House Approves Petitioning the Lord with Prayer at Public Military Ceremonies
by Pamela LeaveySo much for the new Air Force and Navy guidelines on religion. Yesterday, the House approved a $513 billion defense authorization bill that “includes language intended to allow chaplains to pray in the name of Jesus at public military ceremonies.”
Before the bill reached the House floor, Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee added the provision on military chaplains. It says each chaplain “shall have the prerogative to pray according to the dictates of the chaplain’s own conscience, except as must be limited by military necessity, with any such limitation being imposed in the least restrictive manner feasible.”
Air Force and Navy rules issued in recent months allow chaplains to pray as they wish in voluntary worship services. But the rules call for nonsectarian prayers, or a moment of silence, at public meetings or ceremonies, especially when attendance is mandatory for service members of all faiths.
Focus on the Family, the Christian Coalition and other evangelical Christian groups have lobbied vigorously against the Air Force and Navy rules, urging President Bush to issue an executive order guaranteeing the right of chaplains to pray in the name of Jesus under any circumstances. Because the White House has not acted, sympathetic members of Congress stepped in.“We felt there needed to be a clarification” of the rules “because there is political correctness creeping into the chaplains corps,” said Rep. Walter B. Jones (R-N.C.). “I don’t understand anyone being opposed to a chaplain having the freedom to pray to God in the way his conscience calls him to pray.”
Among the provision’s opponents is the chief of Navy chaplains, Rear Adm. Louis V. Iasiello, a Roman Catholic priest.
“The language ignores and negates the primary duties of the chaplain to support the religious needs of the entire crew” and “will, in the end, marginalize chaplains and degrade their use and effectiveness,” Iasiello wrote in a letter to a committee member.
A private association of religious groups, the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces, who provides “more than 70 percent of U.S. chaplains, also objected to the language.”
“Chaplains represent their faith communities and we endorse them to represent that faith community with integrity and loyalty to that tradition, not to the dictates of their individual conscience,” the association’s executive committee wrote.
Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called the language “divisive.” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) offered an amendment to add that chaplains should show “sensitivity, respect and tolerance for all faiths,” but it was defeated on a party-line vote in committee, and the Rules Committee did not allow floor debate on the chaplaincy provision.
Needless to say the faith based conservatives wouldn’t allow anyone to argue that the military “cannot petition the Lord with prayer” during public military ceremonies that should include respect and tolerance for it’s members who may not be of the Christian faith.
Filed under: Bush Admin, Congress, House Of Reps, In The News, Politics, Republicans | Get Permalink or trackback |
And what can some active military person do if they are offended?
Denver has a large Jewish population. When the GOP had control of the state house, the Jewish legislators often waited outside the chambers until the prayer was done….
Ginny
I don’t know. Just another one of many incidents here of not respecting separation of church and state in my opinion.
Ginny
This is amusing… one right leaning “soccer mom” called this post a “rant” – LOL!
Pamela,
I wonder if I could collect all the Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News articles (they both endorsed W, soccer Mom) on the problems at the Air Force Academy with discrimination against recruits who are not Christian and post them on her site.
For those of us who ARE in military families, the increasing discrimination has been obvious for over a decade. Who got promoted in some commands depended on whether the officer and spouse both went to Bible study, church, etc.
Can’t remember where I saw the article then, could have been a newsweekly – been about 10 years. Discussing how prevalent it was at the PENTAGON. High brass.
“Leavey, … surely never having put her life on the line for a bunch of sniveling liberal ingrates. ”
How about all the dead, maimed and wounded who put their lives on the line for a delusional, psychotic, self immersed excuse for a human being who got himself elected by cheating, lying and letting the rest of the GOP machine grease his way into 1600 PA Ave.
Let me explain one of my problems with public prayer that has a little too much ‘flavor’ to it. I had Seasonal Affective Disorder for 11 years when I lived near Elmendorf AFB in AK. I wasn’t diagnosed until 5 years into it. In spite of a multifaceted, intense treatment protocol, every year it would get worse. I contemplated suicide for years and would not do it because I knew the kids could not be ‘left behind’ in this miserable world if I wasn’t staying. And I wasn’t going to do it if either of them would know for a nanosecond what was coming. Every year I asked, I pleaded. I never rejected Jesus, he never accepted me that I was aware of. The last year when I figured out how to do it, I was going to get the guns and was able to stop myself 1 more time – because of my medical knowledge. That summer I moved and have been fine since. Except when some public prayer reminds me of those awful days and nights, waiting and hoping for an answer that never came.
So, forgive me, I’ve been through hell, and I’m a born again Secular Humanist.
I raised two children who will never serve in the military. My son is ADD and none of the services would take him. My daughter is dyslexic and so disabled at 21 from the complications of a childhood disorder, she uses a wheel chair to keep the pain down rather than take drugs. They are both in college working towards engineering degrees.
I hope soccer Mom’s kids grow up strong, healthy, happy- and that she never has to bury one who put a life on the line for nothing.
THAT IS A RANT !!!
Ginny
Yes by golly that is a rant!
Soccer mom seems to be a bit caught up in her own fervor and doesn’t get that she contradicts who she claims to be on her left sidebar, with her ugly rants against those she disagrees with in the center column.
Just because I don’t support the Chicken Hawk in residency, soccer mom shouldn’t be making assumptions about things or people she doesn’t know.
With all due respect,
I think the Lord did answer your prayer, you found a new place to move and you got better and BEST of all your children still have their mother. I am a Navy retiree, my experience didn’t include any discrimination based on religion. (PLEASE listen I didn’t say it couldn’t happen) I just never experienced it one way or the other. Most of the traditional ceremonies and such included prayers and invocations because the one being honored requested them or it was traditionally part of the ceremony. Nobody can make you pray and/or listen to one, whether religious or not. What I do know is that the adage that there are no atheists in foxholes seems to have rung true during my 20 years. Unless I am misunderstanding you it also seems to me that it is not the public prayer that bothered you but that it reminded you of a health issue in which you believed God had not answered your prayer. If I am understanding you correctly this does not constitute crossing the line on the “separation” issue.
