Last week I reported on the toughest 44 Jews in the world, referring to the 44 Jews who were opressing nearly 3800 airmen at the Air Force Academy. Of course, they were doing nothing of the sort, but rather were themselves the subject of abuse from proselytizing evangelicals who attend, teach, and run the Academy. The report listed up to 55 complaints, and if Barry Lynn’s Americans United (a group I generally treat with great skepticism) is correct, the situation is worse than I even imagined:
Religious intolerance is systemic and pervasive at the U.S. Air Force Academy and, if nothing changes, it could result in “prolonged and costly” litigation, according to a report issued Thursday by a group advocating strict separation of church and state.
The 14-page report listed incidents of mandatory prayers, proselytizing by teachers, insensitivity to religious minorities and allegations that evangelical Christianity is the preferred faith at the institution.
“I think this is the most serious, military-related systemic problem I have ever seen in the decades I’ve been doing this work,” said Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “There is a clear preference for Christianity at the academy, so that everyone else feels like a second-class citizen.”
The actual report can be found here (.pdf), and some of the abuses listed include the following:
1.) We have been informed, for example, that, during a Basic Cadet Training session attended by a team of observers from the Yale Divinity School, one of the Academy chaplains
GrantR
To summarize the list:
1.One CHAPLAIN urged people to encouraged others to attend religious services, and used fire-and-brimstone rhetoric.
2.Prayer was used to open a mandatory event.
3.Teachers have introduced themselves as born-again Christians, and encouraged others to become so. In one instance, students had to pray before an exam. A Christmas greeting was published with religious wording about the holiday. Signs were posted about a Passion of the Christ-esque program.
4.A commander, in an email message, endorsed National Prayer Week. He also used explicit prosyletizing language.
5.Christian Cadets are given special leave to attend church services. Because official events are often scheduled for Saturdays, Seventh Day Adventist cadets aren
dagon
john, you were/are doing so well…
“When faced with a choice of this loose-knit coalition of frauds, bigots, hucksters, and letting the ‘evil’ loony left in charge, well, suddenly MoveOn doesn’t seem that damned scary anymore, particularly when you consider how marginalized the Cynthia McKinney crowd is. They may tax the hell out of me and leave us with an impotent foriegn policy, but I can count on them staying out of my bedroom, my science classes, my pharmacy, my science class, and my Doctor’s office.”
…but do you seriously want to debate the fiscal superiority of 2nd term reagan, bush 1 and bush 2?
wake up man. decency and progress come at a price. 200 plus years in, THIS is still an experiment, one that needs the flexibility of ‘progressive’ ideology in order to evolve.
peace
George T
“We aren;t talking about the Taliban or the radical mullahs in Saudi Arabia. They aren’t stoning people, or throwing homosexuals off of towers.”
The operative words are, “not yet”.
And GrantR, in case you haven’t noticed, those exhibiting the greatest “excesses” also happen to be the ones exerting the greatest influence, and it’s like a snowball running downhill, gathering speed and mass. You say that we’ve lived with the excesses of the left for a long time, and if so at least we stayed out of your bedroom and off of your deathbeds.
Don Surber
They were tough but not as tough as the first Gen. Davis. He endured four years of the “silent treatment” to become the first black to graduate from West Point.
S.W. Anderson
Funny thing about it is that Christ didn’t go around ordering people to round up some new pigeons for the flock, or else.
The Bible poses the choice of whether or not to believe as something that occurs in the mind and heart of the individual. The individual does or doesn’t come to it as a matter of personal choice.
That implicitly marginalizes evangelizing, it seems to me.
And no, being in a crowd of hollering, applauding yahoos who are responding to a preacher who is flogging the crowd for people to come forward and be saved, as the choir belts out some Jesus-pop tune, is NOT what the Bible was talking about, as to making a personal commitment.
Brad R.
John-
As a liberal, I urge you to stick with the Republican Party. Having two major parties that aren’t completely insane is generally good for democracy.
Ridge
When this issue first came up, I was accused of being over the top about my fears. This report, even if exaggerated does point to a specific problem; the attempted integration of the officer corps with a singular religious movement. One that places an emphasis on “end times” and the superiority of God’s Law over Man’s. Its just an observation that these same future officers will be in direct control of our intercontinental nuclear missiles.
And I wonder if its coincidence that while this is going on at the Air Force Academy, they were also having trouble with under reporting or lack of response to reports of rape and sexual harassment against female cadets. Since that branch of Christianity often teaches the subservience of women to men and wants to limit their social options….I wonder what the connection is between those perpetrators and the overt religious movements at the Academy.
Jay C
GrantR:
Thanks for injecting the “Well, They do it too” excuse: that really adresses the issue.
