Mikey Weinstein Attacks Muslim US Troops over Religion. Almost.
In an act that almost amounted to a display of principle, Michael “Mikey” Weinstein’s MRFF finally spoke out against US Air Force MSgts Laura and Mark Magee — both Muslim service members. The Magees were the focus of a “Through Airmen’s Eyes” article put out by the Air Force early last week which highlighted their faith. The article was entitled “Nevada ANG chaplain [sic]: ‘I want people to know Islam is not evil’“. (The title should have said “…chaplain’s assistant,” not “chaplain”.)
Weinstein’s group put out a statement saying [emphasis added]:
MRFF objects to it just as strongly as it has to the many articles published by the Air Force highlighting the faith of Christian airmen [sic]…
The MRFF complaint gives only a single example that it says violates Air Force regulations, citing the article which quoted MSgt Mark Magee saying:
“The things that are there, versus reading the Bible and the many contradictions between the Old and New Testament — the Quran is more constant all the way through”
— [This] statement say[s] that the Qur’an is superior to the Bible, which clearly violates AFI 1-1, Section 2.12…
Naturally, the MRFF is wrong: The MRFF doesn’t object “just as strongly” to this article on Islam as it has to those on Christianity.
In just a few examples of the different way in which the MRFF has treated Christians:
- The MRFF announcement is generic from the MRFF, not a vitriolic personal missive from Mikey Weinstein.
- It contains zero unnecessary adjectives, ellipses, or vitriol, indicating Weinstein probably didn’t write or even edit it. (Nor likely did Chris Rodda, as it is about 3,000 words too short.)
- The MRFF does not demand the “immediate,” “aggressive,” “public,” or any other kind of investigation, court-martial, or punishment on the part of the two MSgts or their entire chain of command.
- The MRFF does not equate the Magees with the Taliban, call them traitors violating the Constitution, say they were displaying “fundamentalist tyranny, exceptionalism and supremacy,” or otherwise indicate the Magees were “evidence” of an ongoing “coup”.
- The MRFF does not demand the Magee’s heads be cut off.
- The MRFF does not say one word about MSgt Laura Magee’s public display of faith in uniform: her hijab.
- The MRFF does not threaten a lawsuit, demand the article be removed, or even politely ask for a disclaimer.
- The MRFF does not cite 23 offended “clients”, 13 of whom are practicing Muslims.
- The MRFF release is merely an internet comment. It is not an official complaint, filed with the IG or in a letter cc’d to the entire Air Force chain of command.
- The MRFF says nothing about the chaplain in the article — who proselytized and converted a subordinate, MSgt Magee.
- Finally, the MRFF fails to show the “blood in the streets” it claimed would occur if another religion did what it claims Christians have done.
In other words, the MRFF’s objection to an article on Islamic troops is nothing like its objection to articles on Christian troops.
The entire event is published almost reluctantly, as if Weinstein was forced to put something out and only half-heartedly did so. The MRFF’s tone sounds as though they desperately wanted ammunition to say they didn’t just pick on Christians, but they didn’t have the heart — or the courage — to attack a Muslim the way they would a Christian.
But even if we give Mikey Weinstein credit for trying to look principled, his MRFF is also wrong on the law.
MSgt Mark Magee addressed a simple point on why he chose to convert to Islam after his wife did. He said part of the reason was that he’d read the Qu’ran and found it more believable than the Bible. Whether one agrees with that statement or not, there’s absolutely nothing wrong under Air Force rules or the law with him saying it. After all, anyone who knows he is a Muslim already knows what he thinks about the Bible — along with many other things he believes. That MSgt Magee puts voice to those beliefs changes nothing about his freedom — protected under the law, not just Air Force regulations — to express those beliefs.
Would Mikey Weinstein assert that US troops should have to hide their faiths to avoid violating AFI 1-1 para 2.12?
(The MRFF also took issue with the Air Force naming MSgt Laura Magee’s personal blog. As with mentioning the details of their faith, there is no law, regulation, or policy that restricts the Air Force from mentioning a benign personal endeavor in a personal interest story about a person’s personal activities.)
Many Airmen, Soldiers, Sailors, and Marines have converted religions over the years, some under interesting circumstances. Men and women converted to Islam (and to Islam, and to Islam), from Islam, to Christianity. The reasons these stories are known is the military has published them. Further, the US military has routinely published stories about troops living out their faiths — all published without incident. Allowing someone to tell the personal story of their faith is something in which the military has found value, likely because it acts as both a recruitment tool and an encouragement to others of like faith.
That Mikey Weinstein doesn’t like it does not suddenly make it impermissible or illegal. Mikey Weinstein is not the law, nor is he the Air Force. He is just another private citizen with an opinion and a mouth.
Tragically, the Magees are wrong: the Bible is God’s Word, and Jesus is the Only Way to eternal life. But even Christianity recognizes the Magee’s liberty to be wrong. Perhaps one day they will be as open to a Christian chaplain handing them a Bible as they were to a Muslim chaplain handing them a Qur’an.
