stayed in the Army for six years,but I never forgot that disagreeing with an order lawful or otherwise can have things added to your personel file,and there are ways that you can be singled out,that can look like you are just having bad luck on the extra duty roster.Oh yea If someone was a regular f-up we usualy had a nickname for him.It was "pvt.Joker.Other than that I enjoyed my time in the military.Should have made it my career,but they wouldn't give me my E-5 stripes so when it was time for my ETS,I got out.
Posted by: Meade | August 23, 2009 12:01 AM
Fundamentalist Christianity and the tactics they employ whether in the military or here in America should be looked at as terriorism. If the government will not do something to stop this than as an American I would not fight in the military. I would not lift a finger to help Christianity in its indevor to dominate the world. The Eric Princes of the world need to be stopped along with all their policies. We must get rid of the religious influences in Washington.
Posted by: Elizabeth | August 23, 2009 12:11 AM
My husband served 6 years in the USMC and 16 in the USAF. My daughter served 4 years in the Army, getting out as a Captain. Her husband is now a Major. That there are christian fundamentalists in the Army is not news, but what may be news to most of the readers here is that they can be safely ignored for the most part.
My son-in-law suffered no career problems from telling his commanding officer that he wasn't going to attend the prayer groups at the dude's house. He did request a transfer and got it with no problem.
My husband regularly told AF "enforcers" of whatever to GFT because he understood the military rules whereas many of the new AF recruits didn't.
What I don't think a lot of the commenters here quite get is that as soon as one identifies themselves as "touchy-feely" in the military, they are going to get extra shit. The guy should have just tossed the pork chop on the floor and said "Don't fuck with me, you bastard."
Posted by: Donna B. | August 23, 2009 4:05 AM
Donna B.:
That old adage, ymmd, always applies in such situations. I did some things, nothing to do with religion, that could have resulted in loss of stripes and pay, or worse.
I knew people who got away with shit and some that didn't. On the airbase where I was stationed in Germany, we had a couple of army units. One was the 51st AADCom (anti-aircraft unit) and the other was an 82nd Airborne Jump School (IIRC). The troops going through the jump school were treated like shit, regardless of their rank, and forced to lots of PT for any infraction. That was a training tool. The 51st AADCom unit, otoh, was relatively loose, if you consider getting up at 5:30 for an open ranks inspection, policing up the area for cigarette butts and other trash, and having barracks inspections on a daily basis as "loose". I asked one of the troopers about it one day; he said it was all just chickenshit. A lot of guys, he said, got so fed up that they volunteered for Vietnam duty just to get out of there.
Posted by: democommie | August 23, 2009 9:20 AM
I served in the Army in the early to late eighties and didn't see many issues at all when it came to religion. Although I was raised Catholic and went to a Catholic School I chose to have my tags marked No Pref. Back then being in the Military gave me the freedom to be who and what I wanted to be.
With that said, I recently spent 1.5 years in Iraq and noticed that Evangelical Christianity was blatantly all over the place. My only thoughts were "Thank God I'm not in the Military because I'd be in trouble on a regular basis".
As a civilian, I've noticed these changes in our society and found them disturbing, but easily avoided or ignored. As a soldier I know that not only would I have found this disturbing, but also the attendant problems unavoidable but not impossible. As a few other military people here have noted, forget the I.G. just tell them to go fuck themselves. Unless you ran into an NCO or Officer that decided to make you his pet project, nine out of ten times that would have ended it and you would have just been shunned by the evangelicals. That's a Good Thing.
Also, as others above have stated, anyone having problems with these throwbacks should just find their nearest Catholic Chaplin and tell them their issue. They don't put up with this crap either.
Posted by: JC | August 24, 2009 10:07 AM
Mikey Weinstein will be interviewed this evening (Mon24.Aug.09) on The Jeff Farias Show.
If you can't catch the show between 6-9pmEDT, Mon-Friday, free podcasts are available from the site: TheJeffFariasShow.com
enjoy!
I know I will!
Posted by: BlueBerry.Pickn@gmail.com | August 24, 2009 11:51 AM
Other than Ryan informing me that I am full of shit, I am a bit surprised that no one in this discussion can really understand, or at least own up to the very religious matrix that at least to an outsider like me, makes up every military and paramilitary organization.
