https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/02/is-the-military-preparing-to-court-marshal-christians/ A [retired] college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues Wed, 30 May 2018 18:04:02 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3 https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/02/is-the-military-preparing-to-court-marshal-christians/#comment-78618 Wed, 30 May 2018 18:04:02 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14318#comment-78618 Yes … by all means, everybody please do listen to my appearance on Michael Medved’s show.
By “couldn’t get the rifle argument right,” I assume Tom means that I said M-14 instead of M-1-4, leaving out the dash when referring to the utterly insignificant detail of which model of rifle the Bible verse gun scopes were on. I admit it Tom, I’m not a weapons expert, but I was closer than the caller who for whatever reason thought the model of the rifle was somehow relevant and incorrectly said they were M-16s.
And by “changed the subject,” I assume Tom is referring to me saying that I’d like to get to some other examples after nearly half an hour of talking about the “Jesus rifles,” a subject that I had only intended to mention as one quick example, but Medved just wouldn’t get off of.
So, please do go listen to the interview, everybody. I thought it went rather well for a right-wing show, despite what Tom (who ironically accuses me of “stalking” David Barton while apparently having taken to stalking me) wants you to think.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/02/is-the-military-preparing-to-court-marshal-christians/#comment-78620 Wed, 30 May 2018 18:04:02 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14318#comment-78620 Ptrocles … I completely agree that the verbal distinction between evangelizing and proselytizing is pretty much useless. It’s too subjective and most people really don’t know the difference between the two words. What we’re really talking about here is the difference between something being an appropriate level of religious discussion at a proper time and place and inappropriate coercion and harassment. Let me give you an example. If a peer wants to invite another peer to a Bible study, that is absolutely fine, although they should take no for an answer if the person says they’re not interested. It is not, on the other hand, appropriate for a superior to invite subordinates to a Bible study. This causes the subordinates to feel like they have to say yes because they fear that saying no might affect their superior’s opinion of them and have a negative effect on their career. This is a form of coercion and a misuse of power.
What AFI 1-1, the regulation that keeps being brought up, does makes perfect sense. It makes all religious programs and announcements have to come from the chaplain’s office, and not through the command structure. Chaplains have rank but no command authority. A service member will not feel the pressure to attend a religious event if they get an email from the chaplain’s office that they would if they got an email from their “boss.” MRFF simply want the military to obey this regulation. This does not stop anyone from practicing their religion, contrary to what the lies coming from the right-wing media are saying.
One of the lies being told about MRFF, for example, is that we got the Operation Christmas Child program canceled at the Air Force Academy. This is completely untrue. The program was not canceled. It was just put under the auspices of the chaplain’s office rather than the command structure. The Academy cadets were absolutely still allowed to participate in the program.
I could give you a whole bunch more examples that would make anyone see that nobody is trying to take away anyone’s right to practice their religion. It’s just a matter of doing it in an appropriate manner that prevents any service member from being coerced and harassed, and worse in some cases, because of their personal beliefs. It’s called religious freedom.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/02/is-the-military-preparing-to-court-marshal-christians/#comment-73637 Wed, 30 May 2018 17:29:33 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14318#comment-73637 @Cassi
“… the government’s job is NOT to regulate the actions of anyone, unless it causes bodily harm or death.”
What manual did you pull that out of, or is this just a personal opinion? I shouldn’t have to remind you, in REAL life personal opinions are fine, but they don’t trump military regulations, despite what some military chaplains seem to think.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/02/is-the-military-preparing-to-court-marshal-christians/#comment-73640 Wed, 30 May 2018 17:29:33 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14318#comment-73640 Thank you for being a voice of reason and a proverbial “inhaler” for those with religious asthma.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/02/is-the-military-preparing-to-court-marshal-christians/#comment-55848 Fri, 03 May 2013 16:56:49 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14318#comment-55848 Ptrocles … I completely agree that the verbal distinction between evangelizing and proselytizing is pretty much useless. It’s too subjective and most people really don’t know the difference between the two words. What we’re really talking about here is the difference between something being an appropriate level of religious discussion at a proper time and place and inappropriate coercion and harassment. Let me give you an example. If a peer wants to invite another peer to a Bible study, that is absolutely fine, although they should take no for an answer if the person says they’re not interested. It is not, on the other hand, appropriate for a superior to invite subordinates to a Bible study. This causes the subordinates to feel like they have to say yes because they fear that saying no might affect their superior’s opinion of them and have a negative effect on their career. This is a form of coercion and a misuse of power.
What AFI 1-1, the regulation that keeps being brought up, does makes perfect sense. It makes all religious programs and announcements have to come from the chaplain’s office, and not through the command structure. Chaplains have rank but no command authority. A service member will not feel the pressure to attend a religious event if they get an email from the chaplain’s office that they would if they got an email from their “boss.” MRFF simply want the military to obey this regulation. This does not stop anyone from practicing their religion, contrary to what the lies coming from the right-wing media are saying.
One of the lies being told about MRFF, for example, is that we got the Operation Christmas Child program canceled at the Air Force Academy. This is completely untrue. The program was not canceled. It was just put under the auspices of the chaplain’s office rather than the command structure. The Academy cadets were absolutely still allowed to participate in the program.
I could give you a whole bunch more examples that would make anyone see that nobody is trying to take away anyone’s right to practice their religion. It’s just a matter of doing it in an appropriate manner that prevents any service member from being coerced and harassed, and worse in some cases, because of their personal beliefs. It’s called religious freedom.

]]>