We can pray.
ADVERTISEMENT
There are no contradictions in the Bible, there is only contradictions that people personally look for.
Of course, Wiener-stein wants to score brownie-points with Muslim service-members, so he obviously won’t attack Muslims with the same unashamed hate that he serves to Christians. Wiener-stein is just one demagogue out of a sea of demagogues that populate the bigoted Left.
If I were able to switch places with Trump, I’d make Sonny Hernandez the new USAFA Commandant just to piss Wiener-stein off.
@AP
“There are no contradictions in the Bible, there is only contradictions that people personally look for.”
There are plenty of contradictions — there are just also many ways people choose to explain them away. Which is part, of course, of the problem of basing modern laws/mores on ancient texts; there are so many ways to interpret them, and no way of telling which interpretation is correct.
“….the same unashamed hate that he serves to Christians.”
You mean like the majority of the MRFF’s clients, who are Christians?
First of all, there are no contradictions in the Bible. Don’t blame Christians for your own mind’s inability to function.
Second of all, the majority of MRFF’s clients are not Christians; they are nontheistic, thin-skinned LGBTs, and thinner-skinned atheists. Neither of whom should be in the military if they’re so thin-skinned that the mere mention of Christ or Christianity causes them to complain to a Christophobic retard. You know how I know that? Christian clients wouldn’t be complaining to a Christophobe.
Third, it is actually wiser to base laws on the Bible, because humans have been doing so since the 6th Century, and guess what, [redacted]? They’ve worked better than secular laws.
Edited by Admin.
You mean they call themselves Christians. Going to church does not make anyone a Christian like going to McDonald’s makes you a hamburger. The true biblical definition of a Christian is one who has confessed and repented of their sins and has asked Christ to come into their lives to be their Lord and Savior! Also, being Catholic does not mean you are a Christian either, the greater majority of all Catholics are not Christians!
Mikey’s “clients” are so anonymous and he usually gives the standard line “if I were to up the chain of command I fear that I will not be promoted” stuff. How about Mikey you name names of your so called clients and witnesses so that we can actually fact check their stories to see if they are true or just fake news to bolster your prosperity non-profit organization!
@Anonymous Patriot: “First of all, there are no contradictions in the Bible. Don’t blame Christians for your own mind’s inability to function.”
Which came first: The animals, or Adam? Genesis 1:25-27, Genesis 2:7-19.
This is without going into all the numerical missteps, for example. :)
You may think you can explain them away, but that’s an interpretation, and, as I said, undercuts one’s ability to base anything on them. Why should we treat your explanation as correct as opposed to anyone else’s?
“Second of all, the majority of MRFF’s clients are not Christians; they are nontheistic, thin-skinned LGBTs, and thinner-skinned atheists.”
Have a citation for that? The MRFF’s own data says otherwise, unless, again, you’re defining “Christians” to mean only “Christians who agree with me religiously, unlike those Episcopalians, etc.”, in which case, your religious bigotry is open for all to see.
“You know how I know that? Christian clients wouldn’t be complaining to a Christophobe.”
Well, you appear to be wrong. (Indeed, calling Weinstein a “Christophobe” when he has been supported by several mainstream Christian groups is…an interesting definition, at best.)
“Third, it is actually wiser to base laws on the Bible, because humans have been doing so since the 6th Century, and guess what, [redacted]? They’ve worked better than secular laws.”
Like all those Biblically-based laws supporting slavery, the subjugation of women, the divine right of kings, and so on, and so forth? The problem is that practically any law can be justified by citing the Bible one way or another — which helps make it useless for such a thing absent some good secular reason.
@Anonymous
I suggest you read this concerning “contradictions” might help you a bit – http://crossexamined.org/rules-evaluate-alleged-bible-contradictions-difficulties-free-bible-insert/
@JD “You mean they call themselves Christians. Going to church does not make anyone a Christian like going to McDonald’s makes you a hamburger.”
They have as much right to call themselves Christians as you do — that’s part of what the “religious liberty” this site is allegedly so keen on means.
“Also, being Catholic does not mean you are a Christian either, the greater majority of all Catholics are not Christians!”
See above. Your definition of “Christian” is yours; that gives it no particular power over anyone else’s ability to use the term or not.
“How about Mikey you name names of your so called clients and witnesses so that we can actually fact check their stories to see if they are true or just fake news to bolster your prosperity non-profit organization!”
Because if he’s acting as their attorney, unless they allow him to, he’s not supposed to do so, as it would be unethical? Just guessing.
And as for your pamphlet — here’s the thing. It goes into great detail about ways to reconcile possible contradictions — but ends up with “Remember who’s Boss”. In other words, a tool to interpret in order to salve one’s conscience against the charges.
Of course, one can also take the POV that of *course* there are contradictions; it’s a collection of oral history. But at that point, citing it as any kind of authority for law is no more useful than citing Shakespeare — it’s a container of wisdom, not an authoritative source.