I served in Iraq and like many people in the military it was important that we tried to stay apolitical, that’s why it’s called service, we didn’t run to Canada if we disagreed with Clinton on Kosovo or with GWB on Iraq.
I certainly appreciate your points of view. Soccer Mom is the wife of a soon to be retired Army LTC. So she not only has more than paid her dues but also is sensitive to those serving in the military. (I am not saying that this means you cannot disagree with her) I am merely trying to give you some background.
Thanks.
Elmers Brother
Thanks for sharing your views. I think the objection here is that this was inserted into a bill in Congress.
“the House approved a $513 billion defense authorization bill that “includes language intended to allow chaplains to pray in the name of Jesus at public military ceremonies.””
The rub here is that Congress shouldn’t be inserting this language into appropriation bills and it’s not appropriate for Congress to decide whehter Chaplains can pray in the name of Jesus or Buddha for that matter.
We all know that there are no athesists in the foxhole. Just like the military is apolitical, it also is supposed to be accepting of all faiths. For Congress to deem that chaplains can pray in the name of Jesus, is pushing the views of others on those who sign up to serve regardless of their faith. It’s not right. God and/or the belief in a higher power is a far more personal matter to many than politics.
Just my 2 cents. And for what it’s worth, I didn’t go knocking on Soccer Mom’s door, she linked to me and passed judgement on me, with out cause. Most of what I posted was quoting the news article from the Washington Post and it sure as heck was not a rant.
And FYI, my father served in WWII. Two bother in laws in Korea and one in Nam – Marine Copter pilot. My nephew was in the Coast Guard. I have many dear friends who served in Nam, some who didn’t come back. I don’t judge those who serve, I support them — I voted for Veteran in the last election.
I understand and I appreciate what you are saying but the rub from my point of view is that not all chaplains are Christians.
As I said most ceremonies etc. where Chaplains are used are either at the request of the person (e.g. my own retirement ceremony, I had a Christian Chaplain) or is part of the tradition of that particular ceremony e.g. the christening of a ship. If someone has no religious affiliation to my knowledge of these situations, no one is forced to pray, neither are they discriminated or their career affected in anyway because they didn’t participate. There are no religious police in the military.
I agree that Congress should not be deciding these things, the individual Chaplain should be able to stay true to his individual beliefs. I have never seen anyone persecuted or otherwise for not participating in a religious prayer. And Chaplains are also required despite their religious affiliation to accommodate people of other faiths, even if it is contradictory to their own beliefs. So other belief systems are respected and those who don’t subscribe to a religious affiliation can ignore it. I mean if a person doesn’t believe in a higher being what difference does it make to them, you might as well be talking to thin air. Chaplains must also help to facilitate rites, ceremonies etc of those outside of the Chaplain’s particular belief system.
I appreciate the respectful way in which we can have this conversation.
I appreciate the service of your family. We owe them a debt and I too voted for a veteran.
elmers brother,
I left a post on Cate’s blog regarding my family connections to the military and that it is most definitely not ALL Christians or all prayers that are disrespectful. As an RN, I absolutely respect my patient’s religious needs and have seen some medically unbelievable situations that I attribute to their faiths : American Native, Buddhist, Hindu.
After 30 years I am convinced that it does not really matter WHAT you believe as THAT you believe – and that your actions follow those beliefs. I am a humble atheist. I know I could be wrong. I have the idea that should there be a higher being who does judge us on our life here, it will be: You claimed to be a Jew, Baptist, Buddhist, how did you follow the teachings of your faith?
I know you believe that the Lord helped me. I am aware of the “The Lord helps those that help themselves” teaching.
I also know what I had to do to get 3000 miles from Anchorage to where my family was and how much they did – secular humanists all – to give us a chance to get established here. And although we are alive, my children suffered as much as I feared: their father decided I was just trying to get away from him. He stayed, we made it on my salary with no financial support from him. If the Lord was helping there, I would have been mad at him instead of my ex
What bothers me in public prayer is when someone alludes to the idea that anyone who does not accept Jesus only is somehow excluded from the good will being offered. (Not listen, put our fingers in our ears?) I hear people talking about the faithless and Godless as though we are inevitably the scum of life, whores, cheats, liers, alcoholics, etc. I am more of a goody two shoes than a lot of Christians I know. Not because anything God says, just that none of those behaviors would make me feel good and all have horrible risks.
I have heard combat vets say that the no atheists in foxholes is actually not true. And I believe the foxhole experience makes the individual confront what is really in their hearts.
I suspected soccer mom is a millitary wife. I worked with many millitary wives and was very close to my mother-in-law – the epitome of millitary wives and the sacrifices they make so their husbands can serve our country. I just don’t think Jesus meant for us to build tanks and guns and planes to kill people with. I believe he said, and meant, ‘Love thy enemies’. And that diplomacy and other means than violence can keep us safer – and the innocents who live in a country now in ruins from the warfare we started.
I have a problem with people who think I am a sniveling liberal ingrate because I don’t agree with their perspective of the world. I understand their perspective much better than they realize. They don’t seem to make much effort to understand mine. Yourself excepted.
It’s the language, the attitude and the broad paintbrush.
Given your service and comments, I highly reccommend you watch for the release of Sir,No Sir. A short documentary that is touring now pre-release.
And with all sincerity,
Thank you for your service.
We are against the war, we support the warriors.
Shalom
Elmers Brother
If this law passes the Congress – the House and the Senate, than it mandates, if I am correct that Chaplains can and will invooke the name of Jesus rather God. That’s a whole different aspect of what our men and women in service have been accustomed to all these years. If Soccer Mom took my post as saying that those who serve our country should not be allowed to pray shw misunderstood what I was saying. I believe prayer is personal and I support those of all faiths who invoke the name of who they believe serves their image of a higher power.
