Michael Weinstein’s “religious freedom” foundation has raised a hullabaloo over the decision by organizers to cancel the atheist “counter-event” to last year’s Christian “Rock the Fort.”  Quoth the ever-eloquent Weinstein:

There is a DoD Directive which says that the Department of Defense may never provide a selective benefit for one entity and not provide the same benefit for another, and the Billy Graham Evangelical Society received a benefit that was not afforded to Rock Beyond Belief.  They have treated us horribly.

Weinstein and supporters of the “Rock Beyond Belief” event claim the “horrible” treatment is a result of being treated differently than “Rock the Fort,” or that the military “reneged” on its promise of the “same support” for RBB as RtF.  This “disparate” treatment, then, is proof the military is actually trying to promote Christianity.

Then again, Weinstein thinks everything is proof of some sort of Christian conspiracy.

The long and short of it is that there is a process by which Fort Bragg approves events and their support to them — and, at least for the time being, only a few people know exactly what that process is.  It appears evident Fort Bragg decided “Rock Beyond Belief” met the minimum requirements for support; thus, it approved the event.  It did not approve the requested venue (the parade grounds), but instead offered a theatre based on the description of the event as primarily non-chart-making speakers and musical performers.

While it might not be the desired outcome for RBB, the venue and justification do not seem unreasonable.  Weinstein apparently disagrees.

RBB must stand on its own with regard to meeting the requirements for support — it did so, and it was approved.  The only caveat is Fort Bragg cannot deny support to “Rock Beyond Belief” purely because of its ideology, because Fort Bragg has supported events of other ideologies in the past (“Rock the Fort”).  Beyond that, the proper standard is equitable treatment, not equal treatment.  For example, an event with a projected attendance of 400 is not comparable to one with a projected attendance of 4,000; one composed exclusively of lecturers is not comparable to one composed exclusively of athletic events.  The non-comparable events are reasonably not entitled to identical levels of support.

There is no indication at this point that Fort Bragg’s process unfairly discriminated against “Rock Beyond Belief,” or that any decision made about RBB had anything to do with its ideology.  It appears Weinstein is making demands for special treatment, rather than similar treatment to every other event.  Given the public statements, it appears that unless Fort Bragg volunteered precisely the same logistics as went to “Rock the Fort,” right down to the same number of portajohns, someone (read: Weinstein) was going to complain.  This was true regardless of any differences (say, in projected crowd size) between the two events.  That’s a patently ridiculous expectation.

To recap:  The atheist “Rock Beyond Belief” asked for and received permission to host an event on a US military facility.  That wasn’t good enough for Weinstein, and “Rock Beyond Belief” canceled itself because it wasn’t satisfied with the response.

Perhaps Fort Bragg will now make a public exception to its standard policies — though that would seem futile since the event has been canceled.

In any case, this isn’t about “Rock Beyond Belief” anymore.  It’s about Michael Weinstein, who joined up with RBB several months ago.  Now, by sheer coincidence, he’s found (some might say he’s created) yet another vehicle with which he can sue the US military.  He’s lost four similar lawsuits already, and he’s left a trail of broken promises and unrequited “victims” along the way — quickly dumping each case for a “better” vehicle for his agenda without even bothering to file (a passionately promised) appeal.  This is only his latest opportunity.