In case the difference escapes you, Columbia University (not, please note “Colombia”, which is a country in South America) is a private organization, while the US Air Force Academy is a Service Academy of the United States’ Armed Forces, established by the US Government, and maintained with your and my tax dollars, for the express purpose (ultimately) of defending your and my country and Constitution.
Trying to conflate incidents of ideological bias in one department of one college in NY (which have been exposed and roundly criticised) with an apparent systematic and semi-official religious bias in a US-Government-run service academy (which have been heretofore ignored) is a nice try at deflection, but doesn’t fly.
And thanks, John, for bringing this up.
Rick
We are talking about a coalition of proselytizing zealots who want to control government, codify their religous outlook, and most of all, who want to control you.
John,
Gosh, sounds like almost any political movement, even the Democrats. Who are farther down the “slippery slope” towards authoritarian government because, well, it’s “progressive.”
Sunshine disinfects, so good on ya to notice these things. But collapsing on the fainting couch kind of undermines your message.
Islam containts some very real theocrats, and dwelling on the rare Christian oddball is just a Moveon-style successful misdirection play.
Cordially…
John Cole
Sunshine disinfects, so good on ya to notice these things. But collapsing on the fainting couch kind of undermines your message.
Heh.
Aaron
In grammar school, every holiday season, the Jewish chidlren would be encouraged to explain Hannukah, we’d play spin the dradel, etc.
No one was ever encouraged to talk about Christianity.
So, accoridng to the litmus test, I guess we can say I would have had a strong case to have those events cancelled.
LOL.
Rick
Heh.
Glenn? That you?
Cordially…
GrantR
Jay C:
“Thanks for injecting the “Well, They do it too” excuse: that really adresses the issue.”
Actually, in this case it does, because the issue I was addressing was John talking about switching sides. So, pointing out that the other side is worse is entirely relevant.
“not, please note “Colombia”, which is a country in South America”
Good coffee though, right?
“Trying to conflate incidents of ideological bias in one department of one college”
This was merely one instance used as an example. If you want, I could list a hundred more. Or just go to the Fire website and tool around a bit.
I’m just saying that to get all bent out of shape because these people in the army are proselytizing is to lose perspective of where the most systematic proselytization occurs. I attend a public university; it happens there, too.
John Cole
I am against both, Grant.
former cadet
I think your a little off base on the integration of Christianity and Military Training.
1) I would rather a teacher tell me his biases up front, rather than trying to unearth them over the course of a semester. Would you have any problem with a professor stating he is an avowed Secular Humanist? After all, it IS a belief system based on Faith too.
2) Congress starts its sessions with a generic prayer from a Chaplin also. The prayers at the Air Force Academy or non-sectarian and would only offend a militant athiests who beleives there is no higher power than Man.
3) Christian Cadets are also prevented from attending chapel when military training occurs on a Sunday. Rare – but it does happen. If you are against Sunday down days, you would also have to require ALL government employees to work on Christmas.
4) I think relgion has been reemphasized at the Academy as a one possible solution to the Sexual Assault and Cheating Scandals.
5) Until the Early 70’s, Cadets were required to attend chapel on Sunday. That is forced indoctrination. Exhorting Christian Cadets to witness to classmates isn’t even in the same league.
Halffasthero
I am with John start to finish on this. Utilizing government facilities to promote a faith scares me. The excuse that liberals and muslims do it too means nothing to me. Anyone with enough zealotry to try and indoctrinate Christianity in an academy isn’t interested in the Consitution’s separation of church and state, rather the control of state by church.
John Cole
Former cadet:
1) I would rather a teacher tell me his biases up front, rather than trying to unearth them over the course of a semester. Would you have any problem with a professor stating he is an avowed Secular Humanist? After all, it IS a belief system based on Faith too.
There is a difference between stating your belief and proselytizing and marginalizing those of other faith. See if you can see the difference between these statements:
“I am an evangelical Christian and I believe in the Lord, our Savior, Jesus Christ.”
– and-
“Jesus Christ is the only hope for salvation and there is no one else, failure to recognize this and you will burn in the fires of hell.”
2) Congress starts its sessions with a generic prayer from a Chaplin also. The prayers at the Air Force Academy or non-sectarian and would only offend a militant athiests who beleives there is no higher power than Man.
We also have “In God We Trust” on our money, so clearly we must have mandatory prayer at our military academies. As to who it offends, well, clearly it offends someone or it would not have been reported.
3) Christian Cadets are also prevented from attending chapel when military training occurs on a Sunday. Rare – but it does happen. If you are against Sunday down days, you would also have to require ALL government employees to work on Christmas.
And slowly, you are closing in on the problem. Christians are allowed to take off on their holidays, others are not. Why not have Monday be the offical day off instead of Sunday? Then Christians and Jews and everyone is forced to miss their services.
Of course that would not do- and thus, many are not allowed to practice their religious beliefs, but certain Christians are. You beginning to see why some see favoritism?
