Jay Sekulow: Do you think [Christian] ‘fundamentalists and dominionists’ have the right to serve in the United States military?
Mikey Weinstein: They do not.
This from the guy who claims to defend “religious freedom” and frequently cites Article VI of the US Constitution, which ends with: Read more
Chris Rodda, Michael “Mikey” Weinstein’s paid research assistant, writes an occasional article for Weinstein’s MRFF. Rodda considers herself a history buff, and her writings reflect that. She is also exceedingly verbose, with many of her articles going on for pages even before she says ‘the reason I’m writing this….’
She recently struck again, in a letter to USAFA Superintendent LtGen Michelle Johnson that was co-signed by Weinstein. The letter was clearly hers, as it lacked the alliterative vitriol or the acidic hyperbole characteristic of Weinstein’s writing. (It also contained no gratuitous ellipses or the pastel colored font Weinstein so favors in his emails.) She wrote it, ostensibly, to rebut a letter written by the ACLJ’s Jay Sekulow and Skip Ash: Read more
Over at the Journal of Faith and War, one of the most read articles is “The Religious Rights of Those in Uniform,” written by Robert “Skip” Ash, a 22-year Army veteran and Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ.
The lengthy but thorough essay gives an excellent discussion on the issues of religious liberty, the law, the Constitution, and military policy.
There are growing numbers of persons and advocacy groups in the United States actively seeking to remove from public life — including in the armed services — virtually all symbols and expression of religion and America’s religious heritage by advocating strict separation of church and state. Many of these groups are already actively engaged in filing lawsuits against DOD and its leaders over various concerns about religious expression in the armed services… Read more
Jay Sekulow of The American Center for Law and Justice recently sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel calling on them to “repudiate” any relationship the US military had with Michael Weinstein. Sekulow, who once debated Weinstein at the US Air Force Academy, previously called Weinstein a bigot. In a new article, he’s called Weinstein a “nut” and legal hack who’s all bluster and no substance [emphasis added]:
“The rhetoric and language [Weinstein] uses is hateful; it is violent. He threatens physical violence on people. He’ll beat them up and he’ll fight to the death,” he tells American Family News. “[Weinstein] is a nut – and I don’t use that word lightly…”
“Look at [Weinstein’s] casework – oh wait, it’s very tough to find. You know why? He never won a case in court,” notes Read more
For years Michael “Mikey” Weinstein has had the friendly ear of the media. His comments have often gone unchallenged and his credibility — including his motivations and background — have been ignored. The recent dust-up over his meeting at the Pentagon has undone that, thanks in part to Weinstein’s consistent “over the top” behavior. The Get Religion blog, which frequently covers issues of the media and religion, notes that Weinstein is
a player in this story….and some greater journalistic scrutiny of [his] rhetoric…is in order.
That scrutiny seems to be happening. Last week the focus was on military policies; this week, Michael Weinstein himself has been hammered from all corners for his history of vitriol and hate — and virtually every article uses his own words to drive home the point, with little need to elaborate. The question remaining is, again, why he merited a meeting with senior military leaders.
The Colorado Springs Gazette — hometown paper to the US Air Force Academy — reprinted an editorial from the Washington Examiner questioning the “strange alliance” the Air Force has with Weinstein: Read more
According to Sally Quinn, Defense officials had not only met with Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, but published an entire Air Force manual on religious protocol at his request. Now, either Mikey is lying or the Pentagon is backpedaling, because [the DoD] released another statement claiming to have made “reasonable accommodations” for religious practice and that “service members can share their faith (evangelize), but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one’s beliefs (proselytization).”
Of course, no one should be coerced, but it all hinges on how the DOD defines “unwanted” and “intrusive.” Judging by Weinstein, who views us as “fundamentalist Christian monsters of human degradation,” any mention of religious testimony would be intolerable. Meanwhile, where were those “religious accommodations” when the Air Force disinvited me from a prayer breakfast at Andrews Air Force Base? Or when officers stripped “God” from the Rapid Capabilities motto and purged Bibles from Air Force Inn checklists? Where was the Air Force’s encouragement to “confidently practice your own beliefs” when cadets were ordered to stop promoting charities for needy kids or when it suspended a 20-year-old class on “Just War Theory” because it included a few Bible verses?
Links added to Tony Perkins’ commentary.
ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow — who debated Michael Weinstein at USAFA in 2007 — said Weinstein is a “bigot” in the vein of the Westboro Baptist Church.
[T]he Air Force has been meeting with a bigot every bit as obscene, Read more
Think the issue of LtGen Ronnie Hawkins and his “Ronnie’s Rules” is new? Military commanders have a long tradition of introducing themselves to their units and including personal biographies and life philosophies when they do so, and there are other current examples of military leaders doing exactly that — and mentioning their faith in Jesus Christ as they did so. A few critics have complained, naturally, but their vicarious or self-imposed offense has been insufficient to force the military to restrict the mention of “God” in similar military events — and rightly so.
Supporters have also weighed in with well-researched articles, not just passionate press releases. The Religious Rights of Those in Uniform, which was also printed in an official Air Force publication that also featured the MRFF’s Chris Rodda, was written by Robert Ash (USA, Retired), who is a West Point graduate, served 22 years in the Army, and teaches law at Regent University. He co-authored the lengthy piece with Dr. Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (and debated Michael Weinstein at the US Air Force Academy in 2007). From their essay [emphasis added]: Read more
The Journal of Faith and War has published a lengthy set of articles on “The Religious Rights of those in Uniform.” The series was written by Jay Sekulow and Robert Ash. Dr. Sekulow is chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (and debated Michael Weinstein at the US Air Force Academy in 2007). Robert Ash (USA, Retired) is a West Point graduate, served 22 years in the Army, and teaches law at Regent University.
The articles originally appeared as “Religious Rights and Military Service” in Attitudes Aren’t Free: Thinking Deeply about Attitudes in the US Armed Forces, which contained the infamous article by Chris Rodda denigrating the celebration of Easter by Christians in the military.
The publication is a refreshingly positive perspective on what men and women of faith can do while serving in the US military. So often critics have emphasized (or created an environment focused on) impermissible conduct; as a result, some military members (or religious persons considering military service) may assume their religious exercise is restricted.
That is not the case, as the JFW articles show.
The first article covers the “General Legal Principles” Read more