US Army Says Soldier “Erred” in Treatment over Christian Concert
According to various reports, a US Army Staff Sergeant marched a group of Soldiers to a voluntary Christian concert put on by BarlowGirl at Fort Eustis. When some said they didn’t want to attend, they were marched back to their barracks and told to stay there, without access to their personal electronics and nothing to do but clean the barracks.
This was a result of a “miscommunication,” according to the Army; there was no “malicious” or even “intentional” act.
The company commander found out and apologized to the Soldiers the next day. Contrary to prior assumptions that “about half” didn’t attend the concert, the reports indicate it was approximately 20 of a group of 200. The previous contention their treatment may have been consistent with other training environments was not specifically addressed, though the specific treatment of the Soldiers was not disputed. Nothing in the reports indicates the Staff Sergeant’s conduct was related to the content of the concert, religious or not.
Michael Weinstein, of course, is upset the investigation didn’t turn up proof for his Christian-usurpation conspiracy theory:
A US army sergeant who confined dozens of soldiers to barracks and ordered them to clean up after they refused to attend a Christian concert was part of an “absolute attempt to establish fundamental Christianity in the military”, [Weinstein] alleged.
Contrary to his accusations, the incident was determined to be an error by an individual, not evidence of an institutional conspiracy. As astounding as it is to some, in an institution of 3 million total force members, not every person is correct all the time. When people act incorrectly or inappropriately, they should be corrected or counseled. Such conduct does not prove that Christians are trying to take over the world.
By the reports of the soldiers who were there, it was between 80 and 100 soldiers, not 20. Then there were the ones who did not want to attend the concert, but went anyway because they were afraid of repercussions if they didn’t.
“When people act incorrectly or inappropriately, they should be corrected or counseled. Such conduct does not prove that Christians are trying to take over the world.”
Sounds like a no-lose situation for you… a nice explanation at-the-ready when evangelism gets a little out of hand. Just claim it’s an “individual” making a “mistake”. It seems like there is always an excuse in the back pocket of those seeking to defend Christian evangelism in the military.
I’m new to the site so I’ll share my first and most salient observation… I am indeed amazed that a person who attended the US Air Force Academy isn’t openly and honestly admitting that there is at least a subtle pressure (and often times not so subtle) to practice Christianity. Perhaps you don’t see it because you are so deeply indoctrinated in the Christian faith. Trust me… others not so inclined to believe the story of Christianity feel it (or felt it). At least I did.
WWRID,
Imbedded in your post in an underlying implication that illegal and immoral pressure to practice Christianity at the Academy is so rampant and has been so obvious so long that anyone who has ever gone would know that it exists.
I’ll use myself as an example. In my first year I got my best military rankings yet was the least active in church. My last year I was most active, yet received my worst military ranking. The same thing happened in my pilot training class, although that wasn’t at the Academy.
Can you honestly say that you lost ranking or didn’t get your choice of assignments because you didn’t go to church (or the ‘right’ church)? FYI, i was ’03, what about you?
WWRID,
Actually, Weinstein is guilty of the logical fallacy of hasty generalization. He has never produced evidence of institutional religious coercion. In fact, there is no public proof that the Eustis incident (the decision of the Staff Sergeant) had anything to do with religion.
The Eustis incident would never have happened if the commanding general of the post hadn’t instituted his “Commanding General’s Spiritual Fitness Concert Series.” Being a command event rather than a chapel event is almost certainly why the Staff Sergeant, who has become the scapegoat, thought it was proper to order his soldiers to get into formation and march them to the concert in the first place. So, saying that the Staff Sergeant’s decision had nothing to do with religion actually just reinforces our point — that a command should not sponsor religious events. Calling it a Commanding General’s event can easily make an NCO like this Staff Sergeant unsure of how much they should push their subordinates to attend. If it had been called a chapel event, any good NCO would have known without a doubt that it was absolutely optional, and would have released the soldiers who didn’t want to attend at the normal end of their duty day.