I wholeheartedly appreciate soccer Mom’s husband’s service your service and all who serve.
Now I pray for some sleep… but your conversation is welcomed and enjoyed… so feel free to continue.. I’ll catch up after some sleep.
I read your post on Cate’s blog and I have responded.
The Lord helps those that help themselves” teaching. Not in the scriptures I follow.
The scripture you point out about “loving thy enemy” is in regards to individual persecution and is not a verse that is used for foreign policy. A lot of people will make these kind of assumptions about scripture. No offense intended.
What bothers me in public prayer is when someone alludes to the idea that anyone who does not accept Jesus only is somehow excluded from the good will being offered
I have never seen or heard of this being done as part of a military function
I would never describe anyone I don’t know as faithless and Godless. However if you are an atheist, is this not a proper description. (I mean this with respect, not trying to be funny). This does not mean you do not have good values, integrity etc. It means you have derived these values from a different source than those who follow a particular religion.
Certainly you are not a whore etc. and your behavior can and often will be better than some who are claiming to be Christian or otherwise. Please forgive me but I wish to try to explain a basic Christian tenet, not for the purpose of conversion but for clarity’s sake. A lot of non-Christians misunderstand what Christians believe in regards to good works or good things that Christians do. A basic tenet of orthodox Christianity is that we all miss the mark, including those calling themselves CHRISTIANS. So then going to church is not a gathering of perfect people but a hospital for the sick. The difference is I recognize that I have an illness and need God’s help. As a Christian I don’t claim to be any better than anyone else. Quite the contrary as a Christian I see myself for who I truly am, so I need God. There is the difference.
I am sorry you have been hurt by Christians or others who have dismissed you or found it difficult to understand you. Please be sure that Christians will ALWAYS disappoint you but the ONE they follow will not. (I promise no more preaching)
side note: The Humanist manifesto describes itself some 28 times as a religion.
I certainly appreciate your point of view. I respectfully disagree about the war. This is based on my short experience in Iraq. I believe that it is a compassionate thing that we have done to try and give the Iraqi’s freedom. I know you will disagree and that’s okay. I am not trying to win an argument. I am explaining my point of view for clarity’s sake.
Conservatives often feel the sting of a broad paintbrush as well and the internet is a place where feelings and emotions are difficult to understand. Can you hear the tone in my voice on the interenet? It’s difficult you see.
I suspect that Cate’s attitude should have been directed more at the article and not at you. If you can believe it Cate is a good lady and I suspect you are too.
From this Christian thanks for your work with the veterans.
I was accustomed to Christian chaplains invoking Christ, Jewish chaplains YWHW etc. I don’t know exactly what will change, but I don’t believe as the article states that anything should be done merely for political correctness.
Thanks, EB, for givig a little history.
Pamela,
He’s right. After 20 yeas of service, my husband will be retiring in a few months. My dad served for 22 years and two of my three brothers served.
I’ll concede that describing your post as a rant is a stretch – this is an issue that really bothers me. Here’s why:
A chaplain’s job is to be a minister to servicemen. How can he minister if he is censored? Now we are demanding that clergy distill and filter their faith so that it sounds nice at public ceremonies? How utterly condescending – in effect this kind of censorship defines faith as foolishness by demanding that we compromise it.
For the record, I don’t belong to any of the churces represented by the chaplains who have gained notoriety with their words. And I don’t necessarily agree with what they say, but if pornographers can put tittilating trash in front of my children at the gas station checkout, I’ll be darned if I can agree that anyone else (that isn’t say, calling for death or illicit behavior) should be censored – even if they wear a uniform.
Ginny,
I am sorry for the challenges that you have gone through. Life is hard for everyone and I don’t say that lightly or disingenuously. This summer I stood by my brother’s side as he buried his 12 year old daughter, killed in a car accident where her 17 year old sister was the driver. I use that only as an example because frankly, I don’t think listing all of our adversities is any more unseful to this discussion than having to list our military credentials.
From this side of the aisle, it feels very much like I need Congressional permission to mention the Deity of my choice, however if, for example, I were pro-choice or gay, I could march through NYC denouncing ‘religious bigotry’.
You don’t have to believe to recognize the validity of respecting others who do. I, personally, don’t fit well into the religious right. They won’t have me. Many of them don’t see me as Christian – even though on most doctrinal points we are amazingly in agreement. I go into Christian bookstores and see books that define my faith as a cult. But you know what, I don’t picket those stores or demand that they close and when the chaplains who espouse those same views stand up and pray in public, I listen respectfully, even though I recognize that in another circumstance they might denounce me. It is called freedom of speech.
As for people getting promoted based on church attendance – I had a battalion S3 whose wife loved ‘wearing her husband’s rank’ and she politicked for him shamelessly. She even had her daughter switched from one little league team to another so she could play alongside the battalion commander’s twin girls.
This illustrates the harsh reality that religion isn’t the real problem – the real problem is the bigot who chooses to use it as a factor when promoting subordinates. Some may factor in church attendance – others will factor in race. Ultimately, bigoted people will use whatever discriminators they like – you can no more blame the worship service they attend than you can blame a man for his pigment.
elmers brother Says:
“If someone has no religious affiliation to my knowledge of these situations, no one is forced to pray”
Well, let me tell you what this Former Marine knows about this! I watched D.I’s tell each and every one of us that “EVERYONE WILL GO TO CHURCH”!!! For those that were not affiliated, They were given random denominations.
Such as:
What religion are you?
I have none.
OK you’re now a Baptist. You there, you are Catholic now. You are a Pentacostal now. Get in line! Anyone else?
From that day on, they had to go to that service every Sunday. That is what I saw with my very own eyes.
Donnie,
The same thing happened to my dad when he went to register to vote as a young man in Atlanta.
The voting official said “What are you registered as, son?” and Dad answered, “I don’t know.” The registrar then said, “You’re a Democrat. Sign here.”
