Pentagon Burns Bibles in Afganistan despite Freedom of Religion there

A Pentagon spokesman under the Obama Administration recently acknowledged and defended seizing and burning the privately owned Bibles of American soldiers serving in Afghanistan. The Bibles had been printed in the local Pashto and Dari languages, and sent by private donors last year (under the Bush Administration) to American Christian soldiers and chaplains, for distribution to American troops on overseas military bases during optionally-attended Christian worship services. Had the Bibles not been recently seized and destroyed (as verified and defended by the Obama Administration), they could have legally been given as gifts during off-duty time to Afghani citizens who welcome our troops in their homes, as an expression of American gratitude for Afghani hospitality, promoting the democratic ideals of freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and freedom to print and distribute Christian Bibles like the new Afghani Constitution specifically allows.

But the Muslim controlled Al Jazeera television network obtained video footage of the Bibles, held by American soldiers while listening to a chaplain on the Bagram Air Base (inside the base chapel) whose sermon encouraged outreach and personal evangelism. The American values of freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of Christian speech easily offended some extremist Muslim groups, (who apparently hate their own Constitution) and angered a small group of American atheists, who demanded the chaplain be punished for "proselytizing" because he simply repeated Jesus' words to "Go and make disciples of all nations" in church. (Can you imagine their outrage if we burned the Koran, instead of the Bible?)

I believe the Defense Department trumps the Afghan Constitution in this case. If a private contractor installing high speed cable in Afghanistan was also allowed under the Afghan Constitution the right to freedom of religion as I think you are referring under the Afghan Constitution and by implication PERHAPS the freedom to actively prosletize, that might be true. However, if the high speed cable company installing the optic fibre network finds that when one of their cable guys does this in a new town, the townspeople stop them from installing the cable, then it won’t be long before the contracting company tells it’s technicians not to do it.

Similarly, if freedom of speech is written in the Afghan Constitution, and as a result, U.S. Military personnel start passing out Megaphones to individuals in towns they go into, it won’t be long before the military has a very annoyed populace on its hands actively working to stop the military from experiencing success.

One last thing, the Afghan Constitution was written for the Citizens of Afghanistan not the United States Military which is essentially now a contractor for the government and previously a concerned nation fighting for another nation’s freedom. The constitution may not even apply to what quite possibly a majority of those same citizens actually view as a temporary interloper.

Finally, like many things in the constitution, while protected as a right if a citizen chooses to exercise, does not imply that it is a necessary essential element of basic democratic life. In the United States, if the right to bear arms if one chooses were an essential element, we would all get a hand gun at high school graduation. While that may be a bit absurd, the point remains. The United States Constitution (along with the Afghan Constitution) allows for the right to freedom of religion. Ours also stipulates a separation of church and state. That right does not come with the essential need for all to have Bibles nor the implication that State entities (like the U. S. Military), should voluntarily take up the cause of spreading religion just because the OPTION to practice a faith is a right defended by the Constitution. The voluntary action of a guest state operation hardly rises to the level of a Constitutional necessity and may in fact be a real danger to the guest state in the pursuit of it’s tactical, safety and strategic objectives.

Me: As for the Chinese - LOL!!! Have you read ANYTHING about their dynasties?..................................

You: Only what I have seen on the History Channel.

Me: Well that explains allot!

You: Which of the Chinese wars were fought over religion?

Me: You tell me ... this should be interesting ...

You: Weren’t there wars between Christians?

Me: NO. It was all about power and more recently Communism. Communism and Christianity don't get along so well ... but things are changing in China ... heck they're more capitalistic and tolerant of Christianity than we are here in the U.S. and that is the ugly truth ... .

You: Which Christian sect are you representing?

Me: No “sect”. Are you representing a “Christian sect”?

You: Most of Europe was Christian, how may wars have been fought there between Christian countries?

Me: Most of Europe was Muslim, then Catholic and Atheist at different times. So what is your point? Blame “religion” for the imperfection of mankind? Is that it?

You: True Christianity will not make peace, because it will never happen.

