Air Force Pulls Nuke Training over Religion Complaint

A variety of news sources are now reporting the US Air Force ended a training class after an internet article belittled its religious content.  Contrary to some assertions, this is actually not a big deal.

This much has been accurately reported:  The Air Force training slides had Bible verses, and the course was led by a Chaplain.  There was a public article.  The Air Force pulled the course to “review it.”

Beyond that, much of the other reporting has been misrepresented or inaccurate.

The Washington Post said

The Air Force has suspended a training course for nuclear missile launch officers that used Bible passages and religious imagery to teach them about the ethics of war.

Unfortunately, that’s essentially a misrepresentation, likely because the conclusion was drawn solely from a copy of the slides used in the brief — sans notes or context.  The course did not use Biblical citations to teach ethics.  The ~40-slide PowerPoint presentation was an ethical discussion on the conduct of war, with emphasis on the application of nuclear weapons.  (The title of the first seven slides is “Ethics;” the second section is “Nuclear Ethics and Nuclear Warfare.”)

The course’s focus was to address common ethical issues with nuclear weapons (some religious, some not), against which some people might harbor doubts or even objections.

FoxNews translated this incident as

The Air Force has suspended a course that was taught by chaplains for more than 20 years because the material included Bible passages.

The course…used Scripture from both the Old and New Testaments to show missile launch officers that it can be moral to go to war.

That characterization appears to be generally true: The complaint was over Biblical content, and the Air Force pulled the material over the complaint.  It still ignores the fact the rest of the course supported the objectives without religious reference.

The slideshow certainly had religious content.  It specifically asked “Can a person of faith fight in a war?” It then proceeded to discuss biographical examples of persons of “faith,” including Col Hal Moore from the famous We Were Soldiers Once, and Young.  A second section on “Can war be just?” discussed Augustine and the history of Just War theory; it noted both Christian and Jewish perspectives on war.  That section concludes with the statement

“If war in the natural order is inherently unethical, it cannot be a good illustration in the spiritual order.”

Notably, the entire “religious” section, including title slides, is 11 of the ~42 slides in the two-part ethics brief.  Six slides have Biblical citations; 3 (or 3.5) are exclusively Christian.  While some of the verbal discussion in the course likely had Christian context, to be clear, only 3.5 of the 42 slides had exclusively Christian references.

The remainder discuss general ethics as well as the numbers, and the faces, of people killed in Japan following the delivery of the two nuclear bombs.  Tellingly, to highlight the fact there is nothing unique to nuclear weapons, the brief notes more people were killed in firebombing during World War II than the nuclear blasts.

The slides conclude with information on the local religious resources at Vandenberg AFB, including Jewish and Islamic resources.

There can be little doubt as to the overall objective of the brief.  Air Force spokesman David Smith said

The main purpose of the class was to help missile launch officers understand that “what they are embarking on is very difficult and you have to have a certain amount of ethics about what you are doing to do that job.”

These young officers were about to enter a career field that, for many years, has carried with it a certain aura (even stigma).  Even today, despite advances in technology of recent decades, people are generally more concerned about nuclear weapons in US bunkers than the array of arguably more lethal conventional weapons the military actually uses.  Put the word “nuclear” in front of things, and people get tense.  (In fact, the reason this controversy has legs is because of the word “nuclear.”  A vast majority of the internet traffic takes more issue with the US possession of nuclear weapons than the ethics training.)

Air Force officers come from a cross-section of society.  Contrary to popular belief, many of these trainees likely didn’t volunteer for the career of missile officer.  (Missileer was commonly the last choice of most new officers, with one exception:  Some chose the job because they heard it was so boring there was lots of time on duty to complete their Master’s Degree.)  These officers had likely at least thought of the ethical implications of the career field they were about to enter.  If they hadn’t, they certainly should have.

Public reports indicate this course was the last “reminder” for their consideration prior to them signing a statement indicating their willingness to launch nuclear weapons if properly authorized to do so.

How many career fields start out with that kind of dramatic signature statement?

Is it really so hard to believe an ethics class on war would precede the commencement of training for officers in charge of launching nuclear weapons?

With the vast majority of the American population, and the American military, claiming some version of the Christian faith, is it really so surprising that some portion of that discussion would include religious references — including, but not limited to, the Christian faith?

