{"id":26214,"date":"2013-10-24T00:03:33","date_gmt":"2013-10-24T03:03:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=26214"},"modified":"2016-11-26T00:31:53","modified_gmt":"2016-11-26T03:31:53","slug":"update-usafa-reacts-to-so-help-me-god","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2013\/10\/24\/update-usafa-reacts-to-so-help-me-god\/","title":{"rendered":"Update: USAFA Reacts to So Help Me God"},"content":{"rendered":"

…Who is in charge of the nation\u2019s military[?]\u00a0 \u201cIs it in fact the military chiefs or is it Mikey Weinstein?\u201d<\/p>\n

— Tony Perkins, Family Research Council President<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

A few news sources have picked up on the story about the US Air Force Academy pulling a poster that had the cadet Honor Oath on it\u00a0— an oath that ends in “so help me God” (discussed here a few days ago<\/a>).\u00a0 Michael “Mikey” Weinstein, president of his self-founded charity, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, has celebrated this as his latest “victory.”<\/p>\n

The cadet committee on the subject has met<\/a>, though not yet made a recommendation to the Superintendent:<\/p>\n

Academy spokesman\u00a0Maj. Brus Vidal said the Honor Review Committee…discussed…making no change to the oath, making the \u201cso help me God\u201d portion optional, or striking the entire oath…<\/p>\n

Vidal said. \u201cWe value an inclusive environment that promotes dignity and respect for all.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Public Affairs director did not explain\u00a0how “no change to the oath” could follow\u00a0LtGen Michelle Johnson’s order that the committee “fix this,” since “fix” naturally implies a change<\/em> to something that is broken — or wrong.<\/p>\n

FoxNews quoted FRC president Tony Perkins — himself a Marine vet — noting that the issue isn’t one of accommodation<\/a> of those who don’t believe in God because, as noted previously, no one is required to say it <\/em>[emphasis added]:<\/p>\n

\u201cThat already exists,\u201d he said. \u201cNo one is forced to say this. This is about imposing an atheistic view<\/strong> on everyone so there can be no recognition of God.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Retired Chaplain (Col) Ron Crews, who was instrumental in the return of the Chaplain’s article in Alaska<\/a>, called USAFA’s decision to immediately pull the poster [emphasis added]<\/p>\n

one more example of the Academy yielding to Mikey Weinstein<\/strong> at the expense of official military policy.<\/p>\n

\u201cRemoving this voluntary affirmation expresses hostility toward religion<\/strong>,\u201d Crews said.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

To be clear, no military regulation, law, or policy requires USAFA to hang that poster.\u00a0 To be clear, no military regulation, law, or policy requires USAFA to remove<\/em> it, either.\u00a0 In the end, the\u00a0art choices of the US military are completely within its own discretion (though this is at least the third time Weinstein has played interior decorator for the Air Force).\u00a0 When actions seem focused and targeted\u00a0on only<\/em> associations with religion<\/em>, though — something that is constitutionally protected even in the US military — questions understandably arise.<\/p>\n

Not unlike the Air Force response to Chaplain Kenneth Reyes’ article<\/a>, the incident continues to beg the question:\u00a0 What is so wrong<\/em> with a poster containing “so help me God” that it must be pulled in response to an external\u00a0complaint?\u00a0 As Chaplain Crews intimates and as other incidents have demonstrated, if the mere mention<\/em> of God could be the criterion of “wrong,” it might create the perception — as it did in Congress<\/a> — that the\u00a0Air Force has\u00a0an environment hostile toward religion.<\/p>\n

On another angle, a Christian Post opinion columnist concluded that Weinstein — who claims to defend<\/em> the US Constitution — is actually trying to get the government to impose a religious test<\/a> in violation<\/em> of the Constitution:<\/p>\n

No one is required to recite those four words. We have a constitutional provision; an important one that says no religious test shall ever be required. Any cadet-or President, for that matter-is free to say: I do so swear (or affirm)…<\/p>\n

In forcing atheism on the military, however, Mikey and [his] Murfs are creating their own religious test…They claim they want “religious neutrality,” but what they seek is nothing less than a No-God Zone. That is enforced atheism.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Like Chaplain Crews, author Ken Blackwell also took aim at the military leadership for “yielding”\u00a0to Weinstein’s criticisms:<\/p>\n

It’s time for our military brass to show some courage and to tell Mikey and the Murfs to back off.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Many senior military leaders have discovered that attention is what Weinstein craves, and his “victories” are not a placation, but rather both blood in the water for\u00a0his ego and fundraisers for his “charity” —\u00a0whose single greatest expense is his own paycheck<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Experienced leaders have learned that if they ignore Weinstein’s inane complaints, he eventually sulks away.\u00a0 But if you give a mouse a cookie<\/a>…<\/p>\n

Members of Congress have already taken the military to task over its relationship with Weinstein<\/a>.\u00a0 For the time being, though, the public perception seems to be Weinstein’s braggadocio is correct: he\u00a0has been granted\u00a0special access to military leaders and wields unusual power over Air Force policy decisions<\/a>.<\/p>\n

While the high rank of Weinstein’s ideological\u00a0allies in the military<\/a> may give some indication, the\u00a0root question remains: Why?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

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

\n