No Religious Liberty for US Military?

A DISCLAIMER UP FRONT:  The odd spacing in this blog is not by my neglect or ignorance.  For some reason, "Blogger" will not save the spacing I have entered in this blog.  Thank you for understanding and for reading my blog.

       So that you will understand from whence my viewpoint is derived, let me give you a little personal background.  I enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1968.  After training, I was assigned to the U.S. Army Security Agency, a communications intelligence agency (similar in scope to the National Security Agency), earning the Meritorious Service Medal.  After a number of years as a member of the ASA, I was assigned to the Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).  Later, I became a member of the U.S. Army Recruiting Command, earning two Army Achievement Medals, two Army Commendation Medals, one Meritorious Service Medal, the Gold Recruiter Badge, and the Army Recruiter Ring.  Also, I was assigned to an infantry division for a while.  Altogether, I served on active duty in the U.S. Army for a little over twenty years.

I am proud of my service, and I realize that my successes were by the grace of God.  He protected me through that twenty plus years and gave me favor with most of my superiors throughout that time.  When I first enlisted in the Army, I was a nominal Christian.  After about fourteen years active duty, I became a true, born-again Christian.  During my tenure as an Army Recruiter, I enlisted many young men and women into the Army.  Today, though I honor our military members, I would NOT recommend any Christian become a member of the Armed Forces of this country.  My reasons follow.

Shortly after I retired from active duty, under the direction of then-President Bill Clinton, the “Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell” policy came into being, allowing openly gay and lesbian people to enlist in the military services.  Prior to this, simply answering on the application for enlistment that he/she had participated in any homosexual acts was an immediate disqualification.  Under President Barack Obama, this policy has been abolished.

It appears now, however, that the policy of “Don’t Ask; Don’t Tell” has been reinstated.  This time, though, it applies to Christians, especially evangelical Christians.  There was already an unofficial (I think) war being waged against Christians in the military, but lately it seems to have become official policy.  Some examples are listed below:

·         The Air Force censored a video created by a chaplain because it included the word “God.”  The Air Force feared the word might offend Muslims and atheists.

·         A service member received a “severe and possibly career-ending reprimand” for expressing his faith’s religious position about homosexuality in a personal religious blog.

·         An enlisted service member received a career-ending punishment for sending personal invitations to his promotion party which mentioned that he would be providing Chick-fil-A sandwiches due to his respect for the Defense of Marriage Act.

·         A senior military official at Fort Campbell sent out a lengthy email officially instructing officers to recognize “the religious right in America” as a “domestic hate group” akin to the KKK and Neo-Nazis because of its opposition to homosexual behavior.

·         A chaplain was relieved of his command over a military chapel because, consistent with DOMA’s (Defense of Marriage Act—a federal law) definition of marriage, he could not allow same-sex weddings to take place in the chapel.

·         An enlisted service member was threatened and denied promotion by a senior Non-Commissioned Officer for expressing–during a personal conversation–his religious belief in support of traditional marriage.

There are numerous other examples that could be listed, but these are certainly enough to show a pattern of anti-Christian sentiment existing in the U.S. military.  Last month Coast Guard Rear Admiral William Lee told a National Day of Prayer audience that religious liberty is being threatened by Pentagon lawyers, and service members are being told to hide their faith in Christ.  Now, to make matters worse, the Obama administration has issued a Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) on H.R. 1960, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014.  Among other items, the SAP includes as an objection to the bill:

Expansion and Implementation of Protection of Rights of Conscience of Members of the Armed Forces and Chaplains of Such Members:  The Administration strongly objects to section 530, which would require the Armed Forces to accommodate, except in cases of military necessity, “actions and speech” reflecting the “conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the member.”  By limiting the discretion of commanders to address potentially problematic speech and actions within their units, this provision would have a significant adverse effect on good order, discipline, morale, and mission accomplishment.  (Keep in mind that the administration doesn’t believe that allowing LGBT members to serve openly will have an adverse effect.)  The SAP includes a veto threat:  “…if the bill is presented to the President for approval in its current form, the President’s senior advisers would recommend that the President veto the bill.”

In other words, President Obama indicates that he will veto any bill that forbids his appointees or officers from telling a soldier he cannot mention Jesus during prayer or have a Bible on his desk, or that keeps those appointees from telling a chaplain (who is an ordained clergyman) what religious teachings he can do in worship services, or what spiritual counseling he can give to another soldier.

