US Army SFC Dennis Dutton recently came to the MRFF for…help?…after this happened during his graduation from Abrahms Tank Maintainer school at Fort Benning, Georgia, in 2012:
In case you missed it: He’s the one on the stage who didn’t bow his head.
Apparently, it is a point of pride that Read more
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”
“We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…”
“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence…”
Read the Declaration of Independence at the Archives.gov site.
ADVERTISEMENT
Though atheists had previously called on Jesus to come down from a Montana mountain ski slope, a Federal district court has said he can stay.
As previously discussed, the Freedom From Religion Foundation had sued because the US Forest Service renewed a special use permit that has allowed the statue to stand for more than 50 years. The Knights of Columbus put it up in 1954 in honor of Read more
Eric Metaxas
Thomas Nelson, 2010
Dietrich Bonhoeffer holds a place in Christian history not unlike William Wilberforce — a man that modern Christians should know, but one most are only vaguely aware of and can’t speak intelligently about. Eric Metaxas’ Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy, though hefty at more than 500 pages, does an admirable job of communicating the story of Bonhoeffer’s life to modern audiences.
Bonhoeffer is well-written and is fascinating as a narrative that parallels, rather than focuses on, many of the stereotypical storylines of World War II. While some of the details of Bonhoeffer’s life are interesting, such as his well-to-do upbringing in an essentially agnostic family, the theme most interesting and relevant to modern Christians is Bonhoeffer’s attempts to align his life with his faith. Though Metaxas received some criticism, he did a generally admirable job of using Bonhoeffer’s own words to explain his faith-based reasoning.
Bonhoeffer is portrayed as a man who grows gradually in his faith as it relates to his life; he did not start out as an ardent political activist and wrap his Read more
The Wall Street Journal had a fairly balanced article on the recent dust up over Air Force leaders choosing to meet with religious freedom critic Michael Weinstein at the Pentagon in late April. Author Mollie Ziegler Hemingway accurately notes that there’s been a bit of sensationalism in recent headlines:
Initial reports on these matters were exaggerated, taken out of context or simply false.
But she also acknowledges that, exaggerated or not, there are still some valid concerns:
For one thing, the Pentagon statement clarifying that military personnel would not be court-martialed if they “evangelize” also said that “proselytization” is considered a [UCMJ] offense. Yet the definitions of those two words are almost identical…
Further, the WSJ piece notes that regardless of any hyperbole in recent claims, there remains concern over the mere fact the Air Force met with Weinstein: 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 the third time in a week, the US military released a statement attempting to articulate the DoD’s policy on religious freedom. In response to multiple media questions, LtCmdr Nathan Christensen issued the following statement [emphasis added]:
There is no DOD wide policy that directly addresses religious proselytizing. Furthermore, there is no effort within the department to make religious proselytizing a specific offense within the UCMJ, including under Article 134.
Service members may exercise their rights under the 1st Amendment regarding the free exercise of religion unless doing so adversely affects good order, discipline, or some other aspect of the military mission; even then, the Department seeks a reasonable religious accommodation for the service member. In general, service members may share their faith with other service members, but may not forcibly attempt to convert others of any faith or no faith to their own beliefs.
Concerns about these issues are handled on a case by case basis by the leaders of the unit involved.
In other words, the prior statement that did try to “directly address religious proselytizing” is…retracted?
The statement essentially reverts the DoD from the “new” (first, “uncomfortable,” then evangelism vs proselytizing) back to the “old” more Read more