Monte wrote:
This isn't about PCness. This isn't about an innocent little bible scripture. This is about a much bigger issue, which is to say, the usurping of the most powerful military on the planet by a radical fringe group of religious fundamentalists.
An issue that's completely the fabrication of people who hate the military, Christianity, or both.
Quote:
The stories told in the article I linked are not the ravings of some crazed conspiracy theorist. They are the direct obeservations of a highly decorated and respected military man that saw something very dangerous going on in the armed forces.
Of which there are plenty in the armed forces. "Highly decorated" means nothing; it's easy to get a big rack of ribbons. I got no less than six for going to Iraq; 5 of them are awarded simply as a matter of course for getting there. His stories, in any case, are completely anecdotal and are written in a tone that reflects his personal viewpoints. There's nothing in there that establishes much of anything other than that he takes issue with people in the military who don't share his views.
Quote:
The army is not god's army. The army serves the people of the United States of America. The Army's own rules and regulations prevent exactly the kind of behavior that is now being seen at every level of our military. THis is *NOT* a christian nation. The United States of America has people of all creeds, colors, nationalities, cultures, and people with no creed what so ever. The Army is there to serve all of us, equally. It is not intended to be the arm of conversion for fringe radical christians or any religious group what so ever.
It's nice to see you have a firm grasp on the obvious.
Quote:
Standing against that is not bowing to Political Correctness. It's an essential act in defense of the honor, integrity, and security of our military forces. Christianity is not entitled to control of our institutions.
You're not standing against anything. You're tilting at windmills.
Quote:
And DE, when you claim that the pressure on soldiers to conform to evangelical Christianity is *not* coercion, you are absolutely full of it. It *is* coercion. The pressure to conform in the Army is absolutely essential to a soldier's training. There are plenty of stories of soldiers who's careers were ruined because they did not accept the version of Christ that was being shoved down their throats in the military.
Sorry, but it's not coercion. Making someone go to a speech on surviving in combat where the guest happens to state his religious views is not coercion to accept Christ. Drill Sergeants tricking the trainees into going to church so that they can get a 2 hour break from training them is not coercion; you don't have to do anything in church but sit there. Unless you can show where someone forced them to pray, say "Jesus is my Savior" or something overtly religious, you don't have a leg to stand on.
Basic training is basic training. The DIs are required
by law to give the trainees access to church services, but they also are not going to give **** time to those who choose not to go. Since those are a minority, they have to come up with busy-work for them since any training would need to be repeated. Moreover, since you claim atheism isn't a religion, they are hardly entitled to access to religious services of their own.
As for soldiers whose careers were "ruined by not accepting Jesus" that's total horseshit. Equal Opportunity policy is both very explicit and very strict on such matters. Discriminatiing or permitting religious discrimination of any type
will end your career very rapidly - if it can be substantiated. Any soldiers claiming their "careers were ruined" are either A) lying B) were lying at the time and were caught at it by the EO system or C) didn't bother to make a complaint in the first place, in which case it's their own damn fault. EO representatives and policies are required to be posted where soldiers can see them and commanders are required to have an EO policy that soldiers are aware of and which conforms to Army guidelines. The military is rife with underperformers who will blame any kind of "discrimination" they think they can fabricate to cover their inadequacy.
You don't know jack **** about the military, and putting asterixes around your points doesn't add any weight to them. This is just more indication that you're completely incapable of reason; you grasp at any straw you can to wail and gnash your teeth.
Quote:
And this last example, the example of gun sights with biblical verses, is the second most disgusting, appalling, and horrifying example of just how far our military has fallen in recent decades. The most appalling thing is watching people defend it.
The fact that you think this is a serious problem is the only thing disgusting and appalling here. The lengths to which you will go to justify your own bigotry are simply astounding.
Quote:
Im going to quote this from the article, because you guys don't seem to get it, or refuse to get it -
"Military professionals must remember that religious choice is a matter of individual conscience. Professionals, and especially commanders, must not take it upon themselves to change or coercively influence the religious views of subordinates."
--Religious Toleration (Air Force Code of Ethics, 1997)"
Do you see that? Does that make sense? The military is supposed to leave soldiers the **** alone about their religious views. Not to mention putting bible verses in the sights of the very rifles that will be used to kill Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan. What kind of person does that, and how in the **** did they get a contract in the first place?
You're either lying or didn't read your own article. The military not only didn't put the verse references ont he scopes; they didn't even know they were on there.
Which is it? Lying, or just didn't bother to read?
As for leaving soldiers alone about their religious views, the fact of the matter is that
all soldiers,
regardless of rank, have a
Constitutional right to state their personal religious views to others insofar as it does not negatively use good order and discipline or involve the use of command authority to force participation in actual religious activity. Not having to see it, or be present when it goes on, or be around it, but actual participation.
It is
illegal, and unConstitutional to tell any soldier they may not express their religious views to other soldiers. The Supreme Court has already ruled that Soldiers retain their First Ammendment rights insofar as it does not affect good order and discipline.
By your absurd claims, every time I got a class on Islam before deploying I was having "religion forced down my throat". How about the simulated Islamic prayer calls at Fort McCoy broadcast to the entire FOB?
Oh, wait.. Those serve a valid military purpose, and so does sending soldiers to see a guest speaker who will talk about what happened to him in Viet Nam. His personal story of how his religion helped him deal with it is perfectly legitimate material for other soldiers. It is not prostlytizing or coercion.
As for basic training, "go to church or get your *** smoked for 2 hours" is not coercion. Getting your *** smoked is what you'd be doing anyhow. If you knew anything at all about the military beyond the imaginings you come up with to confirm your own viewpoints, you'd understand that.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Love it!!!! 