It has been said that there are no atheists in the foxhole.  However, if we continue to tell God that we don’t want Him present in our lives, eventually He will not be present in the foxhole with our soldiers.  Neither will He keep His hand of protection on this nation.  God is long-suffering, extremely patient.  However, He is also a just God, and His patience is not never-ending.  At some point, our nation will have to suffer His judgment, if we continue telling Him to get out of our lives.  That point is not far away, either.  I am not so foolish as to speak for God.  Neither am I going to predict that date of His return.  Still, His word indicates that it is soon.  As a nation, we have thumbed our collective nose at Him entirely too much.  Do we really want God to remove His hand from us?  When He does, we are on our own.  Frankly, I much prefer God’s hand of protection on us.  That has served us well for over 200 years.

 

        Although the percentage of people in the United States who are truly “born-again” Christians has dwindled over the years, we still have a commission.  We can read it in 2 Chronicles 7:14:  “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”  It doesn’t take all the people; it takes only God’s people.  Let’s join together and obey 2 Chronicles 7:14.  Will you join me?

Boy Scouts of America

This is a time that I cannot decide if I am angry, disgusted, or sorely disappointed, or all three.  I guess it’s all three.  The decision the Boy Scouts of America, as an organization, made today is disgusting and extremely disappointing.  In case you haven’t heard, 61% of the 1,400 Scout leaders who met in Texas today, voted to remove the ban on allowing gays to be members of the Boy Scouts organization.  In its 100+ year history, the BSA has banned homosexuals and atheists from membership.

 I have a number of concerns, but I suppose the greatest are as follows:

 The Scout oath reads, “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout law, to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.” 

Ø  How can he do his duty to God and be part of an organization that pretty much tells God to go fly a kite?

Ø   How can he keep himself morally straight, if he is going against God’s law?

 The Scout law referenced above is made up of twelve parts.  The twelfth law reads, “A Scout is Reverent.”  The explanation that the BSA provides is, “A Scout is reverent toward God.  He is faithful in his religious duties.  He respects the beliefs of others.” 

Ø  How can a Scout be reverent toward God, if he is thumbing his nose at God?

Also, the gay activists have already said that, though they are happy with the decision to lift the ban on gays, they still want the ban on gay Scout leaders lifted as well. 

Ø  How long will it be before the organization bows to more political pressure and lifts the ban on gay Scout leaders?

 

Galatians 6:7 reads:  Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. 

I have no doubt that it is a matter of a very short time before the BSA is met with lawsuits from gay activists to force them to lift the ban on gay leaders.  At some time after that, the organization’s “leadership” will bow to the political pressure and the pressure of lawsuits and will lift the ban on gay leaders.

I am not concerned about the lawsuits.  The organization has sown, and they should expect to reap the fruits of their decision.  I am concerned that it is simply a matter of time before a boy is molested either by a fellow Scout or by a leader.  The result will be on the heads of those “leaders” who made this decision today, placing political expediency ahead of what is best for the Scouts and the organization.  They have allowed an immoral minority to ruin a fine organization.  Shame on them!  I would rather see the organization go down the drain that have one boy molested by an immoral leader or fellow Scout.

Did I Wake Up in the Old Soviet Union?

Someone please wake me!  I feel like I am either dreaming, or I went to sleep in the United States of America and woke up in the old Soviet Union.  Our Department of Justice seems to have turned into the KGB.  I can understand the Obama administration’s extreme dislike for Fox News Channel.  After all, Fox, which just happens to be the highest rated cable news network, is the only major news outlet that isn’t afraid to ask the hard questions of the Obama administration.

I do believe, however, that even the Obama administration has gone too far this time.  As if the apparent cover-up of the Benghazi fiasco and the IRS fiasco were not enough, now the Department of Justice, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, chose to violate the constitutional rights of James Rosen, a Fox News investigative reporter, who was investigating how the Obama administration was handling the nuclear situation in North Korea.  In an effort to determine which State Department employee(s) leaked information to Rosen, the Department of Justice obtained a warrant from the court to obtain James Rosen’s telephone records.  To do so, however, DOJ named Rosen as a co-conspirator in what they termed a case of espionage.