That’s also precisely what they were: religious references (by a Chaplain).  No reasonable person looking at those slides can conclude there was an effort at “promoting a particular brand of right-wing fundamentalist Christianity” or advocating “Christian nationalism,” as has been ludicrously claimed.  Nor was the Air Force trying to teach that “under fundamentalist Christian doctrine, war is a good thing,” as an asinine accusation from Michael Weinstein claimed.

The original article that started the web-spread was on Truthout; Michael Weinstein is a member of its board, and he apparently provided them with the FOIA papers that amounted to more than 500 pages on this topic. 

While Chris Rodda will likely be along to toot the MRFF’s horn, it is somewhat telling that the MRFF’s credibility is so lacking they had to coattail on their frequent ally Jason Leopold, giving him the documents to write and publish on rather than Rodda.  (And that’s saying something, given Leopold’s own history of credibility issues.)

Leopold’s treatment was typical of his sensationalist and “creatively written” prior pieces.  For example, Leopold said

One of the ethical questions contained in the PowerPoint presented to missile officers asks: “Can you imagine a set of circumstances that would warrant a nuclear launch from the US, knowing that it would kill thousands of non-combatants?
Another question trainees are confronted with asks: “Can we train physically, emotionally and spiritually for a job we hope we never have to do?”
To help the missile officers answer these ethical queries, the PowerPoint presentation cites numerous examples of characters from the New and Old Testament fighting “just” wars.
For example, in the Old Testament, “Abraham organized an army to rescue Lot,” God motivated “judges (Samson, Deborah, Barak) to fight and deliver Israel from foreign oppressors,” and “David is a warrior who is also a ‘man after God’s own heart.'”

The way he tells it, it must be bad, right?  The problem is Leopold’s description is only true if the presentation was delivered backwards.  Yes, those two questions were in the brief.  But the Biblical figures Leopold then quotes as “answers” were from the prior portion of the presentation on a separate issue.  If the Air Force training course was so obviously bad, why did Leopold have to so blatantly misrepresent it?  It seems he felt the need to sensationalize it for dramatic effect.

Leopold then says

The documents’ blatant use of religious imagery and its numerous citations of the Bible would appear to be a violation of the First Amendment establishing a wall of separation between church and state and Clause 3, Article 6 of the Constitution, which specifically prohibits a “religious test.”

Leopold might try reading the Constitution one of these days.  (It’s even on the internet.)  It doesn’t say anything about the use of religious imagery or religious citations.  He also fails to explain how putting a Bible verse on the screen somehow institutes a “religious test.”

The breadth to which this is misunderstood (or is being misrepresented) is evident in the quotation of a “senior missileer” who is helpfully anonymous:

“If they wanted to help people with their spiritual/religious/secular justification for serving as missile officers…

The very first sentence is all that’s needed.  This course wasn’t intended to help people with “justification,” though that premise adds a layer of melodrama that makes it more palatable on the internet.  This course was intended to make sure future nuclear launch officers had consciously considered their personal views on the ethical implications of their new career path, whether the source of those implications was religious or not.  The objective was to give them the chance to say “No” now, rather than face that ethical conflict either in training or when called upon to execute their mission.

The military clearly recognizes that something in the vein of this course must be done.  This event was the last-chance “filter” for ethical objection prior to the signing statements referenced above. 

If there’s any doubt about the gravity of this, reference the case of Ensign Michael Izbicki.  The would-be submarine officer’s saga started when he answered “No” to the Navy’s version of this filter, a ‘psychological test’ in which one of the questions was whether or not he felt he could launch nuclear weapons.  By his own admission, he got all the way to that entry point before he finally figured out his stand — a stand the military knows must be determined before they hand them missile launch keys.  There can be no “assumption” that everyone is “all good” with whatever they have to do.  Izbicki was ultimately discharged as a conscientious objector.

In the end, it is important to note this “scandal” has nothing to do with religious freedom.  Nor, despite the claims of Michael Weinstein, does it have anything to do with the Constitution.  For decades the US Air Force has conducted a course to bring up ethical issues to confront potential doubts or objections from those who may someday be called upon to launch nuclear weapons.  The course has addressed religious, ethical, historical, moral, and other elements of potential reservation.

As was said in the beginning, this “scandal” isn’t really a big deal.  The Air Force can alter, replace, or eliminate the training at its whim.  Whether it keeps the course or eliminates it, it does not prohibit the free exercise of religion, nor does it establish a religion.  If there is a controversy, it is manufactured.