Catholics have a pope, cardinals, bishops prelates priests and parishioners, all presumably following orders from the supercop in the sky as interpreted by the pope.
The military has a secretary of defense chairman of the joint chiefs, generals admirals colonels captains etc etc following the orders of the commander in chief, as interpreted by down chain commanders.
Both achieve order and discipline by convincing the converted that their behaviors will be rewarded or punished by some carrot and stick system, and that the justification for all harm done by the organization is justified by the righteousness of the greater good.
Do what the pope says or go to hell, do what the commander in chief says of get killed. Follow orders. Do not question the word of supercop/commander in chief who always knows better.
If along the way you have to fuck a few people over, murder a few innocents, torture or harass a few unbelievers, or non conformists, so fucking what? You are serving god, or serving country, or shudder, serving both at the same time. When does it occur to anybody in either or both camps, that doing wrong has no justification. Murder is murder, inflicting pain humiliation or negative consequences on anybody is always wrong no matter the justification. Can one rationalize deterrence and confinement of the most dangerous and antisocial? Maybe; once embarked on that road though, as we have seen, we can justify a lot more in the name of "right". We can throw people in jail for smoking pot, totally deny them their rights and equality because of whom they chose to love or fuck, and blow them to kingdom cum because the pope/ayatollah/ commander in chief has decided that it is good to have enemies, so that we can raise money to reinforce our power structure to maintain supremacy.
This all depends FUNDAMENTALLY on a belief system that subjugates the individual. It depends and revolves around idiotic epithets like "for god and country" or worse.
That "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" (an epithet so popular and backward that it is repeated with mantra like faith and is as accepted as "our father which art in heaven")is so entrenched that the few who ever bother to question it are dismissed as either full of shit, or simply not responded to at all is hardly surprising.
What is more than a little shocking to me at least, is that supposedly independent thinkers who have managed to free themselves from the clutches of cult faith, still manage to cling to the fantasies of cult patriotism.
If you can admit you are cynical enough to want to be in the military for the structure, order, relief from independent thought, the pension the education or whatever the perceived benefits, and play along to get along, fine. It is not unlike an atheist cardinal admitting his catholic faith is a sham, but he likes the benefits and looks good in red.
The shame of religion and the shame of the military is born first by those who willingly give support to the church or the military without question.
I may tolerate, and even accept the weak willed idiots who chose to believe in some god, but I cannot respect nor support them. Equally, I may tolerate and accept the weak willed idiots who volunteer to believe in a chauvinist (look it up) patriotic military or paramilitary organization, but I will not willingly support them and certainly will not respect them.
If your faith in the military is somehow shattered because you suddenly discover that that organization could give a rat's ass about your sorry individual rights, then your only recourse is to leave and work against it from the outside. No different than when you come to the understanding that god is a fraud, and no religion gives a rat's ass about your personal damnation, you leave that religion, and demand your humanity.
Follow your fucking orders if you want, but do not think that any chain of command will absolve you of your personal moral responsibility. You don't need either god nor country to know what is right or wrong. If you chose to be a part of an establishment that willingly does wrong, you are every bit as culpable as the wrongdoers within, and the wrongness of the organization itself.
And as for Ryan's observation that I am full of shit, I think Hitler, the pope and all the other tin badge power trippers that ever were would have the same conclusion.
Every catholic, muslim, jew, or mormon who has not stood down when faced with the morbid hypocrisy of his her faith is as guilty as any perpetrator within. Similarly, ever soldier who has not stood down when faced with the unconstitutional behavior of his her employer is as guilty as the unchecked persecutor.
If you manage a shred of objectivity, you might come to find that defending military ways is as intellectually satisfying as defending the bible. If you find intellectual satisfaction in either, question your objectivity.
Joe
Posted by: Joe | August 24, 2009 12:27 PM
You are pretty much full of shit, and now you've even godwinned the thread. Well done. Your first logical error is a simple one, hierachy != religion. And the bit about the subjugation of individuality makes no sense when applied to a volunteer force, where people have made an individual choice to join up and chose to accept the terms of employment.