You are right, cadets at West Point and other military schools are mandated some religious service attendance. I think that only applies to their first year, though.
That is an issue we can agree on. No one should be forced to church – but listening respectfully to someone who prays and believes differently is hardly indoctrination.
Semper Fi Don
Again I said I never witnessed it but never said it didn’t happen. When we were in basic training everybody wanted to go to church because you could catch up on your sleep and nobody got in trouble. LOL
I agree with Cate this should not be mandated.
I suspect the D.I. wanted some time without recruites.
Cate,
I would not have gone to the effort of listing the military experience except to establish that there are different experiences in the military and that to automatically assume all liberals – who have served as valiently as the conservatives, homosexuals and atheists- as ungrateful is not an argument. It is simple labeling that clearly you and elmers creek do not want to be on the receiving end of either.
The charges from the Air Force Cadets went far beyond mandating religious attendence – although it would not have been indoctrination either. And I would agree that is not appropriate. Classes in world religions, ethics, etc are very much so.
I am actually a Unitarian-Universalist and grew up fully understanding that if I expected respect for my beliefs, I had to show that respect for others. As I said, this has been central to my nursing care for 30 years. One of the basic approaches you are taught in nursing school to help people face a difficult time, a bad or life changing diagnoses is to find out what other difficult experiences they have faced in life and look at what helped them get through it. Invariably it was some combination of faith and human assistance from friends, family or total strangers. I advocated for and challenged them to use those again in their new stituation.
I think some of the perception that you can’t use Jesus name is the same thing that happens to those of us who are sensitive to what exactly is said or alluded to in a public prayer aside from Jesus name. That was the point of inserting “sensitivity, respect and tolerance for all faiths,” into the bill. What is the problem with that passage that it had to be voted out? It is sad that such common sense courtesy is even considered to be put into law.
As I said above, this happened in the legislature here, enough that the legislaters habit of waiting outside until the prayers were over made the conservative paper. It was also a huge issue when Billy Graham’s son gave the invocation at the public Columbine service. We are not talking about what can be a beautiful prayer that all can admire, but a prayer that either alludes to or flat out adds ideas and comments that exclude people of other faiths.
What I see happening is sort of a basic law of physics. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. For every comment from Jerry Falwell, etc that overstates the Christian reaction to homosexuality or other religous beliefs; for every radio host and all the callers who have filled the public airwaves with hatred and unfounded accusations: there are going to be those who react as human nature dictates – in kind.
So the rest of us are being cast into groups we don’t agree with and would rather they would get away from the microphones. We have the same attitude towards listening to others political ideas – they have a right to them and we might discover the nugget of truth there.
I fully understand that there are vast differences amongst Christians, Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats, etc.
We usually go to considerable effort to differentiate that it is the factions within the GOP that have ruined the party that we did have respect for. That many of us were members of until one of the groups drove us out. I was raised by committed Republicans, the whole family changed independently in the 70′s.
What I inevitably crunch this down to is that all human institutions, be it education, government, religion, politics or a garden club; are going to have problems with the reality that humans come in all variations and combinations of good and bad. It is up to all of us to try to dissuade and persuade the bad apples to change their actions.
And the point of inviting you to a more open discussion was to establish our similarities. I was wondering last night as I wrote those responses why I was bothering. I kept looking at the ACLU as supporting communism since 1920 ad on your blog and thought “this is going to be ignored or misunderstood”. I did it anyway because there is always the hope that somehow we will come together and care about each other again.
I cannot say how much I appreciate your joining us and adding more thoughtful comments to the discussion.
eb,
I would love to clarify some of the comments but I HAVE to go do some errands… Check back later if you can, thanks for the discussion.
What most that have not been in the Corps don’t know, are lil things like this:
Marine’s Prayer
Almighty Father, whose command is over all and whose love never fails, make me aware of Thy presence and obedient to Thy will. Keep me true to my best self, guarding me against dishonesty in purpose and deed and helping me to live so that I can face my fellow Marines, my loved ones, and Thee without shame or fear. Protect my family.
Give me the will to do the work of a Marine and to accept my share of responsibilities with vigor and enthusiasm. Grant me the courage to be proficient in my daily performance. Keep me loyal and faithful to my superiors and to the duties my Country and the Marine Corps have entrusted to me. Help me to wear my uniform with dignity, and let it remind me daily of the traditions which I must uphold.
If I am inclined to doubt, steady my faith; if I am tempted, make me strong to resist; if I should miss the mark, give me courage to try again.
Guide me with the light of truth and grant me wisdom by which I may understand the answer to my prayer.
“THE RIFLE CREED”
“This Is My Rifle”
This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.
My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless. I must fire my rifle true. I must shoot straighter than my enemy who is trying to kill me. I must shoot him before he shoots me. I WILL…
My rifle and myself know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. WE WILL HIT…
My rifle is human, even as I, because it is my life. Thus, I will learn it as a brother. I will learn its weaknesses, its strength, its parts, its accessories, its sights and its barrel. I will ever guard it against the ravages of weather and damage as I will ever guard my legs, my arms, my eyes and my heart against damage. I will keep my rifle clean and ready. We will become part of each other. WE WILL…
Before God, I swear this creed. My rifle and myself are the defenders of my country. We are the masters of our enemy. WE ARE THE SAVIORS OF MY LIFE.
So be it, until victory is America’s and there is no enemy, but peace!
by Major General William H. Rupertus (USMC, Ret.)
(written following the attack on Pearl Harbor)
“6 Articles Code of Conduct”
ARTICLE I:
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.
ARTICLE II:
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.
ARTICLE III:
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.
ARTICLE IV:
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information nor take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them in every way.
ARTICLE V:
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country or its allies or harmful to their cause.
ARTICLE VI:
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free
I will trust in my God and in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
“Oath Of A U.S. Marine”
ON THE DAY YOU ENLIST: I (state your name) do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
Now take a close look at each of those, and tell me what all have in common!