Me: Guess I won't be seeing you in heaven ... .

You: There are only 2 species on earth that have wars, ants and humans and they are pretty much for the same reasons.

Me: You equate ants to humans? So other animals don't have “wars” or disagreements? I see where you are coming from and better understand why you are not a Christian ... and wish to blame Christianity.

You: There will never be 100% peace on earth. IMHO, it is an unattainable dream. Race, Religion, Political Thought, divided Geographical territorial lines, Greed and Evil will have to be removed and then you will have peace. I don’t see it happening in my life time, I wish you luck.

Me: Oh, it could happen. It happens for awhile and then people like you come along and aid the downfall of genuine Christianity. When America was first settled by Pilgrims, there was peace here. For nearly 200 years settlers got along well with native America Indians ... and then people like YOU arrived and things changed for the worst.

Bringbackthedraft, I am saddened that you didn't sign off with this statement: "Religion is the opiate of the people" I hope the History Channel covered Karl Marx. He too, was an atheist and HATED "religion". He thought Christianity was worthless and the trouble maker out there. Of course Marxists, Communists, Socialists ALL blame "Christianity" as YOU do. They too see no difference between humans and animals. This is helpful to them when they dehumanize people. It helps cheapen life. Yes, the Bible is right ... from another perspective ... people die spiritually and physically of their own ignorance.

Oh, you don’t have to LIKE him to see he is telling the truth.

TEXT OF CHAPS’ WASHINGTON TIMES ARTICLE:

CHAPLAINS STRUGGLE TO PROTECT ‘PUBLIC WORSHIP’

By Gordon James Klingenschmitt, exclusively for The Washington Times

As originally submitted and printed on Page A19, edition May 7th, 2009

The fight to defend military chaplains right to pray publicly “in Jesus’ name” continues, as two North Carolina Congressmen Walter Jones (R) and Mike McIntyre (D) lead another bi-partisan charge on Capitol Hill, introducing H.R. 268 in January, which clarifies an old 1860 law.

“If called upon to lead a prayer outside of a religious service, a chaplain shall have the prerogative to close the prayer according to the dictates of the chaplain’s own conscience,” the new bill declares.

The bill was deemed necessary due to recent legal attacks against the 1860 law, originally signed into military regulations by President Abraham Lincoln, now codified in US Code Title 10 Section 6031: “An officer in the Chaplain Corps may conduct ‘public worship’ according to the manner and forms of the church of which he is a member.” Chaplains who respect that old law have come under fire by liberals redefining the scope of ‘public worship.’

Since complaining in 2005 about “too much Jesus” at the Air Force Academy, secular activist Mikey Weinstein lost his lawsuits, and gained little policy traction in his quest to prohibit freedom of expression by military Christians. His never-ending Inspector General complaints, offered on behalf of a handful of easily offended atheists, are routinely publicized by the New York Times, (including twice last month on March 1st 2009 “Questions Raised Anew About Religion in Military” and March 15th “Air Force Looks Into ‘Inspirational’ Video”). But NYT ironically failed to report that on March 30th the Air Force dismissed Weinstein’s complaint against Colonel Kimberly Toney, who was cleared of any wrongdoing after sending an inspirational email to 3,000 subordinates.

In 2006 the Air Force had temporarily mollified Mr. Weinstein, by issuing restrictive guidelines (reported by The Jewish Week, Feb 10th 2006, “Jesus Banned From Air Force Invocations”), and Navy Secretary Donald C. Winter signed regulations redefining ‘public worship’ as only safe inside Sunday chapel. The secular groups used those restrictions to proselytize the evangelicals, to convert or be punished with government sword.

As an evangelical Navy chaplain at that time, I took a stand by personally violating those restrictions. I dared to pray ‘in Jesus name’ at a Thursday press conference outside the White House, and was court-martialed for ‘worshiping in public’ in uniform, since the Navy judge literally ruled that ‘public worship’ was protected, but ‘worshiping in public’ was not.