Posted by: Ramel | August 24, 2009 12:47 PM
Actually it is your logic or at least interpretation which is in error, Ramel.
What I am trying to get across is that both religion and military depend on hierarchy, both depend on faith in the propaganda being sold. You are absolutely correct that the "subjugation of individuality makes no sense when applied to a volunteer force".
It makes no more sense to voluntarily subjugate yourself to a religious hierarchy than to a military one, once you come to the realization that you have misplaced your faith. In the case of religion, the faith is that there is a god, who will somehow reward or punish you for your belief in it. In the case of the military, you put your faith in a god, a king or a nation who will somehow reward or punish you for your belief in it.
In the case of the American military in particular, you buy into the dogma that you are there to serve the public, to defend the constitution including the bill of rights, and presumably agree with the declaration of independence.
If you find that your faith is ill founded, or worse betrayed, as did the Captain who started this, then your moral duty is clear.
If you are enlightened enough to take the time to study and think, you will find that shit holds all kinds of extremely valuable information, and you overlook it at your own peril.
In case you forgot.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Just in case, Ramel, that you are grammatically challenged, you will notice that there are no exceptions made for religious, political or geographical differences.
If you want to believe that it is ok to murder rape kill or generally fuck people over, just because they volunteered, you are indeed a bigger pervert than I ever hope to be. And if you signed up for employment with an employer who completely changes the terms of employment or the job description, then you become complicit and by definition are as corrupt as the most corrupt person in the chain of command.
You can pray all you want, you can have as many memorial day parades as you like, give out all the medals, chocolates schools or bridges as you please, none of it will wash the blood away from guilty hands. If you think that the ends justify the means, then you have gently placed your testicles, assuming you have any, into the iron fist of despotism/theism/fundamentalism/ or any other ism destined to force you to live as a slave. Really doesn't make any difference which one. They all depend on volunteers who believe its ok to fuck anyone over who does not believe as they,(the despots and their believers) do.
So Ramel, your simple minded attempt to fault my logic, only show you to be incapable or unwilling to think through the consequences. You ignore the evidence of generations who have served, voluntarily or otherwise, and who, intentionally or otherwise, have participated in the corruption and basic principles upon which this particular nation was founded, thereby relegating their efforts to the same sorts of review we now reserve for roman legions, crusades, nazis and the republican guard.
The only legitimate military that can be raised in a democracy is by conscription, where all, ( women homos and conscientious objectors alike) must serve. In that way only, and without career soldiers, can you ever have a hope of checking the sorts of abuse that have reported and ignored over and over again. Only then will the elite be forced to dehumanize themselves, and perhaps once spat out of the machine, will they as non military INDIVIDUALS" bring pressure to bear to make sure the interests of the military do not conflict and override the true meaning of the constitution and the Bill of Rights
Joe
Posted by: Joe | August 24, 2009 5:27 PM
Joe:
Your persecution complex is showing.
Posted by: democommie | August 24, 2009 9:16 PM
Let me get this straight; you can eat some beings but not others. Yet you get upset that the military forces its religion on you.
Thank you for your service but your complaint seems weird to me.
Posted by: jake | August 24, 2009 10:10 PM
Wah?
So you think its ok to kill other nameless people because humans are not all vegans? Weird is one way to put I guess.
Posted by: theroachman | August 24, 2009 10:13 PM
jake:
WTF?
Posted by: democommie | August 25, 2009 7:12 AM
Dear democommie.
My persecution has never been particularly complex
Posted by: Joe | August 25, 2009 11:01 AM
I was in the USAF from 1973 to 1997. I've been a non-believer from the age of 13 and a confirmed lefty since I joined the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee during my freshman year in college. The USAF had no problem with me: I made it to lieutenant colonel, I flew F-15s all over the world, I served on the joint staff with officers from the other services . . . and not once in 24 years did I experience any sort of discrimination or pressure to change my views. No one ever told me I had to go to church (taking up golf, on the other hand, was universally recognized as a career-enhancing move).