Cate
Welcome to the Dem Daily. The many years your family has committed to serving our country is appreciated here. Donnie is not the only Vet who frequents our blog, there a few, and I dare say everyone here fully respects and honors our men and women in service.
You said: “A chaplain’s job is to be a minister to servicemen. How can he minister if he is censored? Now we are demanding that clergy distill and filter their faith so that it sounds nice at public ceremonies?”
It is my understanding that there were some issues particularly in the Air Force where Christian fundamentalism was being forced on members. So the Air Force and the Navy recently changed their rules to what the Washington Post reported and I quoted above:
“Air Force and Navy rules issued in recent months allow chaplains to pray as they wish in voluntary worship services. But the rules call for nonsectarian prayers, or a moment of silence, at public meetings or ceremonies, especially when attendance is mandatory for service members of all faiths.”
We are a country that grants Religious Freedom and that freedom should extend into our military.
My objection with this language being inserted by Congress into the House appropriations bill is that it’s insertion was instituted by “Focus on the Family, the Christian Coalition and other evangelical Christian groups have lobbied vigorously against the Air Force and Navy rules.”
In the 5 years that Bush has been in office, lobbying by groups like “Focus on the Family” and the “Christian Coalition” have become all to prevelant in our goverment. The wall between separtion of church and state continues to be torn down, piece by piece and it is an offense to those who do not follow fundamentalist Christianity.
When the name of “God” is inserted into public prayer services including military events or government events, the majority of the American public – no matter what their faith may be understands that.
This legislation by Congress however, is saying that these Chaplains can now insert the name of “Jesus” into prayer services and as I asked Elmers Brother, what if that legislation said we can now insert the name of “Buddha” into public prayer services or the legislation mandated that Chaplains could now insert Hindu worship into their services as law? Would you support that?
As I reported in my post from the Washington Post: “A private association of religious groups, the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces, who provides “more than 70 percent of U.S. chaplains, also objected to the language.””
The issue is not the prayer, the issue is pigeon holing the prayer to one particular faith.
I can only surmise that the reason Bush backed off on issuing “an executive order guaranteeing the right of chaplains to pray in the name of Jesus under any circumstances” is because he gets, although he claims to be a “Born Again Christian” that to do so would be a violation of the rights of others.
What if Bush or any other president invoked the name of “Jesus” when he spoke publically? I think there would be a great public outcry because it would step beyond the boundries of accpetability.
I have no problem with prayer in the military and did not say in my post that I did. I simply agree with the “more than 70 percent of U.S. chaplains, also objected to the language.”
Congress need not be sticking this into an appropriations bill to appease groups like “Focus on the Family” and the “Christian Coalition.”
As for pornographers putting “tittilating trash in front of my children at the gas station checkout” — if you are a registered Republican I suggest you complain to your elected officials many of whom including G.W. Bush take donations from the porn industry and sports porn stars like mary Carey at their fundraisers.
Cate
For the record, you state you don’t belong to any of the churches that have gained notariety in this mess, however I do see that you are proponent also of other things that the Christian Fundamentalists push such as this:
http://www.religiouscoalitionformarriage.org/
Donnie,
Thanks for your service my family and I owe you a debt.
eb,
The times I have brought this experience up with people who wanted to convince me of my sin in not accepting Jesus, I was usually told that the Lord helps those… Your comment that the Lord had helped me was not exactly that, but made me think of it.
I also had many experiences at military functions where the chaplains were, if you will, perfect. I find the same attributes in hospital chaplains. There is no prosyletizing, no admonishing. There is acknowledgement of our vulnerablility and our fallibillity and the appeal to inspire us to do better, to persevere in spite of our burdens. The claims coming from the Air Force Academy here were too well documented and supported to think it was not happening, and to understand why the Navy and Air Force found it necessary to reword the rules so they had something to hold the few who could not use common sense accountable.
When I said “I hear people talking about the faithless and Godless as though we are inevitably the scum of life, whores, cheats, liers, alcoholics, etc”
The point is the assumption that atheists and secular humanists are painted as faithless and godless and therefore must be some kind of worthless, degraded folk.
It is definitely not all Christians who do this; the ones that do make the insult pretty hard to ignore or forget. I once blew a coworker away when she asked about my religious beliefs. Her reaction:”But you are such a SPIRITUAL person”. That would be me. The variations of secular humanism and atheism are as great as the ones within the Christian denominations.
I believe in forces greater than myself, in trying to be better every day, week and year that I am on this earth. Emerson (or possibly Thoreau) said “Write your own bible” When I turned 50, I bought a beautiful burgandy leather note book to put the personal bible I had been working on for 3 decades in. I have put a lot of time in the contents and the illustrations. There are things like Gandhi’s seven sins, the Dalai Lama’s teachings for the new millenia, Native American poetry, the quotes and concepts that have helped me in my life and that I strive to stay focused on. There are song lyrics and daily affirmations, motivational ideas and pictures.
The word I use for God is “the Force” – and that was before Star Wars
The Force is the power in the universe that is chaos and order, creation and destruction; not by design, but by forces of nature that combine and create life or death. This is not a force I can appeal to for intercession, rather it is the force I try to connect to as a part of the whole universe, to have the strength to do better.
Does that answer your question about whether atheists are not, by definition, faithless and Godless?
I think of secular humanism as the recognition of those truths that we find in almost every religion or philosophy- without the parables or teachings that the religion explains them with. Not to mention the extraneous stuff that was attached for various reasons, good and bad.
Jesus made very clear that the Kingdom of God is not of this earth. His teachings were not aimed at foreign policy. Another big issue underlying this is how to use personal religion in the government and political realm. I have argued, and heard others argue that religious arguments have no place in debates over law, regulations and policy.
