Atheist Soldier Refuses to Bow Head at Graduation
According to a CNN blog, an atheist US Army Private First Class graduating from Advanced Individual Training at Fort Jackson, SC, was expected to “bow his head and clasp his hands” during the prayer portion of his unit’s graduation.
After almost being pulled from a graduation ceremony for refusal to lower the head during a benediction, a soldier is now allowed to attend but must instead stand at attention.
The rehearsal occurred yesterday, the graduation itself is today. Notably, the CNN article was written only on the basis of information from the Soldier and Michael Weinstein; there was no comment from Fort Jackson.
It appears the Soldier was at least partially in the right. As noted previously (in an incident that received far less fanfare but was far more explicit), the required participation in a religious act of contrition could potentially violate the religious freedom of those involved.
The Soldier wasn’t entirely right, however, and he may have caused some of his own grief. He said:
I immediately pointed out that…prayer at a public ceremony [is] unconstitutional…
He’s wrong. Prayer at a public ceremony is not unconstitutional. In addition, making such a politically charged — as well as inaccurate and outlandish — complaint in a public military setting (where most others are just trying to get something over with) will often generate exactly the response he got:
Instantly the rest of my platoon groaned and said to suck it up, stop complaining, etc.
Regardless of the reactions of his peers, it seems his supervision was giving him incorrect direction. Naturally, his first reaction was to use the chain of command…or not:
When I sat down, I immediately e-mailed Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation…
After pontificating in front of his peers, making a complaint to an activist organization that makes a living off criticizing religious freedom in the military likely did little to further endear himself to those around him.
The only other public information, as reported by the Soldier, was that his commander ultimately found him again and said he was not required to bow his head, but was still required to stand at attention in the formation.
It is likely, though it cannot be confirmed, that a leader of the formation was simply overzealous in his desire for “uniformity” in the AIT graduation formation. There is no reason, for example, to believe there was any desire to impose religion on any individual.
It is also likely, but unconfirmed, that the way in which the Soldier expressed himself distracted from an otherwise (partially) valid complaint. If he exited the formation and sat down, for example, when he was being ordered to participate in the rehearsal formation, his conduct may have been considered insubordinate. Military policies specifically say
the dictates of a person’s conscience, religion, or personal philosophy cannot justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.
Participation in the ceremony or formation is not an unlawful order, despite the Soldier’s feelings about the constitutionality of “public prayer,” so bucking direction to participate in the ceremony rehearsal could have resulted in official sanction independent of any religious accusation.
Again, many of the details are unknown, but hopefully the parties on both sides learned from the situation. A military member should not be made to physically mimic an act of religious contrition; a military member should also continue to act with respect and use the chain of command.
Most situations are resolved “at the lowest level” with a simple clarification of communication. As has been noted here before, military members are people, too, and can make mistakes — on both sides of these “scandals.” Such incidents are proof of neither an institutional religious discrimination nor an atheist mutiny in the military.
For his part, Michael Weinstein used the incident to highlight some of his more common PR tactics: He claimed “victory” in a situation over which he had no influence, and it appears he solicited an impassioned email “plea” from the Soldier — after the fact, and solely for the purpose of public consumption.
It all comes down to respect for the soldiers next to you. I do not believe in religion, however if a fellow soldier had a rabbits foot he wanted me to rub to make him feel better I would do it. I would kiss a picture of his mom for him. I would wash his feet if it made him feel better. I would darn sure bow my head why he rambled on about something I do not believe in or understand. Is this soldier forced to “play nice”… nope and he shouldn’t be required to. However noone is “required” to take any extra risks to save his hide either. Noone is required to help him carry his bags if he can’t keep up, noone is required to drag him away from gunfire if he can’t move himself and they were ordered to retreat. Noone is “required” to listen to him when he is scared or missing home either. Noone is required to trade the peanut butter for his cheese packet because he wants to make something. Respect out gets respect in. Selfish behavior out gets selfish behavior in.
In 1961 in Navy boot camp we were told that “There are no atheists in the Navy.” We were given the choice on Sunday of either attending church or doing k.p. Atheists, in my opinion, are among the most discriminated against.
Here’s what really happened: http://wp.me/p1JUri-6v
Of course, the fact that JD admittedly didn’t have the details, such as the soldier being threatened by their commander with UCMJ action, didn’t stop him from spouting off about the situation.
I guess I’m a little disappointed in JD over his substantially misguided views regarding this purposeful attempt to require the practice of prohibited religious ceremony in the military.
Each officer, NCO and any member of the armed forces in a supervisory position knows that he or she may not, in the normal course of duty, favor, advance, elevate, prefer or proselytize one religion over another or religious belief over non-religious belief.
