Pentagon's Problem w/Proselytizing-Evangelicals lately have detected worrying signals from military

The Wall Street Journal ^ | May 9, 2013 | Mollie Ziegler Hemingway

[2ndDivisionVet]

In early April, Army Reserve soldiers in Pennsylvania were told in a redeployment briefing that evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics were "extremists," the same category as al Qaeda. Later that month, the Southern Baptist Convention's website was blocked on Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps bases due to what the military's software filter told Web users was "hostile content." And in early May, news reports said that an anti-Christian crusader had proposed new rules for the Pentagon so that military-service members could be court-martialed for sharing their faith.

But the initial reports on these matters were exaggerated, taken out of context or simply false. The Army Reserve briefing materials in Pennsylvania were quickly corrected, and the alleged website ban turned out to be a software glitch. On May 2, the Pentagon issued a statement reiterating its policy that personal evangelism is permitted:

"The U.S. Department of Defense has never and will never single out a particular religious group for persecution or prosecution," assured Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen in the statement. "The Department makes reasonable accommodations for all religions and celebrates the religious diversity of our service members."

So is the case about Pentagon policy closed? Not at all, say some religious-liberty advocates.

For one thing, the Pentagon statement clarifying that military personnel would not be court-martialed if they "evangelize" also said that "proselytization" is considered a Uniform Code of Military Justice offense. Yet the definitions of those two words are almost identical: Merriam-Webster defines proselytization as "to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause" and evangelize as "to preach the gospel to or to convert to Christianity."

In response to the Pentagon statement, two Southern Baptist leaders issued their own statement on May 6 voicing concern about religious freedom....

[donna]

Gays in charge. What did they expect?

[BitWielder1]

Trial balloon, didn't fly (this time), backtracking (for now).

[bigheadfred]

they need to throw some people into foxholes and put them under heavy fire they can start with hagel

[CMB_polarization]

Exactly. They are threatened by tradition.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

I believe the symbol on the sleeve needs to be changed to the Obama sign.

[Godwin1]

A “soft” persecution is well under way. It begins with incessant ridicule of Christians and their beliefs in the mass culture—the media and entertainment industry. No NFL team will touch Tebow although a couple could use a QB who could run in certain situations. As an overt Christian, he is too “controversial.” In defending the assault on the First Amendment that is the HHS Obamacare mandate, the Administration argues that, for Christians at least, freedom of religion is merely freedom of worship, something to be confined behind the four walls of churches. The attempt to banish faithful Christians from the military was a trial balloon. They will be back, using homosexuality as the club: those who refuse to bow down before the new god of sexual deviancy will be banished from or marginalized within the Armed Forces. The danger to the First Amendment is just another reason we must fight to keep the Second. The First Amendment’s freedom of expression stipulation is also in danger: a man languishes in federal prison for making a video critical of Islam.

[Mike Darancette]

evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics..

Say what??

[G Larry]

Obama is intent on driving Chaplin’s from the Military.

[OneVike]

Well stated.

Let the End Times Begin!

[x_plus_one]

Here come the Mullahs. The brotherhood took control of the nuclear arsenal last month when they fired the 17 officers who wouldn’t take orders to nuke their own people. The American people are being taken down the road to hell.

[RhoTheta]

Bump for further study.