4) I think relgion has been reemphasized at the Academy as a one possible solution to the Sexual Assault and Cheating Scandals.
That may be true, but it was no solution. I was in the army for ten years- you know how to solve cheating and sexual harassment? Punish it. Severely. And then make it clear that it will not be tolerated. Soldiers do what they are told.
Differing levels of the same extreme, but not at all different leagues.
dwk
I love it when bigots want to silence folks they disagree with. What happened to freedom of speech and the open marketplace of ideas? Even a liberal with a bit of fairness can see that such knee jerk reaction against visible religious expression in this nation will eventually take us down the road to another form of tyranny.
John Cole
DWK- This is not a freedom of speech issue.
Flea
It is not only possible to both oppose bias at Columbia University and at the Air Force Academy it is an entirely reasonable position to take. People who would condemn one and not the other may have a sectarian position to uphold but there is no reason why any else should agree with it. It seems to me that those voices on the right that have been loudest in condemning Ward Churchill should be loudest in condemning these new reported academic abuses. I say, should be.
Flea
And yes, I know Ward Churchill is not at Columbia (the university or the coffee producing country).
John Cole
Bingo. Those condeming Columbia’s anti-Semitism should be attacking the offenses at the Academy. Abuse is abuse is abuse….
The Lusir
If you are secure in your own beliefs why should it matter what someone else says about religion? These guys aren’t being converted by the sword. I’m an atheist but in boot camp I wasn’t allowed to have the put on my dog tags AND I was “subtly” ordered by my drill instructors to attend Sunday worship. Practically every military ceremony I attended was accompanied by “The Innvocation from the Chaplain”. Even living that way I never felt threatened. Christianity is rampant through the military, why the sudden vapors?
Justin Faulkner
I simply fail to understand why reasonable people on my side of the aisle continue to run political cover for these folks.
Shouldn’t that lead you to conclude that they’re not so reasonable after all?
Flea
“If you are secure in your own beliefs why should it matter what someone else says about religion?”
I am utterly certain of my religious beliefs. My certainty arises from being born again, saved by Grace. I know what I believe is true. It is precisely because of the certainty of my convictions that I find it so offensive that government officials should attempt to impose their erroneous beliefs upon me. Christians used to be thrown to the lions to avoid just this fate. What on earth makes you believe it is appropriate for us to endorse such an imposition in a Western democracy?
Dan S.
“5.Christian Cadets are given special leave to attend church services. Because official events are often scheduled for Saturdays, Seventh Day Adventist cadets aren
Dan S.
John Cole – we don’t really want to tax the hell out of you (though Bushonomics may well probably render that necessary, when the adults -left or right – finally get back in charge). But we do promise to stay out of your bedroom, etc. Nevertheless, like Brad, I hope you guys manage to bring the GOP back to its senses – without an opposition to provide at least some restraint, both parties end up behaving badly . . .
Brian
The (not so) dirty little secret of the military, any military for that matter, is the intensive brainwashing that MUST occur during training in order for a soldier to freely give up their life for their country. What better way to provide this service than the particular brand of Christianity that says you have eternal life and all non-Christians are going to hell. First of all it should be no suprise that the proportion of evangelical Christians in the military is greater than the general population. More power to them, and God bless em for putting their lives on the line so we agnositcs, atheists, secular humanists, and other believers in God who are not quite so sure about our fate after this world don’t have to.
However, though I understand the possibly neccesary religous impulse in this case, if this isn’t an establishment of religion I’m not sure what is. As someone who is Jewish, who is quite willing to let Christians to put up their creches on public property, set up prayer meetings on school property after the school day, and express their faith in public in many other ways find the prostelytizing by government officials in their official capacity to have crossed the line. Whereas in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam there may have been some benefit in having a “Christian Army”, in the war we’re fighting against radical Islamisism I can’t think of a worse label we would want placed on our Armed Forces.
GrantR
Dan S.,
Here are some cases of
George
A couple of years ago I ran across an incident where a Christian pre-med biology student was told by his faculty advisor that he had to “believe” in evolution in order to get an important recommendation. I stood up for the student on the basis that the university may have legitimate interest in the student demonstrating *competency* in the subject matter, i.e. a graduate-level working knowledge of evolution, but *NOT* “belief” in any particular theory or doctrine, no matter how well-established. This is particularly true where the student asserts a deeply-held principle of conscience in his/her personal beliefs.
With that in mind, I’m appalled by the injection of sectarian religion into the Air Force Acadamy. The principle is the same, i.e. freedom of individual conscience. It is critical in a government institution charged with training America’s warriors, particularly those who hold the awesome responsibility for our nuclear arsenal.
It is especially a cause for concern since extremist religious elements -it would not be excessive to call them the American equivalent of the Taliban- have gained disproportionate power in the political process. By analogy, the presence of Marxists on university faculties would be far more of a concern if America was in a period where even one branch of our government was dominated by Marxists or by an overtly Marxist agenda.
