Posted on 05/16/2008 7:55:57 AM PDT by rosenfan
Maybe the reason the misperception persists that there are no atheists in foxholes is that nonbelievers must either shut up about their views or be hounded out of the military.
Just ask Army Spc. Jeremy Hall, who is making a splash in the news because of the way his atheism was attacked by superiors and fellow soldiers while he was risking his life in service to his country.
Hall, 23, served two combat tours in Iraq, winning the Combat Action Badge. But he's now stationed at Fort Riley, Kan., having been returned stateside early because the Army couldn't ensure his safety.
There is something deeply amiss when we send soldiers on a mission to engender peaceful coexistence between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, yet our military doesn't seem able to offer religious tolerance to its own.
Hall recounts the events that led to his marginalization in a federal lawsuit he filed in March in Kansas. Hall is joined by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, a group devoted to assisting members of the military who object to the pervasive and coercive Christian proselytizing in our armed forces.
Hall's atheism became an issue soon after it became known. On Thanksgiving 2006 while stationed outside Tikrit, Hall politely declined to join in a Christian prayer before the holiday meal. The result was a dressing down by a staff sergeant who told him that as an atheist he needed to sit somewhere else.
In another episode, after his gun turret took a bullet that almost found an opening, the first thing a superior wanted to know was whether Hall believed in Jesus now, not whether he was okay.
Then, in July, while still in Iraq, Hall organized a meeting of the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers. According to Hall, after things began, Maj. Freddy Welborn disrupted the meeting with threats saying he might bring charges against Hall for conduct detrimental to good order and discipline, and that Hall was disgracing the Constitution. (Err, I think the major has that backward.) Welborn has denied the allegations, but the New York Times reports that another soldier at the meeting said that Hall's account was accurate.
Hall claims that he was denied a promotion in part because he wouldn't be able to "pray with his troops." And of course he was returned from overseas due to physical threats from fellow soldiers and superiors. Things became so bad that he was assigned a full-time bodyguard.
This is nothing new to Mikey Weinstein, founder of MRFF and a former Air Force judge advocate general who also served in the Reagan administration. Weinstein says that he has collected nearly 8,000 complaints, mostly from Christian members of the military tired of being force-fed a narrow brand of evangelical fundamentalism.
Weinstein, who co-wrote the book With God on Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military, has documented how the ranks of our military have been infiltrated by members of the Officers' Christian Fellowship and other similar organizations. On its Web site, the OCF makes no secret of its mission which is to "raise up a godly military" by enlisting "ambassadors for Christ in uniform."
Weinstein says recruitment is easy in a strict command-subordinate military where the implied message is, if you don't pray the right way, your career might stall.
Beyond the mincemeat being made of church-state separation and religious liberty, it seems particularly combustible for our armed forces to be combining "end-times" Christian theology with military might. That's no way to placate Muslim populations around the world.
But there's no will for change. The military's virulent religious intolerance could be eradicated tomorrow with swift sanctions against transgressors. Instead, it's winked at and those caught proselytizing suffer no consequence. It appears that brave men like Hall, who simply wish to follow the dictates of their own conscience, will be needing bodyguards for a long time to come.
The point is membership in an organization, and it's up to the organization to describe itself, not the government's.
I told you to be careful of reading more into the "religious test" clause than what's there. No government employee or judge has to determine what is or is not a legitimate religious belief in order to figure out what someone belongs to, that being a First Amendment right ~ to assemble and petition.
They say they're a member of so and so, and so and so says it's such and such type of organization.
End of story.
A totalitarian government might well process those words differently. If you wish to find a government that will do that for you, it's a big world and there are many such places to chose from. However, if you want to have the benefits of living in the USA you have to go along with us on this little quirk we have about "religion". We have a totally secular government with religious freedom for everyone. Attempting to use the organs of state to crush someone else's right to their own religious beliefs is considered poor manners.
What’s an evangelical?
I’m sure he does. I don’t see how believing or not, would have much of an effect on someone.
