{"id":13990,"date":"2011-11-07T01:24:29","date_gmt":"2011-11-07T06:24:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=13990"},"modified":"2015-06-27T19:14:30","modified_gmt":"2015-06-27T22:14:30","slug":"military-atheists-respond-dustin-chalker-and-the-facts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2011\/11\/07\/military-atheists-respond-dustin-chalker-and-the-facts\/","title":{"rendered":"Military Atheists Respond: Dustin Chalker and the Facts"},"content":{"rendered":"

It seems the prior article on the White House petition to “end discrimination” against military atheists<\/a> struck a chord, most notably with its creator, Dustin Chalker.<\/p>\n

Chalker posted a response to the article with his MRFF ally Chris Rodda as an independent blog.\u00a0 Not all of the assumptions Rodda and Chalker made\u00a0were necessarily accurate, but the response here, as some have seen, has been interesting.\u00a0 Most who have commented failed to actually read <\/em>the story behind any of Chalker’s accusations, making such deep and thoughtful statements as “You’re a coward” easy, if logically unsupported, diatribes to make in their passionate support of Chalker.<\/p>\n

Though he never indicated so himself, Rodda claims Dustin Chalker \u2013 who sued the Department of Defense<\/a> as an Army\u00a0Sergeant \u2013 is now the civilian “Mr.” Chalker, though she contradictorily uses his rank in the present tense.<\/p>\n

Both Rodda’s and Chalker’s comments contained factual errors, though accuracy has never been Rodda’s strong suit<\/a>.\u00a0 Some of the more salient points of Chalker’s comment are below:<\/p>\n

Chalker said it was “lying” to say his lawsuit\u00a0 <\/p>\n

was tossed out because Chalker failed to use the internal grievance systems the Army has in place<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The facts of the case seem to disagree.\u00a0 From the order dismissing Chalker’s case<\/a>:<\/p>\n

According to [Captain Kenneth\u00a0Jones, Chalker\u2019s commander], Chalker did not initiate a request for religious accommodation for any of the three named events, and he first learned about Chalker\u2019s desire to be excused after Chalker filed this lawsuit\u2026<\/p>\n

[In an affidavit, SFC Dennis McQuay, EO Advisor for Chalker\u2019s brigade, indicated] Chalker\u2026did not file an EO complaint regarding any of the three named events\u2026<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Finally, from the Judge’s summation [emphasis added]:<\/p>\n

Chalker has provided no<\/strong> evidence <\/em>of even one <\/strong>instance <\/em>where he was denied intramilitary relief, or when he could not receive timely relief through that process.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Apparently the Captain lied, the EO office lied, the institutional Army lied, and the Judge believed the lie.\u00a0 Chalker is free to disagree<\/a>, and he was also free to appeal the dismissal of his lawsuit<\/a>.\u00a0 Despite Weinstein’s promise that an appeal was forthcoming (as he always does), no appeal came (as it never has).<\/p>\n

Chalker had an interesting response to the statement that<\/p>\n

there is no indication the military, as an institution, “forces” anyone <\/em>to participate in any <\/em>religious act.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

His reply (formatting original):<\/p>\n

Being present IS participation. Being forced to stand in silent respect IS participation. The closest thing I have to a “religious practice” is to LEAVE when people do things I find intellectually absurd and irrational. Why can’t I “practice my religion” and leave?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That’s a fascinating display of a lack of religious tolerance and understanding of religious freedom.\u00a0 He furthers the diatribe with a common canard:<\/p>\n

If a Wiccan forces you to stand silently on a parade field in a position of respect so he can cast a spell on you, would you mind? Would you comply?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Chalker has tried this before<\/a>\u00a0(in an apparent assumption that wicca\/etc is the magic pill in such a debate).\u00a0\u00a0There are chaplains of several religious faiths in the US military.\u00a0 Whether a Chaplain (or other military member) says “Jesus,” “Insha’Allah<\/a>,” “Om<\/a>,” or anything else, it does not infringe on the religious freedoms of those who are “present” and are asked to stand or be silent in respect.\u00a0 Christians in the military have stood for Chaplains of other faiths, despite the disagreement with the tenets of those faiths.\u00a0 Despite Chalker’s<\/em> offense, military atheists have, too.<\/p>\n