Statements made by those with authority carry the weight of their position. This is the difference between a statement that is simply “provocative” in the sense of “raising a spirited debate” or “engaging one to think deeply about a subject,” and a statement that can be seen as implying some adverse consequence for failing to agree with it. The latter is damned close to coersion.
Face it: a lot of what is currently going on with religion and politics is not merely an attempt to raise a spirited debate. It is a concerted effort by extremists to gain and use raw, naked power; expressed with an attitude of triumphalism.
Senior Air Force officials deserve praise for responding to the problems at the Acadamy. Our nation’s warriors deserve it, as does our nation as a whole.
The Lusir
It’s probably alittle early for worring about the lions just yet there Flea. I never said it was ok to impose ones beliefs on others. I think it’s hilarious that as a former active duty US Marine and an atheist I never felt threatened by others religious beliefs, except for those who will actually kill me for them. If you’re just going to tell me the I’ll go to hell and burn for not believing as you do then I usually say that atleast I’ll be warm.
Ted
I’ve been in the military for 22 years. Those examples are tempest in a tea pot. Typical Barry Lynne; flaming liberal vapors. Funny how HIS agenda isn’t discussed. Im an agnostic too.
shark
but he has an excuse- he is homosexual. They are gunning for him, first
That’s fine by me, because homosexuals and the secular left have been gunning for the religious right since I was a child…since you condemn 1 side, I expect you to condemn the other…
Captain Video
All imposed religion is bad religion and all efforts to impose religion by social pressure and/or coercion, no matter how subtle, is bad. All people who attempt to impose religious beliefs should be actively opposed by all freedom loving people.
Simon
It is likely true that some military officers have shared prayers and such at meetings. Nevertheless I have seen how when such things occur, some of us take occassion to distort and generally oversensationalize them so that it seems the nation is near to falling prey to a military invasion.
I think rather than unquestioningly hitting the streets in protest, we ought to consider if the reports we have heard are true, if the details have been reported fully and accurately. I also think we should be highly critical of the claim that evangelicals are whacky Taliban wannabes who wish to “enter our bedrooms.” These statements are devised to inflame and, in my view are obviously false.
Assuming the alleged behavior of the Air Force officers took place as reported (an assumption I make with the greatest skepticism), many evangelicals might think themselves on firm footing based upon the examples set by such men as Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Reagan and the Bushes. When these men have in the past used their public offices to speak of and to their respective gods, they were not charged with harassing their thousands of subordinates or abusing their millions of fellow citizens by inappropriately joining Church and State. George Patton, prior to his attack at Bastogne, had his chaplain write a prayer to God and distribute it to hundreds of thousands of troops, encouraging them to pray for clear weather, and yet he was not accused of harassing his subordinates by these actions. When Lincoln prayed to his God, he was not brought up on charges of harassment or even accused of such a thing. The law seems to have accommodated him as it has every president afterward. George Washington also publicly prayed to his god both as general of the Continental Army and as President of the United States. Yet the law at all times seems to have supported his public religious utterances as it has supported those of Senators, Congressmen, governors, mayors and other public officials since the beginning of our nation. In all of this apparently few people, if any, thought themselves “forced” to a certain religious view. Given this history, I think evangelicals perceive an unfair changing of the rules has taken place.
Somehow, what was legal for Washington and other leaders has now, inexplicably, become evil when it is done by leaders today. The change took place without the passing of law and without a political vote. A judge made a decree and that dictate has somehow become accepted as law despite that Washington’s actions did not differ in substance from what the officers of the Air Force Academy are alleged to have done.
I think the evangelicals have a point. Therefore, when I hear bitter attacks against them, claiming they want to “enter our bedrooms” and “oppress women” I tend not to believe them. If we cannot see or refuse to see how the evangelicals have a point on such a simple and relatively benign issue as public prayer, then I hardly think we will be able to truly see their views on such incendiary issues as homosexual marriage and abortion.
For my part, I think evangelicals are no more interested in our bedrooms than anyone else. I have watched as they have been unfairly attacked, their views reduced to caricatures and then marginalized. I think we have been fed propaganda, some of which appears to be in vogue: “Bush is Hitler,” “The Christians want to enter our bedrooms!!!” It is all obvious nonsense.
Someone here has claimed he is about to be pushed to the left by the Evangelicals. Well it was in part because of the uncritical behavior of the left that I, especially during this last election, abandoned the left and began a hasty march to the Evangelical Right. I have seen for myself that the attacks against these people are unwarranted, that claims they are “The Taliban” are nothing more than the unfortunate responses of people unable or unwilling to deal fairly with views contrary to their own.
Kimmitt
For my part, I think evangelicals are no more interested in our bedrooms than anyone else.
