Well I'm curious to know how the Dems on here feel about this. While Islam gets a free pass, Christians are once again punished. Some Christian our President has turned out to be. Also the guy they got to help do this is awful.

 

» Pentagon Confirms May Court Martial Soldiers Who Share Christian Faith Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!

 

Please point out to me where the article discusses allowing non-Christian faiths, particular Islam, to be excluded from this same requirement.

Please point out to me where the article discusses allowing non-Christian faiths, particular Islam, to be excluded from this same requirement.

 

It doesnt mention Islam because no one is allowed to say Islam, Muslim, Jihad, Terrorist, Suicide bomber. It is racial profiling and racist to mention them. Leave them alone. We have to be tolerant of Islam and let them do whatever or CAIR will get us. Islam is a peaceful religion. They dont pressure anyone.

It doesnt mention Islam because no one is allowed to say Islam, Muslim, Jihad, Terrorist, Suicide bomber. It is racial profiling and racist to mention them. Leave them alone. We have to be tolerant of Islam and let them do whatever or CAIR will get us. Islam is a peaceful religion. They dont pressure anyone.

 

It doesn't mention other faiths in the article because that is not in the agenda. Forget the bias of the article, read the actual statement from the military. It doesn't mention any particular faith. That also confirms to what bugatti's military friend posted.

I actually agree with Mt. Ref here. Yeah it might be an established law and in the instances it is applied correctly, but Christianity is starting to get shunned out while other religions are becoming more and more tolerated. If you tolerate one, you should tolerate them all, equally across the board. If people get offended about nativity scenes then why should I not be able to raise cane when other religions exhibit their practices publicly?

So long as the no proselytizing rule is applied equally to all faiths, there really should be a problem. The difficulty is determining if it is applied equally, that is not very cut and dry, rather it is quite subjective. Another difficulty will be determining the grey area of proselytizing. If one soldier invites another soldier to his worship does that count as proselytizing? What if it is your commanding officer inviting you? I guess it becomes an issue when someone says "no thanks" and you keep on them trying to get them to go.

Saw this on FB earlier:

 

I sent this link to my military friend and this is what he wrote: "Yes. But that's a very misconstrued form of the truth. In the military you can not evangelical your religion. It's a form of pushing your faith off on someone else. It's been a law in the military for ever. It's like an officer or senior enlisted telling his soldiers that he is Muslim, and because he is Muslim his soldiers should be Muslim because that's the true religion. Visa versa towards Christians. You can't go around telling your soldiers they should be a Christian because its a sin to not be, and they won't have sinners in their ranks. They make it sound like if you're a Christian you'll get court marshalled, that's not true. You can be any religion you want. You just can't try and convert people to your religion is all. They are addlibing words to make it sound as if they are being persecuted. Which they arnt. They are just trying to protect others from being pressured into having other believes forced upon them. That law has been there for many many years, it was just never enforced because the majority of people were Christian so it was overlooked."

 

THIS^

I binged the guy in charged of this crap, Mikey Weinstein. WOW and I mean WOW, he has a very impressive resume and apparently highly educated. I was more than impressed. Hopefully God will touch him and change his mind.

No proselytizing. This isn't a new military rule and I can't imagine the military regulations are all that stringent about what counts as proselytizing.

 

Anyone have a link to the actual regulations in question here?

 

And while we're at it, does anyone have a link that's not from Info Wars?

 

This seemed odd so I went back to the 'source'. Though not being picked up by MSM (no surprise) the 'trigger' seems to be an April 23 meeting between Michael Weinstein, founder of Military Religious Freedom Foundation (also a former Reagan administration member).

 

Pentagon: Religious Proselytizing is Not Permitted | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

 

From above:

 

President Mikey Weinstein and others from his organization met privately with Pentagon officials on April 23. He said U.S. troops who proselytize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished – by the hundreds if necessary – to stave off what he called a “tidal wave of fundamentalists.”

 

“Someone needs to be punished for this,” Weinstein told Fox News. “Until the Air Force or Army or Navy or Marine Corps punishes a member of the military for unconstitutional religious proselytizing and oppression, we will never have the ability to stop this horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.”

 

Background on MRFF

 

Military Religious Freedom Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The organization was founded by Michael Weinstein in 2005 for the purpose of opposing the spread of alleged religious intimidation by evangelical Christians in positions of power within the US military. Weinstein experienced discrimination due to his Jewish faith while a cadet at the United States Air Force Academy. After his sons experienced discrimination as well while at the Academy, Weinstein founded the MRFF in 2005

 

Book by Weinstein: With God on Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military

 

With God on Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

A major contention of the book is undue privilege given to the organization Christian Embassy in access to military facilities and use of military personnel in its promotions.

 

So...now what is this Christian Embassy organization since it seems to be a key lynchpin in this?

 

Christian Embassy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The Christian Embassy is an evangelical organization affiliated with Campus Crusade for Christ. Like its parent organization, Christian Embassy describes itself as non-political and interdenominational.

 

 

• 1975 - Founded in Washington D.C.
  
  
• 1980 - Opened United Nations office
  
• 1985 - First annual International Prayer Breakfast on the Opening Day of the United Nations General Assembly
  
• 1990 - UN office officially accredited as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO).
  
• 2006 - Washington D.C. office widely covered in the news media after the organization films a promotional video with several prominent military officers in uniform in the Pentagon.
  

 

 

The Christian Embassy website:

 

http://www.christianembassy.com/index.asp

 

On the homepage:

 

We believe that the workplace offers opportunities for people to explore and apply what they believe to what they do for a living. We provide safe places and practical resources to help national and international leaders working in D.C., their spouses, and staffs to integrate their faith and their work.