Just this last month I have found someone who does this and does it right, IMO. Her name is Susan Pace Hamill and she is a professor of Law at the University of Alabama. Her writings on the use of scripture to explain why the state tax laws are not right, convey the teachings in such a way that they become one way of helping others understand why the argument is right. Not that the teachings are right because the Bible says so, but because there are passages in the Bible that can illuminate the issue just as passages from the Koran or other religious sources can reveal the truth. The argument is based on properly applying the teaching to the situation, much like properly applying knowledge of any kind to it. I strongly encourage you to google her name and go to her website to read some of the arguments. They were very inspiring to me.
Then there is this quote at the bottom of Cate’s bio that is troubling.
“Our enemies may be irrational, even outright insane, driven by nationalism, religion, ethnicity, or ideology. They do not fear the United States for its diplomatic skills or the number of automobiles and software programs it produces. They respect only the firepower of our tanks, planes, and helicopter gunships.” Ronald Wilson Reagan
As far as it goes it is true. However the numbers of people who would be our enemies are insignificant to the billions on this planet who would rather we use more restraint with our millitary force and much more diplomacy. I don’t have a problem with using new ways to apply Jesus’ teachings if we see that they also make sense in that situation. Democrats are NOT going to hand this country over to anyone. Those of us against the war see a big deference between defending the country and preemptive war.. John Kerry likened this kind of pursuit of the terrorists to bombing parts of any large metropolis here to get to the mafia. The military is not part of a football league where the best defense is a good offense.
Aside from Jim Wallis’ books, two others I read recently that totally healed my feelings about the wayward Christians and the insults.
Tony Campolo :”Speaking My Mind”
David Dark “The Gospel According to America”
Campola gives wonderful insight into the different interpretations of the Bible and Dark is flat out brilliant. Not easy reading but totally worth his discussions on bearing witness and how many great works of literature and current songs, tv shows etc do this.
Again, your participation, tone and contributions are very much appreciated. One of the quotes in my bible is:
“With malice towards none and charity to all” (it’s a goal…)
Now I have a new observation to put in:
Just because someone sees me as an ‘enemy’, doesn’t mean I can’t try to make them a friend.
Thank you for helping me come to that – it does not apply to you per se, but to others who do see me as a threat to their right to worship and follow their beliefs.
No, I would defend those rights to the death. My own are equally at risk.
Wow, where to begin?!
Pamela,
Yes, I am a proponent of traditional marriage. The fact that you linked that to fundamentalist Christian ideas shows that I am not the only person able to ‘pigeonhole’. You’re using the same broad brush I used last night that got you all so heated
As to the argument at hand:
That 70% of the chaplains did not agree with the wording of the bill is irrelevant. If I can prove that 90% of people prefer Coke over Pepsi does that really mean anything? What matters is whether or not it is legally appropriate to demand that someone censor their religious speech. We aren’t talking about censoring classroom teachers or elected officials. We’re not even talking about run of the mill generals and soldiers – we’re talking about ‘men of the cloth’.
Christianity is exclusionary, so are all monotheistic religions. That is their nature. If you remove the ability of these pastors to invoke the name of the God they believe in then what relevance do they have as ministers of their faith? They would be betraying their own beliefs and that type of hypocrisy is a fundamental wrong in Christianity. Not that I am suggesting we aren’t all hypocrites at one time or another, I am simply saying that institutionalized hypocrisy would be like neutering a stud – you’d have an animal that couldn’t fulfill the design of his existence.
No one should be forced to attend religious instruction. I agree wholeheartedly. No one should be indoctrinated. But censorship is not a viable response. And in a lifetime of attending military ceremonies, I have never heard a PUBLIC PRAYER where a chaplain condemned people to hellfire. Just my personal experience. Personally, I would prefer a moment of silence to censorship.
Ginny,
As I said I have never heard a PUBLIC PRAYER (and I emphasize that because we are discussing mandatory functions and public ceremonies) show anything but deference to all present. But to some, the mere mention of a belief in God is an atrocious offense -and the mention of Jesus a mortal sin. Lobbying groups on the religious right have fought hard to regain the right to pray in the name of Jesus – after all, He gave them that edict – to pray in His name. I don’t know what the answer ought to be but I agree completely that the fact that we even have to discuss this is a darn shame.
In my honest opinion, this is, at its core, an issue that exposes how little some in America respect religion – that we will only tolerate if it there is no mention of the true object of pious devotion. Is the DOD policy “Don’t ask. Don’t tell” for Christians as well as homosexuals? LOL.
I reiterate, my vote is for a moment of silence, if the only other choice is to censor.
As for activist groups impacting legislation… I only have two words to say about that: Norma McCorvey. The system works the way it works for both sides. Lobbyists, ambitious lawyers, activist courts, they all play their parts.
About the Reagan quote:
I empathize with how you feel about chasing terrorists. Many people would rather be victims than aggressors. It is so much easier to justify your position when you are a passive recipient of violence. Still that doesn’t erase the justification for the opposite position. And, what do you disagree with? Afghanistan? Iraq? War as an answer generally?
Okay – there’s my book for now. I’ll be back when I can – motherhood calls.
Cate
Here’s where you are wrong about your assertion that I can’t pigeon hole you. That you think it’s acceptable for Military Chaplains to be told by Congress that it’s okay for them to use the name Jesus in their public prayer services because Focus on the Family and the Christian Coalition put pressure on members of Congress and the fact that you are a “proponent of traditional marriage”, puts you smack in the center of a pigeon hole Cate. Why? Because Focus on the Family and the Christian Coalition are also proponents of “traditional marriage.”
No one said that Chaplains can not invoke the name of “God” in public prayer. This legislation allows them to invoke the name of “Jesus”.
God and Jesus are not one and the same in the view of many in this country and no one should be forced by paranoid Christians to have religion forced down their throats.
The war on Christianity is in the minds of paranoid men and women who believe their God is the only God and thatk you, Cate, but pushing that meme is not welcomed here.
Cate
One last thing… Like I told your friend Elmers Brother last night, I didn’t go knocking on your door with my opinions last night, you knocked on mine and used a fair amount of assumptions.