I’m related to a lot of right-wing evangelicals. My personal experience is that this is very much an incorrect statement. Indeed, our bedrooms are very nearly all that they care about.
Flea
Lusir: I am a communications professor at a publicly funded university in Canada. I am also born again. So I guess this puts me in a position to proselytize for Christ when so many of my colleagues are speaking for Marx or someone inspired by him. We do not even have the same separation of church and state as our southern neighbours. No established religion but God is right there in the first line of the Constitution. What can I say? There are plenty of people who think I will be in Hell burning right there will you. At least the company will be good. I cannot imagine what it must be to have been on active duty in the US Marine Corps. You guys stand between us and harm and do not get half the thanks you should. So, God bless. And thank you.
Captain Video
Anyone who does not realize that the Theocrats on the religious right are a threat to our freedom should look at what is happening in Alabama, where a law is being passed (or has already been passed) that prohibits state funds being spent on books that feature gay characters, or that are by gay authors. This would, among other things, prohibit books by Auden, Wilde, Proust, and Whitman. There are many other examples currently available. “He who has eyes let him see.”
The reality is that now that Communism is finished religious fundamentalism, whether Muslim, Protestant Christian, Orthodox Catholic or any other form thereof is the most serious threat to our freedom because their adherents believe that they have a right and a duty to impose their beliefs on society. Just as people who believe in liberty faught Communism because it was a threat to our freedom must now, for the same reason, fight all attempts by religious fundamentalists to control our lifes.
John Cole
Let’s not get overexcited- the bill in Alabama was proposed by some wingnut, but it has not passed anything, and I doubt it will.
Simon
I think, once again, we should be highly skeptical of claims against the
Chris
Don’t apologize for that Alabama legislator’s nonsense. Denying funding to fundamental achievements of English literature based upon irrational, unconstitutional laws is censorship in it’s most glaring form. Taking away the money for the books is just as damaging (and even more underhanded) as burning the books. You don’t have to have books in flames for there to be censorship. Folks, you must realize this in this lifetime: It is an atrocity to appoint any government as the caretaker of our spiritual salvation. History always proves this.
Captain Video
Simon’s sophistry misses the crucial point: The fact that a legislator has the legal right to propose a law that restricts our freedom does not change the fact that he is a serious threat to our freedom. Such people should be actively opposed by all people who love freedom. People with such views should be kept from positions of authority by all lawful means because they are a threat to our freedoms.
M. Simon
I see nothing has changed at the Academy since the days of General Ripper.
A. Nonymous
Oh my goodness.
People in uniform PRAYING! The theocons are coming! The theocons are coming!
People getting a government salary saying in pubic they are Christians! In a publication no less!
By the way, should we dig up General Patton, who ordered his Chaplin to prepare a prayer for good weather, and court martial him? After all, that prayer got circulated to all the troops. Cannot, simply cannot believe we let those people into the armed forces.
And to think CHAPLAINS are daring to lead people in these worship services?
Why they must be purged…oh wait no wrong word. Hehe.
Well, this is a place of higher ed, so let’s just say they need to be re-educated.
Don’t they know you are not allowed to say “God” anymore or Barry Lynn will freak out and sue you?
Tsk tsk. Why won’t these “Bible thumpers” just go into a closet…er…church and leave us alone? I don’t need to be exposed to them flaunting their religion all around. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but when those people start to parade down the street or say stuff, I just wish they’d keep it in the privacy of their home or house of worship.
And to quote someone earlier up this thread, this is not a free speech issue! We need to silence them. After all, they are on government property saying the “G word”. Can’t have that. Oh no. But if they want to conduct courses in which those of religious faith in general or a religion in particular are depicted as an evil, white, male oppressive patriarchy, why that’s ok because that’s just being open minded.
Frank
I just can’t understand how anyone would object to having a bunch of sociopathic antinomianists in charge of the military. :-)
Sarah
A. Nonymous perhaps you missed it when it was pointed out previously: This is not a freedom of speech issue.
A. Nonymous
Sarah doth pontificate: “This is not a freedom of speech issue.”
And if you read my posting you’d see *I AGREE WITH YOU!*
Quoting myself “And to quote someone earlier up this thread, this is not a free speech issue! We need to silence them. After all, they are on government property saying the “G word”. Can’t have that.”
Therefore, it is NOT a freedom of speech issue! Why how wonderful to be able to define the limits and terms of debate and discussion!
But of course! When it comes to preventing and silencing people who want to pray, express their religious beliefs (even GASP in publication) and hold services who HAPPEN to be in the US military, that’s not a freedom of speech issue.
Instead, we’ll just couch it in terms of freedom of religion, declare that you are not free to worship (regardless of that little contradiction) and shelve the topic.
Now, some freaky Bible thumping types might Sarah, just might you know, consider it BOTH a free exercise of religion AND free speech issue.