You're the one who brought up conspiracies. I never said there was one.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it? I think it was an appeasement prosecution. But then there is precedent, Lt. Harry "Breaker" Morant in the Boer War.
You’ve got quite a good memory. Dang Brit ne’er do well had no business enlisting in the war in the first place. Caused quite a ruckuss though.
"And there I was, an atheist in a foxhole..."
the infowarrior
In this sense like the major as described in this case. All else is subordinate to his belief in God, and if you don’t believe exactly has he does he will try to convert you. If you resist, you are then sub-human. Sort of like an Islam-inspired Christian.
He still considered himself British and wanted to fight for the empire. I guess patriotism isn't always appreciated.
Why, would you be insulted by that?
Not in the slightest.
I am insulted but being charaterized as someone whose thinking is not free. Are Athiest insulted to be called someone that does not believe?
The word freethinker has been in use since the 17th century. Its definition, from dictionary.com:
a person who forms opinions on the basis of reason, independent of authority or tradition, esp. a person whose religious opinions differ from established belief.
—Synonyms: skeptic, agnostic; atheist.
An overview of freethought, from Wikipedia:
Freethought holds that individuals should neither accept nor reject ideas proposed as truth without recourse to knowledge and reason. Thus, freethinkers strive to build their beliefs on the basis of facts, scientific inquiry, and logical principles, independent of any factual/logical fallacies or intellectually-limiting effects of authority, cognitive bias, conventional wisdom, popular culture, prejudice, sectarianism, tradition, urban legend, and all other dogmatic or otherwise fallacious principles. As such, when applied to religion, the philosophy of freethought holds that, given presently-known facts, established scientific theories, and logical principles, there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of supernatural phenomena.
It's a very specific term. It thus characterizes people who aren't freethinkers as having a worldview which is not free of such things as belief in the supernatural...not thought which is not free in general.
It is a bit insulting when you're told "No matter what you believe, God is still watching over you." That's separate from things like "Have a blessed day" ("good bye" in the South) or "Grüss Got" ("Greet God" used as "Hello" in Bavaria) which are just sincere situational phrases. Anyone who takes offense at those just has a thin skin and needs to get a life.
uhh, yah. What you describe is a bigoted stereotype. Personally, I've never met a Christian that believed and acted in this manner, and I know plenty of fundamentalists.
The reason I ask is that since the 04 election and NPR was beating the drum that “Evangelicals” crawled out from under a rock and voted for Bush, Evangelical has been the new-Fundamentalist when a derogatory description of a Christian is needed.
By definition, all Christian religions are Evangelical.
Thanks for the article. In this case it appears we mainly have a couple bad apples creating a hostile environment. The major apparently thinks he’s on a mission from God in Iraq to spread Christianity. Funny, I thought he was on a mission directed by his commander-in-chief in defense of his country. I have no problem with religious people in uniform as long as they have their secular chain of command and mission straight. Threatening a soldier because his beliefs differ is definitely not conducive to unit morale. If it’s true, he should be officially reprimanded.
All stereotypes have truth behind them, even if they're not representative of the majority.
Similarly the belief that being Christian makes one superior or better than anyone has absolutely nothing to do with any Christian religion that self-identifies as Evangelical.
Have there been GOP anti-minority bigots?
Similarly the belief that being Christian makes one superior or better than anyone has absolutely nothing to do with any Christian religion that self-identifies as Evangelical.
They exist, thus the stereotype. In my personal experience they're pretty rare, but then I haven't met any jihadist type Muslims either.
I hear yah. But I disagree in classification.
Sorry, “Evangelical” unqualified was probably not the best word to use.
Fundamentalism, at face value, should be a good thing. Strict adherence to the fundamentals of the religion. If these solders were doing as they are accused, they really are heretics.
I would point out that Christian and Jewish fundamentalists differ from Islamic Fundies.. In that violence against nonbelievers is heresy, in Islam it is strict and accurate adherence to theology. ..that's not an opinion.
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.