{"id":16233,"date":"2012-03-15T01:15:17","date_gmt":"2012-03-15T04:15:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=16233"},"modified":"2015-06-27T19:14:01","modified_gmt":"2015-06-27T22:14:01","slug":"air-force-lawyers-on-religion-and-blogging","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2012\/03\/15\/air-force-lawyers-on-religion-and-blogging\/","title":{"rendered":"Air Force Lawyers on Religion and Blogging"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As noted previously, the US Air Force&#8217;s &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.christianfighterpilot.com\/articles\/files\/militarycommanderandthelaw.pdf\">The Military Commander and the Law<\/a>&#8221; broke some unique ground in 2010.\u00a0 For example, it appeared to <a href=\"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2012\/02\/14\/air-force-lawyers-issued-weinstein-guidance-in-2010\/\">specifically address the coercion tactics of Michael Weinstein<\/a> when it advised commanders on\u00a0responding to activists cold-calling them and demanding they accede to their interpretation of religion in the military.<\/p>\n<p>In another newly addressed area, the JAGs broached the &#8220;emerging area&#8221; of blogs.\u00a0 Like the response to activists, this was <em>only <\/em>addressed in the &#8220;religious issues&#8221; section of the manual.\u00a0 This was probably because, like the response to activists, &#8220;recent events&#8221; had only brought up the issue of blogs and the Air Force as they related to <em>religion<\/em>, and Michael Weinstein was probably responsible for that, as well.\u00a0 The most relevant portion of the text:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8211; Military people have a right to use these sites for religious <!--more-->expression even if their identity as Air Force members is explicitly stated or can be easily determined<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>As with its attention to the <a href=\"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2010\/06\/23\/gazette-chronicles-weinstein-method\/\">Weinstein Method<\/a>, this, too, appears to have been directed at a common accusation of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation: Representatives of the MRFF have implied, if not outright stated, that it is impermissible for members of the military to state their religious views on the internet (at least, if their religious views aren&#8217;t approved by the MRFF as the &#8220;right kind&#8221; of Christianity, for example).<\/p>\n<p>In fact, last August MRFF research assistant Chris Rodda specifically <a href=\"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2011\/09\/02\/mrff-targets-military-ministries-again\/\">held up for derision the &#8220;personal testimonies&#8221;<\/a> of Christian military officers published on the website of Officers&#8217; Christian Fellowship.\u00a0 Said she:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>U.S. miltary [<em>sic<\/em>] officers who are afraid of \u201cviolating the uniform code of military justice, command policy or regulations\u201d by publicly espousing their religious views is a problem? To the rest of us that\u2019s a solution!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>That, from a purported\u00a0advocate of &#8220;religious freedom&#8221; in the military,\u00a0no less.<\/p>\n<p>Importantly, the JAG&#8217;s text continues:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8212; Test as to whether the religious expression and\/or military identity can\/should be restricted must flow from something more than just status, e.g.,<br \/>\n&#8212; Express or inferential language suggesting Air Force endorsement of the expression and\/or of religion<br \/>\n&#8212;- Could involve JER issues, e.g., indications of federal support of non-federal entities<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In other words, &#8220;issues&#8221; cannot arise simply because a member of the military, even if he is <em>known <\/em>to be, expresses his religious beliefs.\u00a0 However, if he should use language that suggests the Air Force <em>endorses <\/em>the expression, that may be cause for restriction &#8212; but that&#8217;s the same rule that applies regardless of content.<\/p>\n<p>The section on religion and blogs ends with this sentence:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8212; Stronger, more prominent disclaimer than the minimums suggested\/required by AFIs can head off potential problems for the poster and the Air Force, and better inform the public<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>That&#8217;s an interesting suggestion, though it hasn&#8217;t been codified in any Air Force Instruction (AFI).\u00a0 Actually, to procedurally require a website of religious expression to have a different disclaimer than non-religious ones might engender the very conflict it is trying to address.\u00a0 That&#8217;s probably why it remains but a suggestion.<\/p>\n<p>As has been noted before, military lawyers provide guidance; they do not set policy, nor do they have line authority &#8212; though they <a href=\"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2012\/02\/23\/mikey-weinsteins-friends-and-allies-in-military-high-places-part-3\/\">advise those Air Force leaders who do<\/a>.\u00a0 As with any career field populated by humans, they are also <a href=\"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2011\/06\/08\/military-bibles-chaplains-and-lawyers-are-people-too\/\">not always right<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>At the present, it seems the JAG advice to commanders is military members &#8212; even if they are identifiable as military members &#8212; may participate in the expression of their religious beliefs publicly on the internet.\u00a0 To most people, this should &#8220;go without saying.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>To Michael Weinstein and Chris Rodda, this is the loss of an avenue of attack.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>As noted previously, the US Air Force&#8217;s &#8220;The Military Commander and the Law&#8221; broke some unique ground in 2010.\u00a0 For example, it appeared to specifically address the coercion tactics of Michael Weinstein when it advised commanders on\u00a0responding to activists cold-calling them and demanding they accede to their interpretation of religion in the military. In another newly addressed area, the JAGs [&#8230;]<\/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":[134,175,96,1823,85,2,2887,5218,7,81,179,17,10,171],"class_list":["post-16233","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-government-and-religion","tag-air-force","tag-chris-rodda","tag-christian","tag-jag","tag-mikey-weinstein","tag-military","tag-military-commander-and-the-law","tag-military-religious-freedom-foundation","tag-mrff","tag-ocf","tag-officers-christian-fellowship","tag-religious-expression","tag-religion","tag-religious-freedom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16233","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=16233"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16233\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16233"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16233"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16233"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}