But these are theocons and should be dismissed out of hand for even DARING to question the great Sarah’s ex cathedra “This is not a freedom of speech issue” statement.
Sarah: I AGREE WITH YOU!
John Cole
It is not a freedom of religion issue, either. No one is not saying they can not practice their religion. No one is saying they can not pray.
What I am saying is that you can not force non-Christians to engage in your sectarian activities as part of a mandatory military academy exercise, that you can not condone and promote proselytization on government time, that you can not belittle and demean those who have differing religious views, and that you can not promote a specific religion.
Now, if you find that to be too oppressive for some, you need your damned head examined. This is not a freedom of speech issue, this is not a freedom of religion issue. It is about what appears to be systematic and systemic abuses done by a few evangelical bully boys.
A. Nonymous
John Cole: Again, maybe I am not being clear. I *AGREE* with you and Sarah! This is not a freedom of speech issue, this is not a freedom of religion issue! Why? Because we have declared it as such. And any of those pesky theocons who disagree with us should as you put it have their “damned head examined.” No sense in even trying to disucss anything with them. Let’s just broadbrush them all as people in need of psychological help. After all, if they don’t agree with us, they simply MUST be nuts, right?
I mean how DARE they pray! Or in a publicaton take out an ad saying they are Christians! What kind of insanity is that? Why won’t they just go in the closet or church or whatever and just let us be? They must be silenced! Or as I said previously, re-educated!
Freedom of speech does not cover religious speech.
Freedom of exercise of religion does not cover actually exercise of your religion!
Of course no one answered my previous question: Should we dig up General Patton, who ordered his Chaplin to prepare a prayer for good weather, and court martial him? After all, that prayer got circulated to all the troops. I think we should. Make an example of him. Maybe Barry Lynn is already on this?
Or how about G. Washington who ordered days of prayer and thankgiving among the armed forces he lead at times of victory? Or wait, no. That was pre-Amendment 1, so I guess we can keep old George safely in his grave.
But all those other military leaders who ever prayed or used the word God in any order, command or official letter? Let’s dig them up and court martial them!
Because you simply can NOT SAY GOD OR PRAY when you don a uniform. ESPECIALLY if you are chaplain apparently.
So glad we are all in agreement as to what we are really talking about here.
RootCause
The problem as I see it is that evangelical Christians cannot comprehend the difference between having and honoring their religion, and insisting on everyone else having their religion. If they can’t make EVERYONE to pray their way, then they’re being persecuted. I urge all involved to read the New Testament, in particular, Matthew 6:5-6: “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men….when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret….” That Jesus was a pretty cool cat. It’s a pity so many of his followers are stuck in the Old Testament.
smithy
I wonder how this conversation would change if the people involved at the USAF Academy using evangelical proselytization were, say, Jewish? Would it be OK for that professor to state at the beginning of a semester that he is a devout Jew and that for anyone to well in his class, he or she must conform to his faith. The men must wear yamulkas and prayer shawls and sit seperately from the women, who, are appropriately covering their heads. And for those who are not circumcised, the local mohel will be in next week to take care of that. Also, all of the subject matter in this class will be taught from the strict perspective of the Torah.
Then he may go on to say that Christianity is just a neuvo-religion that stole the best parts of the Jewish faith and bastardized the rest to their own purposes. Jesus? Well, yes he did exist, but he was just a minor prophet, at best, but not the messiah. And that he has phonetically written out for everyone the prayers they will have to recite, in Hebrew, before class begins. Now if everyone does not adhere to his beliefs, he or she may not do well in this class, and thus, have a difficult time graduating from this academy. And he ends with, “If anyone says that this is wrong is trampling on my right to freely express my religion. Isn’t that want the second admendment is all about?”
I suspect that he would be fired very quickly.
What is lacking in all of this “discussion,” from both polarized sides, is this: a lack of respect. The USAFA is showing those of other faiths a lack of respect by not allowing them to practice their faith as freely and with the same acknowledgement that is given to evangelical christians. Yes, most of the Founding Fathers of this country were deeply religous men, but they brilliantly made sure that their faith did not run roughshod over other faiths. The whole point of this country is that there is not a single point of view, politically, socially or religously. I am so tired of both the far left and the far right telling me that I have an inferior life to them and that they want me to conform to what they see as the only real lifestyle – theirs.
