Posted on 09/02/2007 1:34:34 PM PDT by DogByte6RER
Bush apologizes to Wiccan widow
Published: Sept 2, 2007 at 10:16 AM
WASHINGTON, Sept 1 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush apologized to a Nevada Wiccan who was left out of a presidential meeting with relatives of soldiers killed in combat.
Rebecca Stewart, who sued to have the Wiccan symbol placed on her husband’s grave marker in a military cemetery, told The Washington Post the president called her to apologize. She said she explained to Bush the faith she and her husband shared.
Sgt. Patrick Stewart was killed in Afghanistan in 2005.
Stewart said she heard about the private meeting from her mother-in-law, who was invited. The president visited Nevada to speak at the American Legion convention.
Stewart told the Post she believed she had been excluded from the invitation list because of the lawsuit she filed to have the Defense Department place the Wiccan symbol -- a five-pointed star inside a circle -- on her husband's grave. She won the suit and the government added the Wiccan symbol to 38 others that were previously recognized, including a symbol for atheism.
While other Wiccans are known to be serving in the military, Stewart is believed to be the first to die in combat.
(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...
Whose this “we”.
That leaves a lot to interpretation as can be seen by some Christian churches that border Arizona, Colorado and Utah and practice polygamy.
Aren’t you mocking other religions yourself?
EBH, you can’t win these types of battles. There is no logic or thinking. They are programmed robots. I did battle with one that was convinced that an ink stamp on his hand, to get into a skating rink, was the “Mark of the Beast.”
Drammach, did I misunderstand your post 78? ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1888095/posts?page=78#78 )
I thought you said you had refused to take the mark of the beast when it was offered in jest in the form of an ink stamp.
Satan has a large supply of deceptions. You were wise not to declare an agreement to take the mark of the beast, regardless of how it was presented. It is, after all, the agreement that damns one’s soul to hell. An agreement to serve satan, and an agreement to wear his mark are the same. Some people agree to the mark, without actually receiving a physical mark, but they are damned to hell just the same for their willingness to serve satan.
As I pointed out on an earlier post, the commander of a military unit is responsible by law for everything that occurs in his unit. That includes any religious program.
As an example of a belief that a commander would not honor, take anyone whose "sabbath rest" belief prevented them from doing ANYTHING on the sabbath other than religious observance. The commander would rule that out of line WHEN it conflicts with military necessity. His response would be, "The enemy is coming. You will fight or you will die, and your sabbath takes a back seat to the needs of the moment."
Now, as you think about it, the commander is the one being rational, and the one insisting on his prayer rug, shawl, observance, etc. is the being irrational.
UNIT Morale, good order, law, and discipline are critical issues for military commanders. Therefore, they will go out of their way at times that do not involve military necessity to accomodate ALMOST ALL other observances that are not detrimental to UNIT morale, good order, law, and discipline.
For example, the will not smile favorably on Molech worshippers who desire to sacrifice babies. They will not smile upon Aztec Sun God resurgents who desire to cut the hearts out of helpless victims. They'll not permit the use of illegal substances. They'll not permit practices of one group that require the desecration of another group's religious symbols or worship. It would be a matter of morale, order, and discipline.
As pointed out, a white-supremacist, anti-semitic religious group won't be permitted to paint swastikas on the chapel used by the rabbi and his Jewish followers. Satanists won't be permitted to desecrate crosses, worship areas, etc.
Argue with it all you like, but it ain't gonna happen, and it ain't gonna win in court.
A commander has a legal iron fist, and Congress has given him extremely wide latitude in his evaluation of what's good for the morale, good order, discipline, and law within his unit.
As you think about it, that's as it should be. A military unit isn't a social club tea party; it's a discipline killing machine protecting the existence of this nation. Anything that distracts it from that task is detrimental to the nation.
Absolutely!
Neither is anyone else's religion when it's used to justify contempt for the beliefs of others. If you can't demonstrate objective harm done to others there is no basis for that contempt but hatred. Itself an objective evil.
The "we" who I referred to in my comment are the American people. "We" Americans enjoy freedom of religion and can worship whoever or whatever we believe is God, at least for now.
Symbols are speech.
Burning the American flag was a free speech issue. Displaying the Confederate flag was fought on a first amendment basis. Displaying the peace symbol during the Vietnam War was protected speech. Even "nude dancing" is protected speech.
I'm saying a good first amendment case can be made for putting other than religious symbols on a grave marker.
But I do hate the works of Satan, which are all designed to bring misery upon mankind in this life and eternal damnation in the next life, and my bible teaches that all religions (Christianity in not a religion, see #176) are the creations of Satan and his fallen angels. You and all Americans are perfectly free to believe who and what we choose, or to not believe anything at all in the spiritual realm. However, please choose carefully because you will ultimately be held responsible for your choice by a far higher power than any human government.
What a stupid and asinine remark. THIS has nothing to do with homosexual rights or any other gender issues. THIS has to do with a soldier who DIED serving his country. The Pentagon had already approved 37 OTHER religious symbols for grave markings INCLUDING MUSLIM! Why draw the line at Wiccan?
Are you so arrogant and vapid headed that you have forgotten that this country is about FREEDOM WHICH includes RELIGION. I know this family and I watched over the cemetery when the a$$holes from KC threatened to boycott the funeral of Sgt. Patrick Stewart. I am honored to do so.
Your type of bigotry is not needed nor wanted in the conservative corner. Grow up.
Only by decree of a liberal USSC majority, not by original intent of the authors. The authors would be utterly incredulous if they were aware of how their intentions have been knowingly and deliberately distorted beyond recognition by liberal courts.
But even so, for all practical purposes you are correct in what you said, the court's decision carries the force of law and nude dancing is now protected "speech".
Based on your stupid comment, I'm certain you would have been one of Jefferson's enemies when he brilliantly separated our government from religion. You're the moron.
How very magnanimous of you (/sarc)
Best of all is that it doesn’t really effing matter what you think about the issue. The man has a wiccan symbol on his grave and President Bush apologized to the widow for leaving her out of a meeting. Both are proper. If you don’t like it you can move to a Taleban flavored Christian country somewhere.
Symbols are speech. Burning the American flag was a free speech issue. Displaying the Confederate flag was fought on a first amendment basis. Displaying the peace symbol during the Vietnam War was protected speech. Even "nude dancing" is protected speech.
All of those are Strawmen Arguments in regards to this case this case.
Are ANY military tombstones now issued by the U.S. Government allowed symbols other than religious symbols? No. Then none of those points have anything to do with this case.
If NOBODY is allowed to wear a political campaign button on his military uniform, that is not a First Amendment issue because one of the bedrock priciples of America is that the military does NOT get mixed up in politics likes the Roman Legions did and every military in a military dictatorship did. Everything else detracts from military discipline and they are forbiden EQUALLY to EVERYBODY.
If the military allowed campaign buttons on the uniform for Candidate A but not for Candidate B, that would be a Forst Amendment violation.
I'm saying a good first amendment case can be made for putting other than religious symbols on a grave marker.
Your statement was a mocking stament. A religious symbol of a religion I have not respect for? What next, a Notre Dame logo?
Why are you even on Freerepublic? The man is much more of an American that you. During the times of the 13 colonies there were laws that prohibited Jews and others from holding office. No doubt that you wish we could return to the “good old days”. I wish you could too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.