@Dealer
Dealer – I’m certainly not making the claim that the pressure to participate in Christian activities is “illegal” or “immoral”. Your words, not mine, and I apologize if I led you to that conclusion. Further, I am not intending to imply that this annoying pressure routinely results in degradation of ranking or evaluation. I’d be surprised if this didn’t happen sometimes – but I’m clearly not claiming it happens all the time, or even often.
I would be surprised, however, to hear from anyone who attended USAFA that they were oblivious to Christian evangelism – both from higher ranking individuals as well as a general institutional phenomenon. This is not to suggest that such evangelism is necessarily damaging to careers. But surely you will admit that Christian evangelism permeates the culture. I argue that this notion is the source of the “at least subtle pressure” that I mentioned.
Personally, I witnessed/experienced multiple incidents where this kind of pressure was applied – by superior cadets, by officers and generally by the institution – while I was a cadet in the mid 80’s. My understanding is that the culture went even more deeply evangelical in the 90’s and later, escalating to the point of scandal at times.
@JD
The irony of a fundamentalist Christian lecturing others on the use of logical fallacies is not lost on me.
@Chris Rodda
“Commanding General’s Spiritual Fitness Concert Series”
A perfect example of the insidious (if not illegal, or immoral) nature of Christian evangelism in the military.
Do you guys have even the slightest clue as to how it feels to an atheist (or non-Christian since it’s always perfectly clear that “spiritual” is code for Christian) to have a commanding officer talk about “spiritual fitness”?
@WWRID And there is no question that this “Commanding General’s Spiritual Fitness Concert Series” was exclusively an evangelical Christian concert series. Every concert consisted of Christian bands, with light shows of crosses being beamed all over the stage, and some performers even stopping to read Bible verses between songs.
The DoD contracts for the performers for this Christian concert series show that as of last year’s season (the series is still going on), over $300,000 had been spent to pay these Christian bands, with the smallest opening acts starting at about $9,000, and the biggest headliner getting $100,000 for two concerts. (And, no, JD … none of this funding is coming from any Chapel Tithes and Offings fund. It’s all coming from DoD contracts.)
@Chris Rodda
I’m shocked by this.
WWRID,
I brought up illegality and immorality to differentiate between evangelism that complies with regulation and God’s rules for spreading His word and radical evangelism that does not. If you consider an invite from an officer to a cadet to attend a Bible study pressure, then you need to look up pressure. “Exertion of force,” “harassment,” and “oppression” hardly describe legal evangelism.
As to differing social values contributing to weaker rankings and evaluations, I’ve seen more evidence to the contrary. Members with Christian values who choose to refrain from some stereotypical fighter pilot social events (see JD’s description of a naming) have more discrimination than the other way around.
Chris,
You make a good point foiled by one problem: you complain but offer no solutions. What is your answer to the rise in suicides? Be a do-er not a whiner.
@Chris Rodda
The biggest headliner was “BarlowGirl” and they got 23.000 dollars for 2 concerts.
As for the other numbers and the source of the funding you are lying like a good MRFF “soldier”.
Ms. Rodda…you people have no ounce of shame in your faces? And what about some maturity? Its hard to beleive we are dealing with adults.
No, Pete, the biggest headliner in the series so far was SonicFlood, and they got $100,000 for two concerts. This information is all publicly available at usaspending.gov if you want to look it up for yourself before you come back to apologize for calling me a liar.
@Chris Rodda
I searched “SonicFlood” and it shows 24.000 for Spiritual Fitness Concert.
The “ultimate contract value” listed for SonicFlood is $100,000. If they got $24,000 for one concert, that just means they are going to be doing more concerts. So, they’re doing four concerts at $24,000 a pop instead of two at $50,000 a pop as it appeared when I looked at their contract last year (an assumption based on the fact that all of the other bands for this concert series were doing two concerts.) But, whether the contact is for four concerts or two, this is still the highest paid headliner, and still has a $100,000 contract, so my total of over $300,000 in DoD contracts for this concert series is still correct.