The article noted Chalker\u2019s petition proposed a “mutually exclusive proposition,” saying<\/p>\n

If the voluntary presence of prayer prefers “religion over non-religion,” wouldn’t an official ban on prayer prefer “non-religion over religion?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Chalker claims this is a straw man and that<\/p>\n

not praying shows no preference whatsoever to “non-religion over religion.” Not praying is the position of neutrality.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Again, Chalker shows his tendency to read into something<\/a> that which isn\u2019t there \u2013 he sees the position he wants to fight <\/em>rather than the position stated<\/em>.\u00a0 The article clearly said, and he even quoted, that the dichotomy he proposes is voluntary presence<\/em> versus\u00a0official ban<\/em>.\u00a0 Generally speaking, no military policy requires <\/em>prayer at ceremonial functions.\u00a0 Likewise, no military policy bans <\/em>prayer at ceremonial functions.\u00a0 Those officiating the ceremony are free <\/em>to include prayer…or not<\/em>.\u00a0 This <\/em>is the neutral government position \u2013 not a government enforced ban which could potentially “favor non-religion over religion.”<\/p>\n

When the article noted Chalker\u2019s broad, melodramatic conclusion of a “threat to national security” was unsupported by any example, Chalker put his foot in his mouth grasping for an example.\u00a0 He said:<\/p>\n

Hasan comes to mind.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So the shooting massacre at Fort Hood is evidence of discrimination against atheists?\u00a0 As astounding as that seems, Chalker then prepares the world for an atheist-styled Hasan in the future:<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t actually know any crazy atheists, but I also don\u2019t believe that being non-religious magically makes them immune from the factors that lead to extreme or violent ideologies or behavior\u2026 I\u2019m surprised you\u2019d shy away from the possibility of one of them doing something drastic as a backlash for having magic Jesus spells cast on him all the time.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Chalker and Rodda have joined the “pants on fire<\/a>” chorus with Michael Weinstein.\u00a0 Following Weinstein’s pattern, they cite no factual inaccuracies to be corrected.\u00a0 Errors are occasionally made, and they are fixed.\u00a0 For Weinstein and his crowd, however, it isn’t about the facts.\u00a0 The mere expression of an opinion <\/em>in opposition to Weinstein’s personal vendetta is cause enough for threats of legal action<\/a> or an elevation to that most feared of tactics:\u00a0 name-calling<\/a>.\u00a0 Because when all else fails, aim low.<\/p>\n

Weinstein and his supporters aren’t after the truth.\u00a0 They have an agenda in stark opposition to religious freedom in the US military.\u00a0 Anyone who dares defend religious liberty and Constitutional protections from their vitriol risks becoming a target themselves, as history has shown.<\/p>\n

Doubt it?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It seems the prior article on the White House petition to “end discrimination” against military atheists struck a chord, most notably with its creator, Dustin Chalker. Chalker posted a response to the article with his MRFF ally Chris Rodda as an independent blog.\u00a0 Not all of the assumptions Rodda and Chalker made\u00a0were necessarily accurate, but the response here, as some […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[88,20,5284,175,96,2407,125,1470,2406,85,2,5218,7,2405,11,17,10,171],"class_list":["post-13990","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-government-and-religion","tag-army","tag-atheism","tag-chaplain","tag-chris-rodda","tag-christian","tag-dennis-mcquay","tag-dustin-chalker","tag-equal-opportunity","tag-kenneth-jones","tag-mikey-weinstein","tag-military","tag-military-religious-freedom-foundation","tag-mrff","tag-petition","tag-prayer","tag-religious-expression","tag-religion","tag-religious-freedom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13990","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13990"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13990\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13990"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13990"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13990"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}