Both you and your friend have come here, since I noted your link to my post and given your sermons on Jesus.
Let me make one thing clear. We don’t force religion down anyone’s throat around here and we don’t hold ourselves our views above anyone else’s.
The only opinion I gave on the WaPo article I wrote about was that I felt that faith based conservatives should learn some respect for others who don’t have the same views as them – that holds for you too.
Cate,
“That is an issue we can agree on. No one should be forced to church – but listening respectfully to someone who prays and believes differently is hardly indoctrination.”
Glad to hear you agree nobody should be forced to attend Church services, however I consider being forced to attend such services (as opposed to voluntarily listenening to someone praying or expressing belief in different views) to be equivalent to indoctrination.
If this country has survived with prior rules for over 200 years, and if a group representing over 70% of U.S. chaplains objects to the change in language, I find it hard to buy your argument that these changes are necessary to end what you perceive as censorship. If there really was any meaningful censorship of religious expression (beyond limitations accepted by reasonable religious people to preserve separation of church and state and respect the rights of those of all religions) then I would not expect such a high percentage of US chaplains to fall in opposition to this.
When this many chaplains fall on one side, and the other side is represented by those with a strong history of opposing freedom of religion and separation of church and state (Focus on the Family and the Christian Coalition), you have a much higher burden to convince us that these changes are legitimate.
It is regretable that many religious groups today forget the lessons of the past when it was religious groups which joined with freethinkers to support a strict separation of church and state. In the past many religious groups recognized that any bluring of this separation of church and state endangers continued freedom of religion and the rights of all to worship, or not worship, as they desire. Sooner or later religious groups who have allied with the authoritarian right which dominates the Republican Party will wind up regretting these actions.
Cate,
I think one of the problems we are dealing with is: the problem is rare enough that few have actually run across it. The military was having enough problem in the academies and probably some other places to rewrite the rule book.
My experiences are not with a direct expression of going to hell. It is phrased as “accepting Jesus is the ONLY way to God”. Given the amount of common knowledge in this society about the rest of the doctrine, it is another uncomfortable reminder of how some people view the rest of us. When we know from experience that the prayers can be beautiful and not create the sense of exclusion, it is not easy to ignore the other message. Even more important is the loss of a moment of unification rather than division. As I said, it is rare. But in a situation like the Columbine event, it added more bitterness to the tragedy instead of the healing the gathering was to promote. Those kinds of things heat up the ire of people who are opposed to religion.
These are some quotes I have collected on the idea of talking versus acting.
“I do not know any religion apart from human activity” Mohandas Gandhi
“It is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be read” Thomas.Jefferson
“True religion is the life we lead, not the creed we profess” Louis Nizer
“Religion is goodness with its sleeves rolled up”
Magnus Ratter
“Religion isn’t worshipping what the prophets did, but doing what the prophets worshipped”
William E Alberts
“To worship the prophet is simply an easy substitute for doing what the prophet asks”
Charles Park
“Being religious is being unconditionally concerned whether in secular matters or religious”
Paul Tillich
I understand the intent of these comments and basically agree with them in the context of public ceremony. It is clearly important to speak about your specific beliefs and address the God being worshipped as a part of maintaining and experiencing the power that religion gives us.
I think we are struggling with whether the freedom of religion and speech are ALWAYS a right or whether they are a right, on your own ‘free time’. That can certainly be a public place. It may not mean at a public gathering convened for some other reason.
Once in the military, there are restrictions on the freedom of speech; in theaters yelling fire for no reason is not ok: in President Bush’s campaign appearances, no one was admitted who might have said something controversial.
“In my honest opinion, this is, at its core, an issue that exposes how little some in America respect religion – that we will only tolerate if it there is no mention of the true object of pious devotion.” I know there are those who tear organized religion to shreds and consider it evil because of the people who used it to justify whatever evil they felt it was right to do. Some think so because of their own experiences in being raised in a way that harmed more than it helped. They are not allowed to speak to this in a public ceremony – that I am aware of.
The vast majority of our population identifies with some religious group. I work with a cross section of the population and rarely hear disrespect for organized religion. I have met at least 3 x more folks who are willing to trash anyone who disagrees with their interpretation of the Bible.
I have to say this from my own study of society, history and religion in honesty, not to be mean. There is a growing body of individuals who see the traditional monotheistic religions as having almost run their course in the evolution of culture and human society. Just as they once replaced paganism and multiple Gods, the next phase of religious growth has been identified for some time and the number of people who are coming to this conclusion on their own is growing. The confluence of change on humanity right now is beyond precedence and I wonder if it will ever be equalled. We live at a time when many of us are afraid of what the future will bring: economically, environmentally, politically, and in our personal lives. It also represents the opportunity to grow.
There is a continuum from those who hate religion for it’s historical errors and those who study the illogical, irrational and absurd creatures that are humanity and their actions. Some have both the bile and the book learning.
I keep trying to undersand this because I think it is a transition that is essential to make with as little tragedy and suffering as is possible. I absolutely believe that those who have the devout, unwavering beliefs should be respected, not ridiculed. You also need to understand that there is probably a transition taking place and you are not likely to slow it down much in the time and society in which you live. How you resolve that is not going to be easy. This is from a Sojourner interview with Brian McLaren, a pastor and writer, on ‘The Da Vinci Code’
“The more we can keep conversations open and going the more chances we give the Holy Spirit to work. But too often people want to get into an argument right away. And, you know, Jesus has handled 2,000 years of questions, skepticism, and attacks, and he’s gonna come through just fine. So we don’t have to be worried.”
I think this is the faith that you can use to be at peace with what you may not be able to change. There is no way the billions of Bibles and other books, movies, songs, and even computer programs on Jesus and Christianity will be destroyed. Most definitely not my Holy Bible as long as I live. If 1000 years from now, there are only a handful of traditional Christians left, Jesus’ teachings and influence will still be with the other great contributors to the history and progress of man. Easily one of, if not the, most influential. Still the basis of much human interaction.
