{"id":415,"date":"2009-09-04T00:30:27","date_gmt":"2009-09-04T04:30:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=415"},"modified":"2015-06-27T19:16:32","modified_gmt":"2015-06-27T22:16:32","slug":"military-religion-question-answered-brooks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2009\/09\/04\/military-religion-question-answered-brooks\/","title":{"rendered":"Military Religion Question Answered: Brooks"},"content":{"rendered":"

Previously, a question was posed about the propriety of a photo that showed Maj. Gen. Vincent Brooks and a flag with a Christian cross.\u00a0 The photo and initial post can be seen here<\/a>.\u00a0 The accusation said that a regulation had been violated because it was<\/p>\n

a photo of an Army officer giving a briefing while standing in front of a Christian flag.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So, did the General, as the accusers assert, violate military regulations?<\/p>\n

The shortest, most accurate answer:\u00a0 No<\/em><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

As in previous incidents, the MRFF did not say which <\/em>regulation was violated.\u00a0 What do the regulations actually say?\u00a0 Let’s take a look.<\/p>\n

Did General Brooks violate military regulations because he spoke near a Christian flag?<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

It is difficult to “prove” a negative.\u00a0\u00a0There are no specific military regulations that apply, though\u00a0a variety of policies\u00a0might somehow be related to the situation.\u00a0 For example, the United States Code dictates on which side of a speaker the American flag will be displayed, if it is displayed at all.<\/p>\n

However, the MRFF accusation does not assert any such specifics; they claim that he violated regulations merely because he was photographed\u00a0in the presence<\/em> of the flag.<\/p>\n

No military regulation\u00a0prohibits<\/em> any<\/span><\/em> member of the military from speaking near, being photographed near,\u00a0standing in proximity to, or being in the presence of any<\/span> religious symbol while in uniform.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

As with its unsupported assertions about Colonel Mundy’s appearance on a TV show<\/a>, the MRFF makes no attempt to cite the regulation that was violated–it is an ipse-dixitism<\/em>, to borrow a phrase.<\/p>\n

In fact, one of the few regulations that has some relation to this scenario contradicts one of the MRFF’s own assertions.\u00a0 The MRFF said<\/p>\n

The flag is an Army Christian chaplain’s flag.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The MRFF is well aware of Army Regulation 840-10<\/a>, having used it in the past to cite irregularities with the use of Chaplain’s flags.\u00a0 But the MRFF is wrong.\u00a0 This isn’t a Chaplain’s flag.\u00a0 It is a chapel<\/em> flag, as described in the unedited regulation excerpt below:<\/p>\n

Chapel flags (as distinguished from chaplains flags) are authorized for display in Army military chapels only. The flag is 4-foot 4-inch hoist by 5-foot 6-inch fly, with fringe 2 1\/2 inches wide. Chapel flags are dark blue with the appropriate chaplain\u2019s branch insignia in white centered thereon. The fringe is white. Device will be Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Buddhist.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The MRFF accuses the General of violating military regulations–and, by extension, participating in the Christian takeover of the military and “rape” of the Constitution–but can’t even cite a specific regulation or get its own facts straight.<\/p>\n

In fact, while the MRFF complains about an officer being photographed next to a Christian cross, it has never complained about officers being photographed in Buddhist meditations<\/a>, Islamic prayers<\/a>, or Jewish Torah dedications<\/a>.\u00a0 Using the\u00a0MRFF’s\u00a0logic, these\u00a0instances would be worse<\/em> because their context\u00a0explicitly<\/em> associates the US military with religion.\u00a0 By contrast, the context of General Brooks’ situation had nothing<\/em> to do with religion.\u00a0 When context is removed, all of the photographs still associate the US military with various religions.<\/p>\n

The truth is, though, that none of those photographs violated military regulations, nor did the photograph of a soldier with a wiccan symbol<\/a>, because there is no regulation<\/em> that prohibits any<\/em>\u00a0military member from being in such a situation.\u00a0 One is free to take issue with the circumstances, certainly, but merely disagreeing with the situation\u00a0does not mean any of the military members\u00a0“violated military regulations.”<\/p>\n

In this case, it would almost seem that the truth is secondary to the motive.<\/p>\n

Despite how one might feel<\/em> about General, his ideology, or the photo, there are no regulations that govern it, and it is irresponsible–and deceitful–to assert that he violated regulations that do not exist.<\/p>\n

Again, as with its inflammatory accusation against Colonel Mundy, the MRFF makes an injudicious and unsupported accusation of illegal activity against a military officer.\u00a0 Again, as with the other accusations, the “shocking” nature of the “violation” is enough to goad those who already have negative inclinations toward religious association with the military.\u00a0 For example, one response to the article that included this\u00a0accusation said:<\/p>\n

Thank you…for pulling the curtain back on these Theo-Fascists.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The fact that it is untrue<\/em> doesn’t seem to faze anyone.\u00a0 For some, their minds are already made up and this “violation” fits neatly into their preconceived notions of an impending Christian theocratic movement blooming in the military.\u00a0 They hope that by making these allegations vociferously public–despite their blatant fallacy–they will stigmatize the Christian faith in the eyes of the American public.\u00a0 If nothing else, they will rally the “faithful” to their cause.<\/p>\n

One final problem is that the MRFF and similarly-minded organizations often use these incidents to proclaim that Christianity is endangering our troops, inflaming our adversaries, and turning the world against us.\u00a0 But when the accusation is false<\/strong>, they<\/span> create the harm they say they are attempting to prevent.<\/em> For example, in this situation, there was no controversy until they (falsely)\u00a0created<\/em> it.<\/p>\n

Without rebuttal against fictional charges such as these, they may just succeed.<\/p>\n

The analysis following the last incident<\/a> remains true:<\/p>\n

Regrettably, this is a common technique:\u00a0 display what superficially appears to be offensive and call it illegal, unconstitutional, or a violation of regulations–but provide no facts to support that claim.\u00a0 Instead, they lead the readers to draw their “own,” though incorrect, conclusion.\u00a0 The nature of the offense is shocking enough to some that it won\u2019t matter that the accusation is later proven incorrect, inflammatory, and irresponsible.\u00a0 The damage to the image of the Christian faith in the US military is done.<\/p>\n

And that<\/em> is the point.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Previously, a question was posed about the propriety of a photo that showed Maj. Gen. Vincent Brooks and a flag with a Christian cross.\u00a0 The photo and initial post can be seen here.\u00a0 The accusation said that a regulation had been violated because it was a photo of an Army officer giving a briefing while standing in front of a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[37,4,19,73,44,39,2,5218,7,76,45,10,77],"class_list":["post-415","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-military-regulations","tag-buddhism","tag-churchandstate","tag-government","tag-hindu","tag-islam","tag-jewish","tag-military","tag-military-religious-freedom-foundation","tag-mrff","tag-pagan","tag-politics","tag-religion","tag-wicca"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/415","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=415"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/415\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=415"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=415"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=415"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}