It is a shame that our Attorney General lacks knowledge of the law.  As a former holder of a TOP SECRET security clearance with access to special intelligence information, I thoroughly understand that the responsibility of safeguarding sensitive or classified information rests with the government employee possessing the information.  It is the responsibility and duty of the reporter to ask the questions.  If answering the questions would result in divulging sensitive or classified information, then the possessor of the information is bound by law not to release the information.  All he/she has to do is decline to answer the question, explaining that he/she is unable to answer because the information is classified.  It’s quite simple.

It appears to this writer that this is not truly a matter of an espionage investigation, at least not as far as James Rosen is concerned.  Instead, it appears that this is simply a heavy-handed, terribly clumsy attempt to intimidate Fox News and anyone else who dares to investigate the Obama administration.

The Obama administration in general, and the Department of Justice and the Internal Revenue Service in specific, have gone way over the line this time.  It is past time that someone inform Mr. Obama and his cohorts that this is still the United States of America, still governed by the Constitution of the United States (not Chicago politics), and Mr. Obama and his administration need to abide by the law.  Mr. Obama is the President of the United States, not King (or dictator) of the United States!

Contempt Vote on Attorney General Holder

When the House of Representatives held the vote on whether or not to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, most of the Democrats chose to take the low road.  Instead of coming down on the side of integrity and demanding that Mr. Holder cooperate with the House Oversight Committee, they chose to play the race card.  Nancy Pelosi declared that it was all about denying minorities their right to vote.  Her comment indicates that either Ms. Pelosi is either an idiot, or she is so far out of touch with reality, she ought not to be in the Congress.

When the 108 or so Democrats decided to “take their marbles and go home”, because they couldn’t control the proceedings, they demonstrated just how immature they really are.  As Herman Cain said, “They acted like spoiled children.”  He nailed their behavior as accurately as anyone has.

It is a shame that, of the 193 Democrats in the House of Representatives, only seventeen possess the integrity to demand that Mr. Holder abide by the law and provide the information necessary for the House Oversight Committee to investigate what took place in the Fast and Furious operation that resulted in the deaths of Agent Brian Terry and untold numbers of Mexican citizens.

When the Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi say that the Republicans are on a witch hunt and should be concentrating on jobs, they choose to ignore a number of facts.  They ignore the fact that the Republican-led House has already sent some thirty jobs bills to the Senate for action that are languishing in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) chooses not to bring them to the floor.  They ignore the fact that Mr. Holder has been stone-walling the Oversight Committee for approximately eighteen months.  Most of all, they ignore the fact than an American Border Patrol Agent and a number of innocent Mexican citizens paid for the botched operation with their lives.

To Ms. Pelosi and her Democrat colleagues, I say, “Shame on you.  You are failing to do your duty, the duty to which you were elected, the duty which you swore an oath to fulfill!  Shame on you!”

It's the Fault of the Congress

President Obama, when he is not blaming former President George W. Bush for the problems in America, tends to blame Congress. At first, I thought it a bit curious that he would blame Congress, since his party, the Democrats, control one house of Congress—the Senate. Then it dawned on me. Most people, primarily due to lack of knowledge, believe that the Congress is controlled by the Republicans. Others believe that the House of Representatives, under control of the Republicans, is the Congress.

Folks, if you took Civics or Social Studies, depending on what it was called when you took it, you should remember, the Congress is made up of two houses—the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House members serve two-year terms. The Senate members serve six-year terms. The Speaker of the House, Representative John Boehner, is a Republican, and the Senate Majority Leader, Senator Harry Reid, is a Democrat. Mr. Boehner, as Speaker of the house, runs the House. His predecessor, in control of the House from 2006 until 2010, was Representative Nancy Pelosi, from California (San Francisco area), a very liberal Democrat. Senator Reid, as Majority Leader of the Senate, runs the Senate, and the Democrats control the Senate.

Mr. Obama would like for us all to believe that the Congress (House and Senate) has stopped all of the things he has tried to do to cause the economy to improve. For his first two years as President, his party, the Democrats, controlled both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Remember, they shoved Obamacare down our throats. They were able to do so, because the Republicans did not have enough people in either house of Congress to stop it.

The Republican Party, in control of the House of Representatives, has passed over twenty bills aimed at enabling American industry to create jobs. Harry Reid (DEMOCRAT), as Majority Leader of the Senate, has refused to bring a single one of them to the floor for a vote. The SENATE (read Democrats and Harry Reid) has blocked everything the Republicans in the House of Representatives have tried to do. If either Mr. Obama or Mr. Reid were serious about creating real jobs, they would bring these bills to the floor for an up or down vote.

