Tag Archives: Church and State

ACLU Challenges Naval Academy, Again

As noted at the Religion Clause, the Baltimore Sun carries an article on the ACLU’s most recent threat of “legal action” against the US Naval Academy for holding “mealtime prayers.”  The Academy said it

does not intend to change its practice of offering Midshipmen an opportunity for prayer or devotional thought during noon meal announcements.

Such challenges have been going on for years, and were discussed here more than 2 years ago. The Alliance Defense Fund has volunteered to help defend the Navy against the ACLU.

Respect and Professional Conduct

Christians can and should be involved in public discourse, particularly with respect to Christianity in the public square.  This may mean that they will have opportunities to support statements with which they agree, refute those that they do not, and defend the actions of Christians against unjust or unfounded accusations.  Throughout such discourse, they must endeavor to do so with tolerance and respect for the beliefs and ideas of others.  While there is generally nothing wrong with a stern defense, it is sometimes easy to adopt prejudicial views rather than respond with consideration.  While Christians should be emboldened to speak the truth, even the recent “Evangelical Manifesto” took Christians to task for “expressing the truth without love.”

Christians should remember, too, that tolerance means to respect another’s rights to have different beliefs.  Contrary to modern interpretations, it does not mean that one has to accept those beliefs or agree to their opposing truth claims.  This was once simplified as respecting another person’s “right to be wrong.”  (Pluralism, on the other hand, asserts that there is no single “right” answer; in fact, opposing beliefs may be equally “right.”)

In the military, such respect for another’s beliefs is not only recommended, it is required.  While a civilian can run another person’s faith into the ground without recourse, a military member who did the same Read more

Crosses Removed from Army Chapel

According to FoxNews, the Army has decided to remove three crosses and a memorial plaque that honored a Chaplain who died while serving on Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo.  This was reportedly to comply with Army regulations that require chapels to have neutral appearances and not be named.  From 13-3:

The chapel environment will be religiously neutral when the facility is not being used for scheduled worship.  Chapels must be available to people of all faith groups for meditation and prayer when formal religious services are not scheduled.

[Religious] symbols are to be moved or covered when not in use. Distinctive religious symbols, such as crosses, crucifixes, the Star of David, menorah, and other religious symbols, will not be affixed or displayed permanently on the chapel exterior or grounds. Permanent or fixed chapel furnishings, such as the altar, pulpit, lectern, communion rail, prie-dieu, or reredos, will be devoid of distinctive religious symbols.

While some blogs have criticized the Army for the move, neutral symbology is fairly standard Read more

Report: “Fundamental” Chaplain “Suppressed” in Iraq

The World Net Daily, which can sometimes be justifiably accused of sensationalizing its stories, carries a report about a fundamental Baptist Chaplain who claims that his services in Iraq were “suppressed” because “it was offensive to the brigade chaplain.”

Without the true facts of the case, it is impossible to draw a conclusion.  It is true that it would be improper for a chapel service to be cancelled for its theology; it is also true that the military is under no obligation to have a chapel service for every “flavor” of religion in its ranks.

It is possible that this is the case to which the ACLJ previously referred.

Court Grants Objector Status

A federal court has ruled that the Army must grant conscientious objector status to an Alaska-based soldier whose application was previously denied.  Historically, the Army has insisted that a CO object to all war, not just “this” war, and the soldier’s previous comments seemed to indicate that he looked forward to combat.  The soldier indicated that his objection developed as a result of what he saw in Iraq.  The judge did concede that the military had a legitimate concern on the “timing” of the CO application, but that it could not deny it based solely on that cause.

The text of the ruling can be seen at the Religion Clause.

Religious Objection to Military Autopsy

As noted at the ADF, the AP has reported that an Army Private contacted the Military Religious Freedom Foundation after the Army autopsied his deceased infant son.  The Private indicated that he was Muslim and objected to the autopsy on religious grounds.  Reports indicate that the MRFF plans to include this, as everything else, in their ongoing lawsuit.

While the situation is regrettable, it is not isolated to this military case or this religion.  Many government offices perform autopsies over the religious objections of the family, and the courts have apparently supported their ability to do so–particularly when the cause of death is suspect, as it was in this case.  It is not, then, a case of military “anti-Islamic prejudice and bigotry,” as Michael Weinstein asserts.

It is also worth noting that the religious opposition to autopsy is equally valid in Christian, Jewish, and Islamic faiths.  There is no objection to the practice in their core doctrines, though “interpretation” in each could lead to the conclusion.

Weinstein Blasts Commandant’s Assignment

In a typically scathing commentary, Mr. Michael Weinstein lambasted the move of General Caslen, currently Commandant at West Point, to lead an infantry division out of Hawaii.  Caslen was one of several flag officers who appeared on a Christian Embassy video investigated by the Inspector General last year (previous post).

Expanding his hyperbolic and alliterative repertoire, Weinstein called this a “tragic trifecta of travesty” and likened the General to Iraqi militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr.  He also criticized Caslen’s association with OCF, which he said was a

virulently fundamentalist Christian organization devoted to gaining unconstitutional control of the U.S. armed forces…

As with everything else, Weinstein has promised to add this to his ongoing lawsuit (in fact, he said it would go to the “head of the list”).

The Military and the National Day of Prayer

As previously noted, the National Day of Prayer is May 1st, by virtue of Presidential declaration and in accordance with US law.  According to the Christian Science Monitor, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has complained that the NDP “task force” (associated with Focus on the Family) has coordinated with military bases and Chaplains for the observance.  Using his oft-repeated hyperbolic and alliterative talking points, Weinstein promised

that the Military Religious Freedom Foundation fully [intended] to include this despicable collusion in [their] current Federal litigation against the Department of Defense as yet another stunning example of a pernicious and pervasive pattern and practice of unconstitutional rape [of] religious liberties…

Jason Leopold, a former journalist and frequent voice for the MRFF, took issue with the fact that coordinators for the task force were required to sign a statement that ‘confirmed their commitment to Christ.’ Read more

1 … 67 68 69 70 71 … 76