At one point I was executive officer to a wing commander in Alaska, and in that position I reviewed all the officer evaluation reports that came up the chain for the commander's endorsement. I routinely rejected OERs that mentioned an officer's Christianity or church attendance, sending them back to the evaluators with instructions to remove any discussion of religion. My boss never challenged me on that; inserting religion into the promotion process was and is against the rules. Career impact on me? None. On the contrary, I left Alaska with an assignment to one of the military's most prestigious advanced schools, the Armed Forces Staff College.
Reading about the evangelical movement in the military today, I wonder that I did as well as I did. Many would say that with my politics and beliefs I'd have been a bad fit for the military. But my experience was otherwise; I fit in just fine. And in fact the evangelicals were very much around in the 1980s and 1990s . . . but they never came after me.
Why? Well, I didn't broadcast my views. If asked, I'd answer honestly, but I didn't wear my commie pinko atheism on my sleeve. Maybe, too, I was able to stay under the radar because when other officers looked at me they saw someone who was white, blonde, and blue-eyed . . . someone who fit the stereotypical fighter pilot image. Or maybe I was just lucky.
Despite appearances, there are plenty of men and women like me in the military, and most of them are getting along quite well.
Posted by: Paul Woodford | August 28, 2009 2:23 AM
The MRFF has produced two letters like this over the past 8 months (which bear striking similarities in semantics, if you compare them). If you already believe there's a conspiracy, they confirm it for you, despite any reservations that might be reasonable under other circumstances.
On the other hand, your comment now makes nearly a dozen on this post to say something to the effect of "I never saw/don't see this in the military." Funny how such a widespread, pernicious conspiracy is so invisible to those in the organization--even if they would be ideologically sensitive to it.
Careful, you might be tossed in the pile of Christian dominionists.
Posted by: JD | August 28, 2009 4:54 PM
I have friends in the military and that have had many complaints about the Christian religion being pushed on them as well. Basically, if you don't attend services then you end up being ordered to do the things others don't want to do.
The Christian religion is a rather sick and vile system that has a history of immoral behavior. The Christians are the ones that gave us the war in iraq based on lies that allowed the murder and torture of innocent people. And they call themselves moral?
What can we expect from a group of people that worship a being that drowned most all life on earth, to include babies and the unborn child in the womb of the mother (abortion). They praise this kind of thing and call it moral? Holy Crap! Then, this same being promises to torture billions with fire for an eternity of suffering, his children, and they still call him moral? No wonder these people can lie about anything and claim it is good, moral and done in the name of God. They are completely delusional. Religion could easily case the downfall of America unless we get it under control. No more respect should be given to religion in public. In God we trust needs to be laughed at by our children. Our children need to call out other kids when they make silly claims about invisible men that have all mighty power to heal and yet they never heal an amputee.
It is pathetic.
Posted by: chris t smith | August 28, 2009 10:33 PM
JD:
Did you think all of the adults had left the thread.
I keep asking and you keep pretending you're not seeing the question.
Do you do your blogging while on duty as a USAF member? Are you using government property to do so? Simple questions; they have simple anwers. Just ask Gordo Klingstoshit.
Posted by: democommie | August 29, 2009 8:25 AM
Joe:
Oh? Please, share the details with us. Tell us what, exactly, your persecution consisted of. Show your work.
Posted by: democommie | August 29, 2009 8:28 AM
JD,
The MRFF has thousands of complaints on this. The fact that some officers understand that the military is not an Army for Jesus and act correctly, ala Paul Woodford, does not make the problem go away. Morons are handing out bibles in Afghanistan and Iraq in spite of direct orders to desist. This does not happen without cover and/or encouragement from above. There are bad (read zealous xian) officers out there and they can infect an entire command.
What they are doing is wrong, counter to our stated goals in the region, counter to our constitution and counter to rational thought.
Posted by: MikeMa | August 29, 2009 8:50 AM
JD - why are you so intent in denying military personnel their freedom of conscience, causing many of them to have their careers comprised, ruined, or diminished, and not taking your oath to defend the Constitution and their rights seriously?
