{"id":28756,"date":"2014-04-01T01:00:20","date_gmt":"2014-04-01T04:00:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=28756"},"modified":"2016-09-23T09:36:23","modified_gmt":"2016-09-23T12:36:23","slug":"atheist-chaplain-analyzes-usafa-whiteboards-freethinkers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2014\/04\/01\/atheist-chaplain-analyzes-usafa-whiteboards-freethinkers\/","title":{"rendered":"Atheist Chaplain Analyzes USAFA Whiteboards, Freethinkers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Chris Stedman, the Assistant Humanist Chaplain at Harvard University, took to the Religion News Service to express his view<\/a> on recent events at the US Air Force Academy. Specifically, he addressed Todd Starnes’ comparison of how USAFA took down a Bible verse recently and censored Christian cadets in the past — but allowed atheists to advertise their beliefs<\/a>. Stedman said:<\/p>\n

The stated reason for removing the Bible verse\u2014attempting to ensure that no person, perhaps particularly religious minorities, feels coerced or discriminated against\u2014is a good one…Thus, Starnes has the comparison between that incident and \u201cAsk an Atheist Day\u201d backwards: they were both attempts to encourage a more inclusive environment, not to encourage atheism or silence the voices of others.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is similar to the argument other atheists and even Mikey Weinstein have made: In essence, muzzling or restricting Christians is good<\/em>, because doing so creates an “inclusive” environment.\u00a0 Similarly, supporting or promoting<\/em> atheists — but not Christians — is good<\/em>, because it is “inclusive.”<\/p>\n

The claim is ludicrous. It reflects bias and prejudice rather than principle. Religious freedom and “inclusiveness” is promoted not by silencing one and supporting another, but by allowing<\/em> all. Naturally, the simple question becomes how does the government create an “inclusive” environment — one that would include Christians — by restricting some religious expression but promoting others? The fact is, you can’t. Stedman’s assertion that such an environment is “inclusive” is asinine.<\/p>\n

As a “humanist chaplain,” one would hope Stedman would be more open minded to equally supporting all beliefs, rather than encouraging a government entity to promote the one with which he aligns and restrict the one he doesn’t like.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

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

\n