But when 300,000 petitioners, 75 Congressmen, 35 pro-family groups, and 85% of polled voters expressed outrage on my behalf, President Bush signed the conference report to the 2007 Defense Authorization Act, passed by a (then) pro-faith Congress who rescinded the restrictive Air Force and Navy guidelines, restoring ‘public worship’ to its original broader meaning. Since 2007, all military chaplains are free again, on paper at least, to pray publicly ‘in Jesus name’ everywhere, seven days a week, even in uniform. That victory cost my career and pension, and was not grandfathered back to my case.

Since those nation-wide restrictions were rescinded by Congress (which fact remains errantly unacknowledged by NYT reporters), other local restrictions have emerged. One Air Force commander in Oklahoma issued a base-wide ban on Jesus-prayers by chaplains, only to have that ban lifted by the next commander. A handful of evangelical Army chaplains reported religious harassment, and were not promoted by hostile commanders. And Rutherford Institute Attorney Art Schulcz, suing the Navy on behalf of 65 evangelical chaplains, lost a D.C. Appeals Court decision, which granted Catholic Priests retention well beyond the mandatory retirement age for Protestants.

Last summer the ACLU threatened to sue Naval Academy Midshipmen to stop their noon-prayer tradition, ongoing since 1845. But ‘Big Navy’ and Department of Justice defend the students right to pray, led by rotating chaplains of diverse faiths: Muslim, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist.

Outside the military, six Virginia State Troopers were forced to resign their voluntary chaplain jobs, when Democrat Governor Tim Kaine’s administration ordered them to stop praying publicly ‘in Jesus name.’ With 76% of polled Virginians supporting the heroic chaplains, I organized 1,000+ citizens to rally outside the Governor’s mansion, so the Virginia House voted 66-30 to restore police chaplains rights. But the Senate Committee, including Democrat Gubernatorial Candidate Creigh Deeds defeated the bill, 8-6-1 along party lines, so the chaplains won’t be reinstated, at least until Republican Bob McDonnell becomes Governor, since he pledged to help chaplains, if elected in November 2009.

This uncertainty is compounded by two conflicting 2008 court rulings by the 4th and 11th Circuit Courts of Appeals. Respectively, Turner v. Fredericksburg ruled governments can mandate ‘non-sectarian’ prayer speech in government forums, but Pelphrey v. Cobb County ruled governments cannot censor anybody’s prayers, ever. The tendency of local governments and commanders to make up their own conflicting policies leads Congress to re-examine the issue. Mr. Jones and Mr. McIntyre’s bill lies on the table in the House Armed Services Committee.

https://secure.conservativedonations.com/pijn_fax_chaplains/washtimes.html

China didn’t fight wars over religion, they fought wars over territory. They spent centuries trying to gain land and unify a country when they weren’t fighting off Mongol invasions, and the only major “religious war” they fought was the Yellow Turban Rebellion, which was less a religious war and more a peasant uprising. If YOU want to claim that China has a history of waging war over religion, then it’s your responsibility to give examples. I won’t do your homework for you.

But tell me, if Christians don’t wage wars with each other on the basis of religion, then how do you explain the Thirty Years’ War, the French Wars of Religion and the various uprisings across Europe following the Protestant Reformation? If China is more tolerant of Christianity than the United States, then why is there a government-sanctioned organization intended to control and regulate its expression?

“You equate ants to humans? So other animals don’t have “wars” or disagreements?”

I haven’t seen groups of dogs, birds or fish in the hundreds fighting to the death to expand their territory or defend it from an outside threat, just ants and humans. If YOU have, though, I’m sure National Geographic would be very interested.

“Of course Marxists, Communists, Socialists ALL blame “Christianity” as YOU do.”

“As I do?” Tell me where I said that in my last posts. Or art thou committing a sin by bearing false witness against me?

People will always find something to wage war over. If we were the same race we’d fight over territory, if we were one nation we’d fight over political ideals, if were were one party we’d fight over religion, if we were one faith we’d fight over possessions and if we were one generic faceless mass that all thought alike and were given everything we needed we wouldn’t even be human anymore.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.