Since the Democrats gained control of the House and Senate in 2006, they have failed to pass a federal budget, instead voting in “stop-gap” measures to keep the government running. Mr. Obama has not submitted a serious budget to the Congress (the House of Representatives and Senate) since he took office over three years ago. What he has submitted, Mr. Reid and the Democrats defeated in the Senate.

If you want to blame anybody for the ills of the American economy, and you don’t want to blame Mr. Obama, then you need to blame Senator Reid and the Democrats in the Senate. That is where the bottle neck is located (once you get past the bottle neck in the White House). They can ram through Obamacare, and they can take time to file lawsuits against Arizona, Alabama, and South Carolina to overturn their immigration laws. They can take the time to block South Carolina’s attempt to inject some integrity into our elections by requiring a photo I.D. to vote. Mr. Obama can find the time to take nineteen vacations in three years (at enormous taxpayer expense), but Mr. Obama and the Democrats in the Senate can’t seem to find time to pass a budget. It seems to this writer that the problem resides in the White House and the Senate. I would say it’s time to clean house in both houses—the Senate and the White House! Unfortunately, as long as our government robs Peter to pay Paul, they will always have Paul’s vote. When Paul outnumbers Peter, we will go down the drain.

It's Still Horse Manure!

As he has done in the past, President Obama is playing Christians (especially Catholics) for fools. He’s betting that we are fools or, at least, extremely naïve, and will believe that his “compromise” on the Obamacare requirement for employers to provide, through their healthcare policies, birth control, including the “morning after” pill, and abortion. It’s nothing more than an accounting gimmick. Anyone who buys it is either naïve or a fool. You can call a pile of horse manure a rose, but it still stinks.

This is all sold under the guise of “healthcare” for women. Nancy Pelosi, former Speaker of the House of Representatives (praise the Lord it’s former), in her usual two-faced support of the President, said, that Republicans want “to use the excuse of religious freedom” to take an action that will harm women's health (emphasis added). In the first place, it has nothing to do with “women’s health”. In the second place, she ignores the fact that a large part of the female population of the United States is Republican. Nobody in their right mind would want to “harm women’s health”. As far as using “the excuse of religious freedom” is concerned, it’s not an excuse when we are talking about the exercise of religious freedom. It’s in the constitution! It’s called the 1st Amendment! Read it, Ms. Pelosi. You just might learn something!

The Pot Calling the Kettle Black

Iman Rauf, the Iman at the center of the so-called Ground Zero Mosque controversy continued his harmful rhetoric this morning. Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), he lamented over the use of, in his words, “deliberate misinformation and harmful stereotypes” in the argument over the building of the mosque within a short distance of Ground Zero in Manhattan. There is an old saying that this is simply a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I believe it truly applies here.

If misinformation and harmful stereotypes are being used, and they are, it seems to me that most, if not all, of this usage is by the Imam and his supporters. I have not heard any critic of the building of the mosque near Ground Zero say that the Imam and his supporters do not have the right to build there. Quite the contrary, critics go out of their way to state that they do have that right. Their argument is that it is the wrong thing to do, given the seriousness and semi-sanctity of the site of the former World Trade Center.

The Imam and his supporters continually state that the critics are trying to deny them their constitutional right to build a worship center. No one has made any attempt to do so. Misinformation is the word used, but lie is actually more accurate. The Imam and his supporters are lying when they use this smoke screen to disguise their true intent.

The use of harmful stereotypes again is coming from the Imam and his supporters. The 60-70% of the American people who oppose the placement of the mosque at the Ground Zero location are not radicals. They are very much mainstream Americans. They appreciate the constitutional right to build in the disputed location and support it. Their objection is the wisdom of building there. The Imam seems to be utilizing one of the primary tools of today’s Democrat party. The Democrat party has mastered the use of name-calling to deflect criticism of President Obama and his supporters, and now the Imam and supporters are doing the very same thing. It seems that as soon as one offers criticism of these people the critics are labeled as radicals.

The Imam’s veiled threat of violence, if the mosque location changes, is certainly no way to build bridges. So far, the Imam’s actions and rhetoric are destroying any bridges that have already been built between Muslims and other Americans. Based on Imam Rauf’s mention of violence if the mosque location is changed, it seems to me that the radicals are on his side, not the side of the critics. I have not heard of any threats of violence from any of the critics if the mosque is built near Ground Zero. The pot is indeed calling the kettle black.