Simon
We may agree certain works of literature are
Brian
“The problem as I see it is that evangelical Christians cannot comprehend the difference between having and honoring their religion, and insisting on everyone else having their religion”
To be an “evangelical ” Christian is literally to “spread the gospel” It is intrinsic to their practice of religion to want everyone else to practice their religion, in fact it is one of the if not THE central tenet of their faith. And it is completely their right to do so except in their official role as a U.S. official. And yes I can see the counter argument (i.e. what about a biology professor at a State University expressing the naturalist’s religous belief of evolution), let’s just say I wish everyone would be a little bit more humble about their most deeply held beliefs and not try to coerce students to believe like they do.
class of 99
in case you’re still reading these comments:
i went to the academy. class of 99 but a medical discharge my firstie (senior) year. i could have stayed to graduate but not get my commission, but i wanted to leave. with the sole exception of being preached at and forced to stand around pretending to pray during BCT (Basic Cadet Training), everything in that report is completely unsurprising. it is not new. i had a number of friends, including friends for life who are religious and christian. however, i often felt shunned because i was a vocally nonreligious. Ask about the spirit hill being used repeatedly for “spirit” missions to arrange a bunch of rocks into a jesus fish for full public display during noon meal formation and how if anyone challenged christianity they were painted as intolerant. the history department had the worst reputation when i was there for keeping nonreligious officers out of important meetings they labeled as “prayer meetings.” and every formation i had to hear about this or that stupid prayer group, church this, church that. i had a math instructor for calculus and descrete mathematics (i was so pissed to have him twice) who lectured us about god while keeping us at attention almost every class period (that, and lecturing us about how we were weak and they aught to have been able to hit us and how isn’t it great that A10’s in the first Gulf War mowed down civilians and women should only be allowed to do admin stuff and fly planes in the military because of body type).
look, i don’t have a grudge, those were great years in a lot of ways and nobody can say i didn’t figure out where i really stand (in a republican, out a dem)… i survived a good 3.5 years and it wasn’t the thing to do me in, but i was never fully a part of the wing because of this. it was pretty obvious.
i had one roommate (i consider a close friend, but this is true) who never stopped bugging me about church the whole time. I had to wake up to Jesus singing, sleep to it, church groups in my room, being told i was going to hell… blah, blah, blah… this Commandant sounds more daft than Lorrenz, who was a hoot… “life is hard, especially when you do stupid things”… but i don’t remember a prayer.
Cryptic Ned
look, i don’t have a grudge, those were great years in a lot of ways and nobody can say i didn’t figure out where i really stand (in a republican, out a dem)… i survived a good 3.5 years and it wasn’t the thing to do me in, but i was never fully a part of the wing because of this.
If you went through this, and you’re still a Republican…don’t you realize the harm these people are doing to our country now that they’re in charge?
Cryptic Ned
A commander, in an email message, endorsed National Prayer Week. He also used explicit prosyletizing language.
That’s THE commander of ALL CADETS. Don’t you find that unacceptable? Legally, he has complete power over them, unless they quit the Air Force.
Cryptic Ned
I mean how DARE they pray!
If by “pray” you mean “force others to pray, and verbally abuse and ostracize them if they don’t”.
Or in a publicaton take out an ad saying they are Christians!
If by “publication” you mean “Christmas card”, and by “ad saying they are Christians” you mean “message stating that everyone except them is going to hell”
What kind of insanity is that? Why won’t they just go in the closet or church or whatever and just let us be?
Yes, why won’t they stay in the church and let us be?
They must be silenced!
If by “silenced” you mean “not allowed to give their religion the force of law”.
Or as I said previously, re-educated!
Oh-ho! Lots of people are suggesting that!
Freedom of speech does not cover religious speech.
If by “religious speech” you mean “forcing others to take part in your religion, and verbally abusing and ostracizing them if they don’t”.
Freedom of exercise of religion does not cover actually exercise of your religion!
If exercise of your religion requires you to force others to take part in your religion, and verbally abuse and ostracize them if they don’t, then I don’t think you should exercise your religion as a representative of the U.S. government.
Of course no one answered my previous question: Should we dig up General Patton, who ordered his Chaplin to prepare a prayer for good weather, and court martial him?
No.
After all, that prayer got circulated to all the troops. I think we should. Make an example of him.
Did this prayer for weather involve the assertion that one branch of Christianity was the true path to salvation, and all other religions were the path to hellfire? I don’t think so. If so, then yes.
Or how about G. Washington who ordered days of prayer and thankgiving among the armed forces he lead at times of victory? Or wait, no. That was pre-Amendment 1, so I guess we can keep old George safely in his grave.
If these days of prayer were mandatory, then he shouldn’t have done that. But he had good reason to expect that his soldiers were religiously homogeneous, unlike the current Air Force.
But all those other military leaders who ever prayed or used the word God in any order, command or official letter? Let’s dig them up and court martial them!
If by “prayed or used the word God” you mean “forced others to take part in their religion, and verbally abused and ostracized them if they don’t”, then yes.
Because you simply can NOT SAY GOD OR PRAY
If by “say God or pray” you mean “force others to pray, and verbally abuse and ostracize them if they don’t”.
I don’t think the distinction is difficult to grasp.
