RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,149846,00.html

Ooo a Pentagon official commented on this...which pentagon?

interesting, last I checked, atheists don't "believe" in God/a god, so where does the religious freedom come in?

Now let me get this straight. An athiest is sueing for religious freedom. What, somebody told him he had to pray? Now, there's another striped jass-honkey backing him up. Cleatus!!!! Help!!
Sergeant Major

That's interesting. Its not the military I remember serving in. Its common to give up some Constitutional rights when you are in the military and put into a sensitive situation...especially warzone.

Just what we need is for every pogue who has too much time on their hands to decide that they can go against the grain. They destroy efficiency and morale and then run under the Constitution and whimper "It's my right!" Maybe the military will have to start giving consciencious objectors Honorable Discharges. Maybe a CO won't be able to prevent a soldier from reporting compartmentalized information to the media.

Great job getting the ball rolling there Spec. Maybe you should go around Iraq wearing hunter's orange and holding up a banner that reads "Bong Hits 4 Allah" while you're at it. Because apparently, your Bill of Rights trump your COs orders...

btw, I think that each unit should vote on where they are deployed to (Hello Hawaii!).

quote:

Originally posted by awahilii:
Now let me get this straight. An athiest is sueing for religious freedom. What, somebody told him he had to pray? Now, there's another striped jass-honkey backing him up. Cleatus!!!! Help!!
Sergeant Major

The free exercise of religion must include the free exercise of no religion as well, or the first amendment has no meaning.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Originally posted by awahilii:
Now let me get this straight. An athiest is sueing for religious freedom. What, somebody told him he had to pray? Now, there's another striped jass-honkey backing him up. Cleatus!!!! Help!!
Sergeant Major

The free exercise of religion must include the free exercise of no religion as well, or the first amendment has no meaning.

The major was trying to help a godless heathen.

Atheism is not a DOD recognized religion, therefore, no accomodation is required. Same thing as Satanic worship; not recognized. Ref: AR 600-20.

quote:

The free exercise of religion must include the free exercise of no religion as well, or the first amendment has no meaning.

Agreed.

However, I expect (or at least hope) that there were some extenuating circumstances for not allowing them to convene the meeting; i.e., would have interfered with the safety/effectiveness/efficiency, etc., of their mission.

I don't see anything wrong with a meeting being held for just Atheists, or for just the non-religious, but if they were including all groups except Christianity, that seems a little inflammatory to me.

Heh, and another thing; the freaking Army is not a democracy. Army Regulations determines, not what Jodi follows!

Seems like a young trooper who needs to walk point for awhile and discover religion!
I agree with the idea that anything that detracts from the ability of the unit to perform it's missions must be subordinated to the lawful will of the commander. It's not a negotiation....it a war fighting unit.
If the Chaplin came to me before a mission and even suggested I delay an operation for the Christian services I would have inserted the Chaplin in the lead unit as they crossed the L/D. Preach on the run...and those who chose can hear or ignore.

quote:

Originally posted by awahilii:
Now let me get this straight. An athiest is sueing for religious freedom. What, somebody told him he had to pray? Now, there's another striped jass-honkey backing him up. Cleatus!!!! Help!!
Sergeant Major

I think they meant "freedom from religion."

Think everyone needs to read the beginning of the article again.

FORT RILEY, Kan. - A soldier whose superior prevented him from holding a meeting for atheists and other non-Christians is suing the Defense Department, claiming it violated his right to religious freedom.

Note he wanted to hold a meeting. So no religious intent or action was intended. Seems to be a case of an overzealous individual who was offended that someone wasn't of his persuasion.

And, yes, this isn't your military, thankfully. In basic, the DIs held a company formation on our first Sunday. DI said,” All protestants to the right. All Catholics to the left. Baptists up front.” He then went on to ask all the rest what their religion was. “Jewish? To the left. Hindu,. To the right. Etc” Finally, I was the only one left. The DI came up to me, pulled himself up to his full height of 5’ '5" and demanded to know what religion I was. I said, "No rel pref, Sergeant". And with that he consigned me to cleaning up the battalion order room for the next two months. The CSM and I had a leisurely Sunday morning with coffee and donuts without any interruption for the whole time. Also watched some sports on the TV. The good old days may have been old, but not necessarily good Have a good day!~!

The problem we have is that the holy-roller, evangelical, jesus-freaks have infiltrated the services to such an extent that to be considered an "atheist" or non-believer is to jeopardize your military career. Just look at what was going on in the Air Force Academy. All it takes is for one of these bible-banging nuts to get into a C.O. position and the next thing you know they're trying to push their religious views on others under their command. I'm so glad I didn't have to deal with this crap when I was still in!

quote:

Originally posted by ertstic:

quote:

The free exercise of religion must include the free exercise of no religion as well, or the first amendment has no meaning.

Agreed.

However, I expect (or at least hope) that there were some extenuating circumstances for not allowing them to convene the meeting; i.e., would have interfered with the safety/effectiveness/efficiency, etc., of their mission.

I don't see anything wrong with a meeting being held for just Atheists, or for just the non-religious, but if they were including all groups except Christianity, that seems a little inflammatory to me.

I don't find it in the least "inflammatory", given what happened with his superior. He got permission to distribute the flyers for the meeting (one presumes that Christian organizations had done so previously) but not to hold the meeting? I find it very likely that the meeting was called as an opportunity to compare notes about how much illegal prostelization was happening on their post.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Originally posted by ertstic:

quote:

The free exercise of religion must include the free exercise of no religion as well, or the first amendment has no meaning.

Agreed.

However, I expect (or at least hope) that there were some extenuating circumstances for not allowing them to convene the meeting; i.e., would have interfered with the safety/effectiveness/efficiency, etc., of their mission.

I don't see anything wrong with a meeting being held for just Atheists, or for just the non-religious, but if they were including all groups except Christianity, that seems a little inflammatory to me.

I don't find it in the least "inflammatory", given what happened with his superior. He got permission to distribute the flyers for the meeting (one presumes that Christian organizations had done so previously) but not to hold the meeting? I find it very likely that the meeting was called as an opportunity to compare notes about how much illegal prostelization was happening on their post.

The specialist is an ACLU plant!

Congress shall make no law repsecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Again, Army Regulation determines. Know what the Regulation says and you'll never be wrong and this also applies to the young CPT the SPC is asigned to! AR 600-20 Ch 5-6. This regulation is on the web for all to read, even the SPC! The so-called Jesus-freaks comment is a cop-out. If you know the regulation, you know your rights. Also, the chaplain is there to serve all Soldiers and so is the Equal Opportunity Advisor-every Brigade in the Army has one. So, bottom-line: ignorance is no excuse! As a former DS and EOA the atheist is trying to push his agenda and doesn't know Army Regulation and that, SPC, is what governs your conduct as a Soldier in the United States Army!

The last I heard, was that atheism was not a religion. If he doesn't believe in God, that is his choice. But I don't see how this is an infrigement on his religious freedom.

quote:

Originally posted by GeorgeRGarcia:
The last I heard, was that atheism was not a religion. If he doesn't believe in God, that is his choice. But I don't see how this is an infrigement on his religious freedom.

Well, it could mean; "free from religion". Howz dats? s Have a good day!~!

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Originally posted by awahilii:
Now let me get this straight. An athiest is sueing for religious freedom. What, somebody told him he had to pray? Now, there's another striped jass-honkey backing him up. Cleatus!!!! Help!!
Sergeant Major

The free exercise of religion must include the free exercise of no religion as well, or the first amendment has no meaning.

Freedom of Religion, not freedom from it.