The Air Force has currently “pulled” the course and is deciding if it wants to rework or replace it.  It is entirely entitled to do so.

It would be nice, though, if the US military could do its job without people being so hypersensitive over the non-profane mention of Jesus during military training.  From the grandstanding over this brief, you’d think the Constitution prohibited the government from referencing the “J-word.”

Did anybody else notice no one complained about the reference to the Maccabees or the multiple slides of Jewish scripture?


  • Gee, JD, you finally got around to writing about this MRFF victory, huh. (That’s me coming along to “toot the MRFF’s horn.”) Why didn’t you write anything about this sooner, JD? Hoping the story would go away? Or were you afraid to criticize the Air Force leadership that decided to pull the training?

    And, speaking of you being afraid to criticize people who greatly outrank you, you never did answer my question from your post a couple weeks ago about whether or not you thought General Schwarzkopf was wrong when he set a policy of not allowing Christian worship services and displays in Muslim countries, right down to having the chaplains removing their crosses from their uniforms.

    So, once again, I want to see you say flat out, right here, that you think that General Schwarzkopf’s decision not to “wave a red flag in the face of religious extremists,” as he put it, was wrong. Do you think that General Schwarzkopf’s policy regarding religious services, which was “we won’t advertise them, publicize them, or let them be filmed — we don’t want them broadcast on TV for the whole Moslem world to see,” was wrong?

    Very simple, JD. Is your answer yes or no? Do you or do you not think that General Schwarzkopf’s decision was wrong?

  • Clarifying something from my above comment that I should have proofread before posting: Whre I said Schwarzkopf’s policy was “not allowing Christian worship services and displays in Muslim countries,” I didn’t mean that he didn’t allow worship services. I meant that he didn’t want worship services to be visible to the local population.

  • JD, immediately correct: Weinstein is a member of Truthout’s BOARD OF ADVISERS not BOARD. That’s a big difference. Talk about misrepresentation! Your cite of Fox News as getting the story straight, which is the most biased news networks ever, shows how utterly biased you are. And it’s clear from those slides that the ethical questions that came AFTER the use of religious imagery and bible passages were intended to make the officers answer the questions having just sat through the slides on religion you idiot. As far as “sensationalist,” it’s the Air Force that gets credit, not the reporter. Also, why no mention of Nazi SS officer Wernher Von Braun? Would that interfere with your Breivik-esque analysis? Lastly, JD, the Air Force SUSPENDED THE PROGRAM! YOU LOSE!

  • Also, JD, did you even read what the sr. Officer said? Or do you need a reading comprehension class? Have you been getting enough oxygen Mr. Fighter Pilot? Do yourself a favor, you right wing nut, read the Constitution yourself! You are a bigger threat to our country’s safety than any “terrorist”

  • Shawn Campbell II

    Baptist Joint Committee just issued this, so sorry JD, looks like you fail, yet again. Really what this is about is your personal crusade against Mikey Weinstein. And that your name is “Christian Fighter Pilot” kinda makes you biased :)

    “A course in Ethics seems appropriate for all kinds of reasons in a military academy, but there are ways to introduce ethical concepts, theories and problem-solving without promoting or diminishing specific religious views. If anything, this presentation – which some apparently dubbed the “Jesus loves nukes” speech – sounds like an effort to debunk religious beliefs about war, to counter religious objections in a way that is wholly inappropriate. The training of military personnel should not include any form of religious indoctrination, or any overt effort to undermine religious beliefs, even if those beliefs call into question the conduct of war. “

  • Shawn Campbell II

    More misleading and outright lying from JD:

    “Public reports indicate this course was the last “reminder” for their consideration prior to them signing a statement indicating their willingness to launch nuclear weapons if properly authorized to do so.”

    That should be “public report” as in the Truthout report. Man, you’re on a roll JD!

  • Shawn Campbell II

    “this is actually not a big deal.”

    Really? The Air Force suspended an ethics training program that was in place for more than 20 years. Seems like it’s a very big deal bub.

  • @GetItRight

    Weinstein is a member of Truthout’s BOARD OF ADVISERS not BOARD. That’s a big difference.

    The dictionary disagrees with you. You might consider using one.

    @Shawn Campbell II

    That should be “public report” as in the Truthout report.