This is leading to your final question. I don’t see how following the Constitutional mandate for Defense means that we would be “passive recipients of violence”. Although we certainly looked that way on 9/11. In all the years of watching the fighters scramble from Elmendorf, I can remember thinking that the Russians could feint all they wanted, they would never get past our fighter pilots.
How and what happened to the standard scrambling of fighter planes in response to the erratic aircraft behavior on 9/11 is yet to be explained. Then there is why?
Afghanistan could have been handled much differently. I actually believe our special forces had OBL trapped – the military had mapped every valley, mountain and cave in Tora Bora when an exercise that Richard Clarke led identified it as the best place for the terrorists to hide with WMD.
The unfolding situation in Iraq was completely forewarned for months before we started the bombing. War is becoming increasingly impossible to justify. We are the most responsible for the levels of violence, killing and destruction that have plagued the world since WWI. Our weapons manufacturers, financiers and energy barons have essentially created an economy based on war. The wars that go on in and between other countries, are largely sustained by our exportation of guns, ammo and explosives. All other nations combined do not approach the level of weaponry we export. They sell the power to destroy, ignoring that we can be the targets too.
Hence the bumper sticker:
What would Jesus bomb?
I apologize if you thought I was preachy. I said that what I was expressing was for clarification and not for evangelization.
eb,
I thought you were very clear on that and appreciated it.
Just for clarification, my opinions are not something that I hear discussed, let alone think would be accepted in the Democratic Party. Many Dems would be flabbergasted.
The first significant comments on the change from the monotheistic religions started around 200 years ago. Jefferson thought it would only be 100 years. I do not think it is at all clear yet what time frame this might happen. The confluence of change is certainly setting it up and my suspicion is that as the WWII generation passes, and then the Korean, there will be a possibility that enough boomers could bring it into the mainstream in the next ~ 50 years. That doesn’t mean it would be a majority then. I think there are too many human unknowns and variables to make a very accurate estimate. That it was coming has been evident to me since the 60s, confirmed for me by current events and a large body of scholastic work.
There’s a LOT of quibble room.
Cate, Elmers Brother
In general we don’t discuss religion on this blog because on a whole it’s a news and political blog. The regulars here are mostly people of like mind, not unlike the two of you — we see things in similar light and Ginny summed up fairly well what I too believe:
“There is a growing body of individuals who see the traditional monotheistic religions as having almost run their course in the evolution of culture and human society. Just as they once replaced paganism and multiple Gods, the next phase of religious growth has been identified for some time and the number of people who are coming to this conclusion on their own is growing.”
A very long time ago, when I was a small child I came to understand that I did not need a place to worship “God” because “God” is within me. My life’s path took me on a journey that at one point was very difficult to understand. It was through that journey that I once again came to understand what I knew as a small child.
An open mind is like a sponge, if you allow your mind to soak up all the knowledge that it can you will grow and blossom like flowers on a vine. If stay in one place with one form of teaching you will not learn beyond the boundaries of that teacher and teaching. Jesus never sought to be the one and only teacher of love and faith. To all who understand this, and seek to know more, the pushing of a particular sect on Christianity is an offense.
This country affords us religious freedom and we need to continue to be afforded that right for all people, including those who defend our rights every day.
Meister Eckhart said, “The idea of God can be the final obstacle to God.”
Don’t be blinded by the darkness of fear that some people want to take away your religion. Religion does not exist in a church or a temple, it exists in your heart, in your spirit and in your mind. No one can take away anyone’s religion, and likewise inserting the name of “Jesus” into public military services will not save it.
As Ginny said, “If 1000 years from now, there are only a handful of traditional Christians left, Jesus’ teachings and influence will still be with the other great contributors to the history and progress of man.”
Iraq, was not justified Cate – Afghanistan could have and should have been handled differently. Where is is Osama? Where are the WMD’s. You can justify these things in your mind, but we don’t drink the Kool Aid here.
I have read that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, or at least the text third world.
A Chaplain praying in Jesus’ name to save Christianity, huh never thought of that one.
I just thought like Cate it was so that he can stay true to whatever religion/denomination, coven, mosque or synagogue has sanctioned him. They have to answer to those who have sponsored them as well.
I have appreciated this conversation and I understand you all much better.
Elmers Brother
Cate expressed concern for the so called “war on Chrisitanity” that right wing conservative fundamentalist claim is happening. That so called “war on Chrisitanity” was what propitiated the members of the House aligned with Focus on the Family and the Christian Coalition to insier that language into the House appropriations bill.
When the Air Force and the Navy changed their rules on religion, it’s my understanding that they did so to stop the tide of pushing Christian fundamentalism on their members who had been forced into and/or coerced to participate in religious services or face reprimanding or worse.
Focus on the Family and the Christian Coalition have forced their views on America and created a huge lobbying effort to push fundamentalism down the throats of Americans.
This in itself is an afront to our Democracy and an assault on our civil rights and civil liberties. No one who is not a fundamentalist is saying you who are are not free to worship as you please. Those who are not fundamentalists are saying DO NOT TELL US HOW OR WHO TO WORSHIP.
This country was not founded on Theocratic principles.
eb,
I really do appreciate your efforts to discuss and understand what does and does not separate us.
Dems are truly about everybody getting a chance to be happy: healthy and able to make their own best contribution to their families, communities and the world. We don’t want to harass or hamper the great contributers, we do think that those folks do not tend to be the ones hooked on extreme wealth while others need health care, education, food, etc.
Yes, Islam has been the fastest growing religion in the world and it is growing fast here as well. One of the reasons it would have been much better to understand the religion and the culture before we attacked a country.
Things like this just add to the problems there and here:
http://www.courant.com/hc-mental1a.artmay14,0,275720.story
“Mentally Unfit, Forced to Fight”