https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/03/the-militarys-policy-on-proselytizing-is-not-new-and-is-consistent-with-federal-law/ A [retired] college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues Mon, 06 May 2013 20:58:33 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3 https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/03/the-militarys-policy-on-proselytizing-is-not-new-and-is-consistent-with-federal-law/#comment-55866 Mon, 06 May 2013 20:58:33 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14350#comment-55866 As has already been clearly stated, soldiers are not permitted to ‘fight back’. Thus it is up to the citizenry (and for some soldiers, that would include their parents) to fight for them.
But we wouldn’t want to infringe on anyone’s self-righteous superiority complex.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/03/the-militarys-policy-on-proselytizing-is-not-new-and-is-consistent-with-federal-law/#comment-55865 Mon, 06 May 2013 18:47:40 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14350#comment-55865 Yours is an invalid analogy, Rich. Evangelization is part of free exercise–the Henry point is germane. Further, these Weinstein stories about isolated incidents of harassment are already in violation of regulations. That a soldier needs their parent to fight for them is indeed an infantilization.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/03/the-militarys-policy-on-proselytizing-is-not-new-and-is-consistent-with-federal-law/#comment-89775 Mon, 06 May 2013 16:58:33 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14350#comment-89775 As has already been clearly stated, soldiers are not permitted to ‘fight back’. Thus it is up to the citizenry (and for some soldiers, that would include their parents) to fight for them.
But we wouldn’t want to infringe on anyone’s self-righteous superiority complex.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/03/the-militarys-policy-on-proselytizing-is-not-new-and-is-consistent-with-federal-law/#comment-89774 Mon, 06 May 2013 14:47:40 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14350#comment-89774 Yours is an invalid analogy, Rich. Evangelization is part of free exercise–the Henry point is germane. Further, these Weinstein stories about isolated incidents of harassment are already in violation of regulations. That a soldier needs their parent to fight for them is indeed an infantilization.

]]> https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/05/03/the-militarys-policy-on-proselytizing-is-not-new-and-is-consistent-with-federal-law/#comment-55864 Mon, 06 May 2013 14:31:58 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=14350#comment-55864 Tom, the Henry incident was more about the establishment rather than free exercise clause. It wasn’t the preaching the Gospel that was at issue but rather he wasn’t licensed by the Anglican Church. The closest analogy is like evangelical Christians at the Air Force Academy forcing themselves on Jews and other religious minorities like Mikey Weinstein’s son. Here is what he said in The Hill in 2006.
“My battle against the Air Force began two years ago (2004) when I learned that my sons, the eldest an Air Force Academy graduate and the other a cadet at the Academy, were subjected to taunts and derision because of their Jewish faith and that each had faced proselytizing both from their peers and superiors. My daughter-in-law, a graduate of the Air Force Academy and a practicing non-evangelical Christian, also found herself subjected to evangelizing.
The matter was personal, but it was very clear that it was not just my sons and daughter-in-law whose constitutional rights were being violated. Air Force personnel — non-evangelical Christians, those of minority faiths and those who chose not to worship at all — were experiencing illegal proselytizing and evangelizing.”
More of this is documented concerning this and other Christian anti-Semitism in the documentary Constantine’s Sword.

]]>