    You are incorrect.

    sounds like an effort to debunk religious beliefs about war…

    What “it sounds like” to a person sans context is irrelevant. The inclusion of religious objections, among others, in a brief about the use of nuclear weapons hardly constitutes “indoctrination.”

  • Which dictionary would that be, JD?

    There’s a big difference between a board and a board of advisers. Advisers have no authority to make decisions, but are merely people who can be called upon for advice; Board members have legal authority and responsibility.

    Please let us all know what dictionary you found that says differently, JD.

  • @Chris Rodda
    Make a donation in the name of the MRFF to Officers’ Christian Fellowship, the Navigators, or Campus Crusade’s Military Ministry. It can be any amount, and you don’t even have to provide a receipt. Just post here that you did.

    Then, your MRFF research query will be answered.

    You may, of course, decline and do the research yourself (which you have said is your day job), or you might recommend to Weinstein the MRFF hire a person who is capable of doing research.

    Your call.

  • Dominionist Satan

    Just another silly publicity stunt.

    “TEH Dominionists have infiltrated TEH NUKES! Ohhh TEH horror!! Thermonuclear war 4 Jesus Return!!!”

    Sometimes it’s hard to believe we are dealing with adults.

  • Shawn Campbell II

    Here you go, JD. Await your immediate correction

    “A board of advisors is a small group of people which meets periodically to offer advice and direction to a company. Members of the board of advisors do not usually have a share in the company, and they do not bear legal responsibilities for the company’s actions.”



  • @JD
    Wow, JD, I never realized you were such a funny guy. My soda almost came out my nose when I read that ;-)

  • It would appear that at long last the coercive and often illegal Christian proselytizing in the armed forces has come under the scrutiny of many thinking Americans and organizations dedicated to the maintenence of religious freedom in the military.

    For too long has a bastardized version of Chritianity known as “Christian Dominionism” been allowed to flourish under the aegis of Officers Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade for Christ Military Mission, The Navigators, Focus on the Family and other extreme Christian groups.

    These far right religious organizations under the guidance of Christian leaders such as Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Rod Parsley, James Dobson and others are determined to overthrow by attrition, or even force, the US Government. The number of Extreme Christians in governorships, state legislatures and Congress is substantial and growing. Christiian Dominionists such as Governor Rick Perry of Texas have already begun to comingle government and Christianity. County Commissions, City Councils and state legislsatures, many led by Dominionists have taken to reciting sectarian Christian prayers before meetings.

    A recent federal court ruled these prayers unconstituional and I’m sure many more objections to unconstitutional use of such unilateral Christian demonstrations in government are in the works.

    Remember, the Supreme Court has held that government officials, including the militray, may not, in their course of duty, favor, elevate, prefer of proselytize one religion over another or reliogion over non-religion. It is constitutionally forbidden.

  • Carmine Wiggins

    Richard… I’ve been associated with th AF for 35 years and I’ve never heard the Officer Christain Fellowship, Campus Crusades for Christ or the others to be christain dominonists. They do seem to have an unusual amount of access, probably because of high ranking Military associate. The televangalists you mention do not particularly register with most people, at least where I work and associate with. However, Hagee preaches another way of salvation for the Jew, which supposedly is in direct violation of Paul’s warnings in Galatians 1:6-9 and he’s anti-catholic. He is the hell-fire and brimestone preacher, the worst of them all in my opinion, with Pat Robertson a close second, for implying gods wrath for hurricanes…could you imagine a Military chaplain saying such a thing? So don’t worry, I think you are probably safe from a hostile takeover.

  • @Carmine Wiggins

    Hi Carmine,

    Thank you for your reply. I hope you are right but if you can, obtain a copy of Pat Robertson’s book, “The Secret Kingdom,” in which he outlines the Dominionist blue print for the take over of government and its replacement by appointed Christian men. Our constitution wold be abrogated and replaced by Biblical Mosaic Law with at least 17 different sins punishable by death, including heresy and Homosexuality.

    The command and control of the armed forces is to be co-opted by Dominionists and formed into an exclusive Christian fighting force capable of deploying and operating weapons of immense destructive power. This would be to begin a world-wide conversion of all populations to Christianity with those not cooperating cast into the “Lake of Fire.”

    Hagee’s Christian Zionist format and support of the Israelis are only to keep Israel strong against Arabs and Muslims and preserve Israel for the Christians that Dominionists believe are the rightful inheritors of Israel. Jews would be allowed the courtesy of converting to Christianity or death.

