Marine court-martialed for refusing to remove Bible verse

Foxnews.com/opinion ^ | 5-26-2015 | Todd Starnes

[Impy]

It’s a wonder anyone is still willing to serve in the military under these conditions. The next Republican Secretary of Defense has some work to do.

[lee martell]

I agree. We had a case of two very stubborn women locking horns and playing for power. In some cases we have to remember, the military has a right to dictate how their material is to be treated or maintained. It’s not out property, not really.
She wasted a lot of time defending herself when the other side had everything to gain and very little to lose. They could have drug this ego war out for another couple of years.

[Birdsbane]

God’s Word trumps all earthly law.

[NFHale]

Going to take more than just a “Republican” SecDef to undo the damage this admin and his f***ed up party has wrought.

Going to take a LOT more.

But I agree with some of the other posters. You learn REAL fast that the equipment does NOT belong to you; it’s US GI (now, technically, you can argue that it’s TAXPAYER property, but that’s an argument you will lose...).

She should have obeyed the lawful order (yeah.. I know... I can hear the “HALE!!! YOU TOO?!? WTF!” comin’ through the internet already...)

[NFHale]

“..God’s Word trumps all earthly law....”

Yeah, that’ll work...

[RKBA Democrat]

So let me get this right. According to caesar’s courts, displaying a Bible verse doesn’t constitute religious exercise.

And what is it that Christians seek to gain by appealing to caesar?

[Birdsbane]

Your sarcasm may condemn you, as it already has the earthly powers that be. Mark 3:29 - “...but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven it.

[captain_dave]

The military is an authoritarian socialist subculture.

[Political Junkie Too]

the Religious Freedom Restoration Act did not apply to her case because displaying a Bible verse does not constitute religious exercise.

It didn't display all by itself. It took an action to make it display.

What about speaking it out loud?

What about speaking it out loud at a school?

What about speaking it out loud at a graduation or a football game?

What about speaking it out loud at school in a club of like-minded students?

All of that is outlawed, but this soldier "displaying" a Bible verse is not covered?

Do you get the sense that everyone - at every level of government - is just making it up as they go to suit their particular agenda at the time?

-PJ

[Anoreth]

Wonder how she got away with that haircut.

[NFHale]

Well, that’s too bad isn’t it?

You believe what you want, others will too.

[Maudeen]

Well, that’s too bad isn’t it?

You believe what you want, others will too.

__________________________________

Christians are seeing the dismantling of our country’s founding core beliefs and it is very frustrating to say the least. It is just a matter of time. . . . http://www.patburt.com/

[july4thfreedomfoundation]

Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

[Conscience of a Conservative]

Here, the appellant taped a biblical quotation in three places around her workstation, organized in a fashion to “represent the trinity.” While her explanation at trial may invoke religion, there is no evidence that posting signs at her workstation was an “exercise” of that religion in the sense that such action was “part of a system of religious belief.” Indeed, the appellant never told her SSgt that the signs had a religious connotation and never requested any religious accommodation to enable her to display the signs. Instead, the record supports the conclusion that the appellant was simply placing what she believed to be personal reminders that those she considered adversaries could not harm her. Such action does not trigger the RFRA.

The full opinion of the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals is here. It's worth a read. This article doesn't quite capture what was going on here - based on the facts laid out in the opinion, it sounds like she did not seem to think that orders applied to her, and the "signs" thing was just one small part of that bigger issue.

[Secret Agent Man]

Got that right.

[NFHale]

Then fight back.

Learn how to beat the enemy at his own game.

Instead of sitting around throwing Bible verses and complaining about how bad it is, do something constructive to start punching back.

Start with absolute refusal to comply, and go from there.

[Grimmy]

Imo, it’s that any SNCO, USMC or otherwise, could find that bit of nothing in any way offensive.

Douchebag needs to see the Corpsman to have his Sniveling Astro Turf Gland removed.

[montag813]

Quoting #57: The proper response to a lawful order is not “Why?”

An order that violates the U.S. Constitution is not a "lawful order."

[T-Bird45]

Are you familiar with the saying “you may beat the rap but you won’t beat the ride”? It applies here in the same way it applies at the side of the road when attempting to adjudicate a ticket with the traffic cop. Further, by establishing the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the interest of good order and discipline, the Congress determined that the special circumstances of military service required structure not found in the Constitution.

At some point in the appeals process, there may be some finding more aligned to your point of view. However, that won’t be the daily reality of cheerful obedience to the orders of your superior NCO/officer.

[Carry me back]

They were being attacked before Obama. It started under George Bush. Obama is continuing it.