 

From their homepage there a links meant for those they intend to 'serve' with their efforts - Presidential appointees, Diplomats, Pentagon staff, and Congressional staffs (Capital Hill).

 

 

It seems Weinstein has a very serious issue with Christian Embassy and its methods or influence. His comments seem to indicate he wants specific action. He seems to be dogged and sincere in his efforts. Maybe with the demise of 'don't ask, don't tell' and the open support for gay military members Christian Embassy 'activity' has ratcheted up. Just speculation.

 

Highly publicized court-martials do not sound wise for moral. If some can not deal with the changes in the military for what ever reason maybe they should be offer discharges. The ultimate goal should be an effective and high moral military. It should not be place for constant social policy meddling.

If that is for me, I am about fed up with tolerance. That is what put America in the shape it is today. A group being tolerant while others run rampant and not caring. And now we have an unmoral society. I think tolerance is over rated and I quit. Im sick of having my religion pushed back while other religions get a pass.

 

Not at all Ref. I was talking about the idiots wanting to court martial soldiers.

Highly publicized court-martials do not sound wise for moral. If some can not deal with the changes in the military for what ever reason maybe they should be offer discharges. The ultimate goal should be an effective and high moral military. It should not be place for constant social policy meddling.

 

I'm with you that highly-publicized court-martials aren't good for morale. But I don't think that's really at the heart of what we're talking about here. Weinstein is a highly-public figure that gets to be the face of this particular thing but the government won't go as far as he wants and the Christian groups that want to preach the gospel to everyone at all times don't get what they want either. The incidents at the root of this aren't very pleasant and, in the case of Weinstein's own experience and the experiences of his sons, tend to be less a case of being exposed to people talking about their religion and more cases of senior officers harassing them about their Judaism.

 

I want a highly effective and unified military. No one should want that military to be one in which asking a soldier what it's like to know that his people killed Christ or to tell him his entire family going to hell is acceptable (happened to one of Weinstein's sons).

Edited May 2, 201313 yr by Getslow

Being bullied isnt the same as witnessing to someone. I agree no one should be told what his son was told. but a bad experience shouldnt ruin what other Christians do.

One bad cop dont make all cops bad.

^ True. And so I'm wondering what the fuss is about here.

 

This is from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation's website:

 

"The Military Religious Freedom Foundation's mission is to ensure that:

 

-No religion or religious philosophy may be advanced by the United States Armed Forces over any other religion or religious philosophy.

 

-No member of the United States Armed Forces may be compelled in any way to conform to a particular religion or religious philosophy.

 

-No member of the United States Armed Forces may be compelled in any way to witness or engage in any religious exercise.

 

-No member of the military may be compelled to curtail – except in the most limited of military circumstances and when it directly impacts military discipline, morale and the successful completion of a specific military goal – the free exercise of their religious practices or beliefs.

 

-Students at United States military academies are entitled to the same Constitutional rights pertaining to religious freedoms and the free exercise of those freedoms to which all other members of the United States Armed Forces military are entitled.

 

-No member of the military may be compelled to endure unwanted religious proselytization, evangelization or persuasion of any sort in a military setting and/or by a military superior or civilian employee of the military.

 

-The full exercise of religious freedom includes the right not to subscribe to any particular religion or religious philosophy. The so-called “unchurched” cede no Constitutional rights by want of their separation from organized faith.

 

-It is the responsibility of the military hierarchy to ensure that the free exercise of religious freedoms of all enlisted personnel are respected and served.

 

-All military personnel have the right to employ appropriate judicial means to protect their religious rights."

 

So far, it's the sixth bullet point that seems to be causing the problem. To that end, I'd like to know what exactly it is we're talking about. What is the military's definition "proselytizing" that would trigger disciplinary action. I'm wondering because what I seem to be seeing is a lot paranoid fear-mongering about the stripping of religious freedoms and pandering to persecution complexes that sites like Info Wars and Breitbart love to put together to get hits for their websites and drive up readership. I'm looking for real interpretations of military regulations that would lead to Christians being denied their freedoms. So far I've seen none.

I'm with you that highly-publicized court-martials aren't good for morale. But I don't think that's really at the heart of what we're talking about here. Weinstein is a highly-public figure that gets to be the face of this particular thing but the government won't go as far as he wants and the Christian groups that want to preach the gospel to everyone at all times don't get what they want either. The incidents at the root of this aren't very pleasant and, in the case of Weinstein's own experience and the experiences of his sons, tend to be less a case of being exposed to people talking about their religion and more cases of senior officers harassing them about their Judaism.

 

I want a highly effective and unified military. No one should want that military to be one in which asking a soldier what it's like to know that his people killed Christ or to tell him his entire family going to hell is acceptable (happened to one of Weinstein's sons).

 

More than agree that circumstances like that are unacceptable. And to maintain moral it needs to be stopped.

I binged the guy in charged of this crap, Mikey Weinstein. WOW and I mean WOW, he has a very impressive resume and apparently highly educated. I was more than impressed. Hopefully God will touch him and change his mind.

 

 

Why? So soldiers can try to push their faith on others no matter what? I don't care what your faith is, I don't want you trying to proselytize to me. You could be a Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, Pagan or someone that follows the Flying Spaghetti Monster and his noodley appendage, no matter what you follow keep it to yourself. I don't need your faith pushed on me.

It doesnt mention Islam because no one is allowed to say Islam, Muslim, Jihad, Terrorist, Suicide bomber. It is racial profiling and racist to mention them. Leave them alone. We have to be tolerant of Islam and let them do whatever or CAIR will get us. Islam is a peaceful religion. They dont pressure anyone.

 

Okay. Get back with me when another religion is allowed to do something that a Christian is not.