    This is a deep Evangelical Christian committment based on the “Great Commission” as outlined in Matthew.

    As for access to our cadets and troops, the organizations I listed are given access to them 24/7/365. As an example, right now a Christian cult known as “Warrick Paternal Shepherding” or “Cadets for Christ” is operating with the full knowledge of the chain of command. Their ministry proclaims all women to be sheep and all men to be their shepherds. Women are not to hold positions of authority over men nor attempt to teach or guide them. Several female cadets have resigned and married male cadets and two committed suicide.

    These folks aren’t fooling around, Carmine. They scare me as much or more as the Muslim Jihadists, who at least proclaim their religious intent. Only recently has any of the Dominionist revealed their part in the overall plan. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, Gov. Chris Christy of New Jersey, the governors of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, North and South Dakota, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana and many others plus a number of Dominionists in Congress have become very vocal about putting the Christian take on abortion and other hot button issues into secular legislation.

    I am a former Air Force Officer and Rescue Pilot and like you, did not experience religious improprieties until about the last 6 years or so since Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Oral and Richard Roberts and others began the push for Dominionism through the Christian Coalition, Moral Majority, Southern Baptist Convention and others. Focus on the Family, CCC Military Mission and Navigators are very active at the Air Force Academy.

  • @Richard
    Your comment is an excellent example of your consistent reliance on emotional appeal, and your complete failure to ever support your positions with actual facts.

    For example, you said

    the organizations I listed are given access to them 24/7/365.

    Instead of launching into an irrelevant diatribe about Cadets for Christ, how about providing evidence that anyone outside of the chain of command has unique access to cadets “24/7/365”?

    Provide evidence for your accusations, or people will simply conclude…you can’t.

  • @JD
    Hi JD.

    The things I mentioned in my previous post have been published over the last few years in various blogs, websites, newspapers, TV Newscasts, public affairs programs, etc.

    Please don’t ask me to do your job for you. It is your job to prove me wrong.

    You might Google Air Force Academy religious problems and read many incidences of religious impropriety including a scathing piece by former Superintendent Gen. John Rosa. A wealth of information can be obtained at as well. I will pass along this one site in case you are busy.

  • @Richard
    When someone asks you to support a specific accusation, say, that a group has access to cadets 24/7, you say “Google it.”

    Aside from the USAFA website listing restricted visitor hours, there’s no way to “prove the negative” of your statement, any more than someone could prove that you don’t have 24/7 access to cadets.

    But that’s the core of a great conspiracy theory, isn’t it?

    You might consider that its “your job” not to skirt the law. Sedition (advocating the overthrow of the government) is a crime. Falsely accusing someone of criminal conduct is libel in most places.

    If you refuse to support your ridiculous assertions, you may be treading on thin ice. Then again, that might be your saving grace: your assertions are ridiculous.

  • @JD

    I was wondering when the threats would begin.

    How typical of the Dominionist Christian to use coercion and threats to silence criticism. This is the United States of America JD, not the Christian States of America. We are free to criticize any government or religious body and even to accuse them of perceived offenses.

    Libel? False Accusations of criminal activity? Just a cursory perusal of the aforemention google entries condemn the vicious and unAmerican groups cited above. Pat Robertson, Gary North, Tony Perkins, John Hagee and others are condemned out of their own mouths with their writings of installing an exclusive Christian government in the United States.

    Reading the mission statement of CCC Military Mission in which it seeks “Government Paid Missionaries for Christ” is a chilling reminder of Dominionist Christianity’s assault on the constitution and on our young men and women in the armed forces.

    According to my sources shuttles have been made available to ferry cadets to extreme local Christian churches. The presence of Focus on the family has been plainly visible in the AFA Visitors center, exclusive Christian scripture quotations have been painted on dormitory walls, e-mails from the chain of command, containing exclusive Christisan messages, have been sent to the entire cadet populaton, advertising flyers for exclusive religious movies have been place on dining tables at cadet mess halls, operatives from The Navigators, New Life Church, Focus on the Family, CCC Military Mission and others are this day able to access cadets at dormitories, classrooms and other gathering places. Disprove any of these revelations if you will.

  • @JD
    Unless I’m on the wrong page, it appears that my last post in which I provided a list of Dominion Christian transgressions at the US Air Force Academy has been deleted.