If your religion requires you to force others to take part in your religion, and verbally abuse and ostracize them if they don’t, then your religion is ridiculous, and giving it the force of law would be a gigantic human tragedy.
Cryptic Ned
And yes I can see the counter argument (i.e. what about a biology professor at a State University expressing the naturalist’s religous belief of evolution),
If by “religious belief” you mean “belief”.
Simon
I have read all that I can on this prayer issue and have seen no credible evidence that any officer “forced” anyone to pray or that a prayer was improperly given at an official meeting. I think reason demands we hold these complaints highly suspect because too frequently non-religious people have dishonorably accused Christians of behavior that upon close examination has not been proven or that has been proven not to have taken place. More typically, non-religious people have in my opinion simply confused what being “forced to pray” or “imposing their views” really mean. One writer here, for example, complains that “important meetings” were held under the guise of “prayer meetings” and that Christians used the guise to exclude non-Christians. It will not take the most perceptive reader to suspect the likely fraudulence and dishonor within the claim. Few, if any of us, have ever met a group of Evangelical Christians who have actually refused to allow non-Christians to join them in prayer. These Christians are typically motivated to conduct prayer meetings so that instead of excluding non-Christians they might proselytize them. The claim these people have employed what is to them a typical method of outreach to exclude the people they wish to reach is far less believable than the notion that these sorts of complaints against them are false and the result of non-Christian dishonor. It is less believable because of the over third of a billion Evangelicals I have never seen or heard of such a thing taking place in even one. The Christians, even at the Air Force Academy, have a right to assemble in prayer, just as atheists have a right to assemble in silence. If by such mere assembly non-Christians think themselves abused, then I think it is obvious the non-Christians have lost the meaning of the concept of abuse.
Non-Christian confusions are, in my opinion, now typical. Non-religious people quite often complain, for example, that Christians aim to
federalist
“no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” (Article 6, section 3)
class of 99
cryptic ned: you misread. i said i went IN a republican and came OUT a democrat. i am painfully aware of the problems this party’s quest for absolute power is inflicting.
and, i never said anyon “imposed” anything on me. however, this is a military unit and unit cohesion is paramount. what’s more, this is the Air Force Academy. It’s an elite school, ranked in the top five most difficult academic institutions in America year after year after year. If ANYONE should be held to a higher standard of professional behavior, it is cadets. I thought that then when I was forced to listen to cadets openly speak of giving President Bill Clinton an about face and I know it now. Cadets at the Academy have, time and again, shown that the leadership style and unit “cohesion” being thrust upon them by officer leadership is lacking. The religious intolerance doesn’t surprise me… and the sexual harrassment and assault does not either. One of my best friends was raped so badly by a fellow cadet, that she bled for days. what happened? They sent her home for a year (because, you know, she was unstable) and did nothing to the male cadet. She had the pleasure of being forced (and i mean forced because attendance was mandatory) to watch the perp graduate a year ahead of her. he was a mighty good christian and member of the cheer squad and part of one of the four Group’s cadet leadership.
talking to someone about religion doesn’t mean forcing things on them. being in a position of power and using that position to preach is not appropriate. as i said before, we were usually at attention when Capt. X preached to us in a math class.
and my roommate never stopped bugging me even after i asked several times over the years… it got to the point that i was going to be living in my own room.
the point is that bringing one’s religion to the workplace when your job is to protect the rights of all citizens is wrong. if anyone should be taught better, if anyone should be held to this absolute standard, it’s cadets who will make up the vast majority of the very elite sections of the officer corps.
as it is, cadets are encouraged to behave and believe that they are better than the general population and that civilians are generally worthless and scum. so what are they there for? prestige, power, some for superhero complexes, etc, etc.
Brian
Actually, I meant exactly what I said by “religious belief”. As someone who has lived with evangelicals, and as an academic, I can tell you that a Darwinist biology professor to red state America is equivalent to a Baptist minister in blue state America.
Atheism is a religious belief. Deism is a religous belief. Darwinian theory, as taught in modern biology, allows for no other religous belief other than Atheism or Deism. To believe in Darwinism, is to reject the Christian, or for that matter, the Jewish, or Islamic concept of God. Now it is possible to blend evolutionary theory into a theological argument (i.e. intelligent design) but that is neither true Darwinism (random mutation of cells) or true Judeo-Islamo-Christianity (seven-day-creation). Therefore, Darwinism taught in college and high school biology classes pre-supposes a religious belief in no God or a powerless God, and is thus a religous belief itself.
Nate
To believe in Darwinism, is to reject the Christian, or for that matter, the Jewish, or Islamic concept of God.
Congratulations for coming up with the most outrageous and ludicrously misguided statement I’ve read all week. Considering the fact that Muslims, Jews, and the world’s largest Christian denomination have no problem at all with Darwin or with evolution, I’d say your remark is demonstrably bullshit.