Posted by: Michael Heath | August 29, 2009 9:46 AM
JD - why are you so intent in denying military personnel their freedom of conscience, causing many of them to have their careers comprised, ruined, or diminished, and not taking your oath to defend the Constitution and their rights seriously?
Because he's doing it for Jesus, and when you're doing it for Jesus, you're playing according to an entirely different set of rules. It's perfectly acceptable to lie, oppress people, whatever - anything in order to achieve and then maintain Christian hegemony.
Posted by: Jeff Eyges | August 29, 2009 4:08 PM
Jeff Eyges
"It's perfectly acceptable to lie, oppress people, whatever - anything in order to achieve and then maintain Christian hegemony."
The best part is that hegemony is never pure enough, so there's always another outgroup to be marginalized.
Posted by: Modusoperandi | August 30, 2009 10:59 AM
Joe, you are an incredible individual with remarkable intellect. The large words that are inserted all throughout your statements almost give the impression that your are a smart man. However, upon reading your posts it is evident that you are a man who does indeed love to speak his mind over internet sessions because his own life is filled with inexperience and longing for meaning.
Did you really find it necessary to explain to us why you were never in the military. I am certain it had nothing to do with the fact that your strength combined with your intellect would still not make it through the first week of training.
And what on earth is the purpose of your argument? You argue against everything yet you take no action to change any of it. You speak of the ridiculous hypocrisy of our government and of our military, yet you live here in America paying taxes into our government that pays the salaries of everything you protest.
"I may tolerate, and even accept the weak willed idiots who chose to believe in some god, but I cannot respect nor support them. Equally, I may tolerate and accept the weak willed idiots who volunteer to believe in a chauvinist (look it up) patriotic military or paramilitary organization, but I will not willingly support them and certainly will not respect them." -Joe (126)
I do thoroughly enjoy the idiocy of this statement Joe, for it makes me ask many questions. You will tolerate the members of the military? What would be your other option sir? Furthermore, you are either unemployed and pay no taxes, evade paying your taxes, or you pay the very salaries of the men and women that you DO NOT SUPPORT. Ironic, is it not?
You sir would fit in much better in a system such as North Korea. You do not deserve to live in a country that has been protected by the men and women who have died because they did not want their children to be ruled by a Nazi regime or a Soviet communist republic.
Is the American military perfect? Oh please...but find a better country with a better military. Understand that beyond the realms of your PSYCHO-BABBLE their is the reality that if we do not have the capability to defend our country then we would be ruled by systems much worse than whatever you think about America's.
Posted by: Kyle | September 13, 2009 12:30 AM
I'm a US Army Chaplain (MAJ), and a born again, evangelical Christian. The first person you should have gone to, to support your Constitutional right of free exercise (or non-exercise), was your Chaplain. We are trained in performing, providing, or protecting everyone's religious convictions. I certainly would have supported you to the chain of CMD, from WP to your time as a company grade officer.
Posted by: Chaplain | October 4, 2009 9:35 PM
Chaplain @ 144 - I would argue the onus is on the Chaplains to provide an environment where soldiers are aware you are go-to people when such misbehavior occurs rather than the solider as you advocate.
We've had a Captain Holcomb (retired chaplain and the guy that fired Klingenschmitt) commenting on these issues many times in this forum. Capt. Holcomb provides clear evidence there are both Chaplains and commanding officers of Chaplains who are willing, able, ready, and maybe even adequately visible in the promotion of American ideals to a volume where soldiers are aware such resources exist in at least scattered areas of the military. Captain Holcomb is an example of what you are talking about and while I'm not religious, would be happy and proud such a resource would be available to me if I served with him, and one I'd probably utilize as well (he's a wise man).
However, we also see clear evidence that large sections of the military contain no such environment and in fact chaplains maybe either enabling or leading such efforts to deprive many soldiers of their freedom of conscience rights. Hey, it's Management 101. If there's a problem of culture, blame management, not the disempowered.
I realize your trying to provide good advice, but we can't conceivably reach all the military people in need of such advice. It's the relevant officers' jobs to create such an environment and Chaplains should be preemptively visible as a resource not by our passing on the word, but instead by the example they set in both word and deed.
Posted by: Michael Heath | October 5, 2009 4:56 PM