{"id":24429,"date":"2013-07-24T01:11:11","date_gmt":"2013-07-24T04:11:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=24429"},"modified":"2016-11-26T01:10:26","modified_gmt":"2016-11-26T04:10:26","slug":"congressman-calls-idea-of-atheist-chaplain-total-nonsense","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2013\/07\/24\/congressman-calls-idea-of-atheist-chaplain-total-nonsense\/","title":{"rendered":"Congressman Calls Idea of Atheist Chaplain “Total Nonsense”"},"content":{"rendered":"

Update<\/strong><\/span>: The House passed the Appropriations bill<\/a> along with the amendment<\/a> referenced below requiring chaplains to have endorsers — effectively prohibiting non-theistic chaplains (along with any<\/em> new endorsers).\u00a0 Rep Doug Collins (R-Ga) accused atheist activists of having the real goal of covertly undermining<\/a> the entire institution of the military chaplaincy.<\/p>\n

\n

The Obama Administration has threatened to veto<\/a> the 2014 Department of Defense Appropriations Act, saying it is too generous with military pay and too stingy with civilian pay.<\/p>\n

As a point of clarification, the Defense Appropriations<\/em> Act is a distinct entity from the Defense Authorization<\/em> Act (or NDAA), which has been the point of focus for the past few months<\/a>.\u00a0 The Authorization Act describes how the US DoD is “authorized” to organize and operate; the Appropriations Act “appropriates” the money to accomplish that end.<\/p>\n

The appropriations bills were actually already passed by each house of Congress, but have yet to come out of conference committee.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the recent push for atheist chaplains has now generated an official Congressional response — twice.\u00a0 First, US Rep Jared Polis (D-Co) offered an amendment (#295<\/a>) to the authorization<\/span> act that would have permitted\u00a0 <\/p>\n

those certified by recognized nontheistic organizations to be appointed as officers in the chaplain core [sic<\/em>] in order to fully serve nontheistic or nonreligious service members.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That was voted down<\/a> (twice).<\/p>\n

Now, US Rep John Fleming (R-La) has countered the move with a proposed amendment (#160<\/a>) to the appropriations<\/span> bill that would<\/p>\n

Prevent[] funds from being used to appoint chaplains without an endorsing agency<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

as defined by current US Department of Defense policy, which requires endorsement by one of a list of approved religious endorsers.\u00a0 Fleming offered the amendment<\/a> in response to the moves by some which would seem\u00a0to require<\/em> the military to have atheist chaplains, noting<\/p>\n

“When it comes to the idea of an atheist chaplain, which is an oxymoron — it’s self-contradictory — what you’re really doing is now saying that we’re going to replace true chaplains with non-chaplain chaplains,” said sponsor Rep. John Fleming, R-La. “It’s just total nonsense, the idea of having a chaplain who is an atheist.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Retired Chaplain (Col) Ron Crews commended Rep Fleming<\/a> and defended the institution of the chaplaincy:<\/p>\n

A fringe minority is advocating for atheists to be commissioned as chaplains, but the very nature of the word \u2018chaplain\u2019 suggests that the individual possesses a belief in God and a desire to minister to spiritual needs.<\/p>\n

\u2018Pro Deo et Patria, For God and Country\u2019 is the motto of Army chaplains who are committed to bringing God to soldiers and soldiers to God.\u00a0 This has been our ministry since George Washington founded the chaplain corps on July 29, 1775.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Atheist Jason Torpy made the news again on this topic, with a correctly worded but misleading use of the demographics<\/a> he’s so often misrepresented:<\/p>\n

Jason Torpy, president of the Military Association of Atheists and Free Thinkers, claims that 23 percent of those in the military ranks assert no religious preference. And he argues chaplains are not providing enough “positive outreach and support” in the way “they do for all of those beliefs that aren’t their own.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That percentage may very well be correct, but as discussed exhaustively, “no religious preference” does not<\/em> mean “atheist,” as Torpy would have you believe.\u00a0 His unsupported accusation that chaplains aren’t working for atheists contradicts the evidence of those that do<\/a>.\u00a0 Chaplains will speak and listen to anyone of any faith, and they will provide spiritual support for anyone.<\/p>\n

Torpy’s claim is ridiculous, but he is trying to make the case for the government placing a non-religious person in an explicitly religious field — for no reason.\u00a0 Atheists in the military are perfectly free to exercise their non-belief.\u00a0 They are free to congregate to do so.\u00a0 Chaplains and others may even help them with that.<\/p>\n

The other most frequently used argument — that atheists need a chaplain because only chaplains have absolute confidentiality —\u00a0wasn’t even mentioned in these articles.\u00a0 It was also debunked some time ago, though atheists have yet to highlight the Military Family Life Consultant option<\/a> on their own.<\/p>\n

Their choice not to believe in a religion does not obligate the government to act, other than to allow them to exercise that non-belief without coercion.\u00a0 That it does.\u00a0 It need do no more.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

ADVERTISEMENT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\n