    Anyone seen my post?

  • Sorry,

    For some reason my post did not appear until I posted again.

  • @Richard
    You seem to have become a little sensitive over the years. The statements above are no more a “threat” than saying if you speed, you may get a ticket.

    How typical of the Dominionist Christian to use coercion and threats to silence criticism.

    Weinstein seems to keep his lawyers jumping using “coercion and threats” to silence his critics. No one here has done anything similar.

    Are you making an accusation, again without support, that someone here ascribes to “dominionist” theology?

    Among other things, you said

    James Dobson…[is] determined to overthrow by attrition, or even force, the US Government.

    Nothing you have said has provided any evidence he has committed such a crime. Citing broad Google searches that “condemn” him is not proof he’s done or said anything to support your accusation.

    You need to learn to support your accusations with evidence. Until then, nothing you say is credible.

  • @JD
    Hi JD,

    I am suggesting that you or whomever is writing over your name displays all the insensitivity, religious supremacy and disregard for constitutional provision that Christian Dominionists display. It is quite easy to detect the smugness, feeling of immunity and “in your face” militarism which is the hallmark of Dominionist Christianity.

    What I said is that Leading Dominionists Pat Robertson, Gary North and Tony Perkins have all expounded on the Christian Theocratization of America. Their views are available by googling their names. James Dobson subscribes to all of their writings.

    It seems to me that your are living in a fantasy world in which theocracy has already been achieved and that anyone who dares to question the Christianization of America is some kind of misfit heretic.

    Your vision of the armed forces is of a massive crusade against everything non-Christian. You don’t seem to realize that thinking people might be frightened by a “Christian Fighter Pilot Force” under the command of a Christian Dominionist rather than a contistutionally neutral officer and that you just might obey an order to nuke a Mosque in Mecca in the course of your flight duties.

  • I wonder why you have to post again to see your last post?

    Oh well, it must be a Christian Fighter Pilot Thing.

    JD Says that nothing I say is credible without evidence. Yet he accepts the entire Old and New Testament without a shred of evidence.

    Here we have resurrections, miracles, hosts of angels and just about every other eerie other-world happening known to man and he’s worried about me providing more evidence after I’ve supplied more than both books of the Bible.

    This is called unqualified religious submission. And I can’t help but wonder what JD and his “Christian Fightrer Pilots”have up their sleeves. Maybe God will tell them to nuke MRFF. It appears JD and his submissive Christian Fighter Pilots would be far more interested in destroying atheists, Non-Christians and young men and women in the armed forces who don’t cave to Command centered and coercive Christian proselytizing.

    Time to take a second look at what’s happening to our kids in military training and service academies. They are in the hands of some very sinister folks.

    We must not abandon our young to Dominion Christian indoctrination.

  • @JD
    Hi JD,

    Yes, I have grown a bit sensitive over the years. Actually, I’ve grown more frightened over the years as Dominionist activity and presence in the military and government increased and blatant constitutional violations committed routinely.

    I’m sure you have seen and approve of Governor Perry’s turning Texas state government into a Christian enclave replete with sectarian Christian prayer and unabashed references to Jesus Christ.

    Christian prayer opening school board meetings and local government meetings have sprung up across the nation, County Governments in Colorado and elsewhere have instituted School Voucher programs in which parents are given tax payer money to pay relgious school tuition, leaders of Christian organizations and churches have taken to supporting and recommending political candidates on church letterhead and e-mails. These activities are all violations of constitutional provision and thankfully many of them are being nipped in the bud or overturned in the courts by true American protectors of the constitution such as MRFF, ACLU, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, People for the American Way, Jews on First and others.

    It is plain to see that this increased unAmerican religious activity is the Domionionist Christian agenda we have discussed for years being put into action and following the blue prints so carefully designed by megalomaniac Dominionist leaders.

    What I say here is what I see elsewhere to which all are exposed. It’s in the news JD. One should get his nose out of the religious blogs and Sunday school catachisms and start reading the newspaper and watching television. (except Fox News) You won’t need me to to provide each and every story of Christianity run amok, it’s all over the news.

  • Pingback: God and Country » Weinstein Complains of “Wretched” Christian Air Force Training

  • Pingback: God and Country » Air Force Yet to Replace Pulled Nuke Training

  • Pingback: God and Country » Weinstein Recycles Material to Sell Book on Religious Freedom