This soldier, during an AIT graduation was given an order to bow his head and clasp his hands, an obvious posture of religious supplication. Under constitutional provision, this order was illegal.
The Private wasn’t “pontificating” in front of peers but merely attempting to clarify his civil rights and religious freedom not to be coerced into religious ceremony by superiors. His complaint to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, a privately funded organization that advocates for religious freedom in the military, was truly the one act guaranteed to obtain an avenue of relief, given the lack of cooperation and action on the part of military chains of command in countless other similar situations.
To sum up, it is most certainly a “victory” when an act of religious coercion is thwarted and one of our young soldiers is protected from systematic religious hegemony in the armed forces.
In this case the Military Religious Freedom Foundation and its founder, Mikey Weinstein were doing their job. The AIT graduation commander was not.
Well written article. It is nice to see that both sides have rational people who can present information in a relatively unbiased fashion despite their personal feelings. Of course, the MRFF made a bigger deal of it than it needed to be because they are trying to fight off an increasing trend of evangelical influence on the military. Just look at the religious demographics of chaplains compared to the demographics of soldiers. There is a great disparity. This story was more a wakeup call to other atheists to stand up for their rights rather than an admonishment of the military. Most chaplains I know a very respectful of the pluralist nature of the military.
Obviosly TWO heads were unbowed. The atheist and whoever saw that his head was unbowed… Absurd!
I applaud that soldier for standing up for his beliefs. With what the Air Force Academy was doing with their harrasment of Jews and non christians by and through a right wing-nut evangelical church was bad enough some years ago. You wouild think that the military would learn and that right wing-nut evangelicals would shut the […] up.
Edited by Admin.
@Dennis wilson
Hi Dennis,
You must remember that there are those who are tasked with monitoring the masses, including the military. They may keep their heads unbowed in order to report others whose heads are unbowed. The Nazie were good at this. Apparently Dominion Christians have learned well from them.
@Tundra
You might do that as a favour to a friend. But you should not be ordered to partake in any religious practice by someone who literally has the right to kill you if you disobey them enough.
@Chris Rodda
On the contrary, the UCMJ accusation was part of the CNN blog noted above. The details left out include what, precisely, the Soldier did and commander said. One can claim a police officer threatened them with a ticket, but that’s insufficient information to justify any conclusion on the conduct of either them or the cop.
Your own write up adds nothing to the information known.
So, what details would you like to share with the group that would further elucidate this situation?
@Richard
You fail to say what, precisely, is “substantially misguided.” You are attempting to assign motivation without the basis of fact, and you’re ignoring the public facts of what actually occurred.
@JD
Hi JD,
You are starting to sound a lot like a lawyer in your posts. You must have completed the barracks lawyer course you purchased on E-Bay. LOL
By “substantially misguided” I mean you always place your religious beliefs above constitutional provisions which go against everything that happened to this young soldier and the hundreds of other incidences of Dominionist Christian wrong doings in our armed forces on which we have debated. You completely ignore the proper drill in these circumstances.
As a senior officer, you should be johnny on the spot when the civil or religious rights enumerated in the constituion for all Americans, including the military, are violated out of hand by officers who have abrogated their oaths to the Constitution and, instead, choose to apply archaic Christian doctrine instead of military and constitutional law to a situation such as this.
JD, secular constitutional law must and will prevail despite the diversions and “misguided” actions of a few who would see America succumb to the awful threat of theocratic submission.
The real caution here is to remember your oath of service is not to God but rather to your countrymen. God will take care of himself whereas our young Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors, Marines, Coast Guard and Reservists depend on you and your fellow officers to guide them in the difficult roles they have chosen. You must not betray them.
@Richard
Not sure what you’re reading, but its not on this website. The article above doesn’t even make a reference to religious beliefs (on anyone’s part).
Again, what part of the article above do you find “misguided?” The part where it says the leaders were “incorrect,” or the part where he was (at least partially) “right?”
@JD
By “misguided” I mean that the commander may well not have purposefully directed the young soldier to bow his head with full knowledge that he was committing a constitutional violation. These violations have become commonplace in the armed forces and have only become fully disclosed since MRFF has been exposing them. He may well have though it was SOP.
So the commander was probably just misguided in his call for all troops to bow their heads in prayer. In that regard, you too are misguided because you already know what a violation this is but choose instead to cover it up with your standard “Tu Quoque” defense and logical fallicy.
All religious belief is subordinate to military regulation. One may not use religious doctrine as an excuse to disobey military orders. Provisions for religious worship are made by UCMJ and all religious activities must remain within those parameters.