Posted on 01/04/2022 12:46:34 PM PST by Fury
And you didn’t even touch the fact that all of the coerced “vaccines” are experimental, yes, ALL of them. That fact makes the order Illegal, an unlawful order, and I think you know that. It’s a human rights issue, and of course the religious community has a moral stance regarding, and an interest in human rights, even for soldiers, to your dismay.
The military isn’t interested in beliefs that are contrary to command.
Show me the that regulation — the one stating there are no human rights for soldiers. It’s interesting you seem unconcerned that preserving the military command structure at the expense of natural human rights, religious rights, and natural human dignity is an immoral argument on its face.
—-
It is based upon command and control and if the lower ranks can make the presiding decisions for the commanders, who’s in control?
What could go wrong, Lt. Calley?
“You tried to put the Church on trial — absolutely disgusting but not surprising coming from our modern transgender-worshipping, politically correct, pronoun-obsessed “inclusive” [except-for-the-religious] military apologists.”
“It’s a human rights issue, and of course the religious community has a moral stance regarding, and an interest in human rights, even for soldiers, to your dismay.
Insulting aren’t you? I deal in facts and was working within this system for over 30 years with USAF active, Department of the Army, and the DOD.
I will be glad to assist you by providing the DOD directive concerning refusing an order and why it means nothing again as they have no reason to. The reason the military troops are refusing the vaccine is because of they first incorrectly determined that aborted fetus cells are used in the vaccines. That hasn’t happened since the mid 1980’s and was used in vaccines these members have probably used in the past like chicken pox. Obtaining a religious exemption is rooted in a process that predates the pandemic and has been used for decisions such as whether troops on duty can wear head coverings or beards for religious reasons.
Even in the past, few troops have cleared those hurdles to get religious exemptions. And because the pandemic can directly affect the force’s health and readiness, the bar is even higher, so military leaders aren’t surprised by the lack of approved exemptions.
From what I’ve read the reason most of them are trying to be exempted for the use of the aborted cell problem doesn’t even exist. At that point the order exists and changes. If they are given an order to take the vaccine because it has not be proven dangerous even though the possibility may be there, the commander in chief of the military has determined it is to be used. So, where art 86 for failure to go makes the application of art 92, failing to follow orders. It’s the way the military works and has for a couple of centuries. So you can take your cheap shot at me, but it doesn’t change the facts.
You can use DOD Instruction 1300.7. It’s on the web. It states:
“Establishes DoD policy on the accommodation of individual expressions of sincerely held beliefs (conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs), which do not have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, good order and discipline, or health and safety.”
Don’t bother posting me back. I won’t try to discuss issues with a person that states the case while failing to work with regulations and directives that it sounds like you haven’t seen and trying to apply your logic to it while attacking me. This has almost nothing to do with civil law and is directly effecting the UCMJ. I hope you find your answers.
wy69
What kind of confused statement is that? The “vaccines” are not “proven dangerous” because there are NO STUDIES. The control group was contaminated deliberately to hide the data, and the paucity of data that does exist is being made inaccessible — to the point of seeking petitions for delayed release of the unspun raw data for up to 75 years.
Additionally your nonsensical statement is not the least bit comforting considering ALL the “vaccines” are experimental. DoD even lied to the troops telling them they were getting Comirnaty when they weren’t. They are human Guinea pigs, only they’re not voluntary subjects like you probably are.
So your standard of whether some sh*t-for-brains woke “commander” with his nose up some superior’s a$$ can decide to impose a medical experiment on all soldiers with an experimental “vaccine” is whether they, the troops, can prove it’s dangerous, without any available safety studies. “Hey GI, you can’t prove this LSD isn’t safe, and we need to collect data, so take this pill — that’s an order! And if you say no we’ll throw you in the brig for UCMJ violations!”
That’s it in a nutshell, I understand your insane position with complete clarity.
——
The Government’s “Religious Exemption” Process Is a Farce
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-governments-religious-exemption-process-is-a-farce/
———
Actually, I read they have approved “exceptions” — totaling TWO.
"The filings received by the court as of January 21, 2022, show that out of 22,951 religious exemption requests received, only three were granted, and those were questionable since at least two of those service members were already scheduled to leave the military.......... However, 3,449 medical exemptions have been granted. The reports confirm the military continues to deny religious exemptions while granting medical exemptions."
As I said.
----
https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/national-security/2022/february/federal-judge-issues-emergency-injunction-us-military-systematically-denying-religious-exemptions
“However, 3,449 medical exemptions have been granted.”
I am not sure you can use medical exemptions as a display of the lack of religious exemption. Medical exemptions are broken body parts that will not allow a troop to function properly and is beyond their capacity to change.
The Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) is a process designed to determine whether a Service member’s long-term medical condition enables him/her to continue to meet medical retention standards, in accordance with military service regulations. That is not a choice as it is a determination if the injured troop can continue to function on their job determination by the military physically or psychologically so they can participate in the mission under their job description. If they can’t, they will be discharged at either honorable of general. This is not the case as the complaint by the members is not about the shots as to what they do or do not contain...human cells from abortions.
The site you gave me, thanks, as most don’t they just expect me to believe they are correct, indicates that the court order described the RFRA, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. ... § 2000bb-4 (also known as RFRA, pronounced “rifra”), is a 1993 United States federal law that “ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected” does not pertain here. There’s nothing on the facts that make it a religious or medical issue.
And that’s where the argument breaks down. They have the right to believe anything they wish. But the members have made an incorrect assumption in that there are abortion cells in the mix. That has not been used since 1985 as I mentioned in a past post. That’s how the original vaccines were made but no more and stopped long before the ones being used now were made. So the religious grounds for refusing is erased. Now it gets down to whether the shot is safe or not. And that has already been determined by the powers that be that it is. So again, no religious argument available. If you tack on to this that the member swore to obey the orders of their superiors as part of the enlistment and/or re-enlistment package, then they are bound by military law to take the shot or face a series of actions leading to discharge.
And that’s where the actual argument steps in. They are being discharged due to failure to follow a direct order. Different article of the UCMJ. People don’t understand the military scene as they try to equate it to the outside world. Not the same. Very black and white.
wy69
No they won't find aborted arms and legs in the injections, but yes, the "vaccines" could not have been made without the aborted fetal tissue cell lines they admit using. And that's enough.
Now it gets down to whether the shot is safe or not. Now it gets down to whether the shot is safe or not.
No, not really. We already know from the three whistleblower's data that the "vaccines" are unsafe. But it is unlawful to coerce these experimental drugs involuntarily on service members. There's no informed consent, and that is reason enough to dismiss any order to receive these gene therapies, aside from any religious argument.
----
Renz Whistleblowers DMED DATA Reveals Incredibly Disturbing Spikes in Vaccine Injuries Across the Board
279% SPIKE in Miscarriages
487% SPIKE in Breast Cancer
1048% SPIKE in the Nervous System
155% SPIKE in Birth Defects
350% SPIKE in Male Infertility
369% SPIKE in Testicular Cancer
2181% SPIKE in Hypertension
664% SPIKE in Malignant Neoplasms
680% SPIKE in Multiple Sclerosis
551% SPIKE in Guillain-Barre Syndrome
468% SPIKE in Pulmonary Embolism
302% SPIKE in Tachycardia
452% SPIKE in Migraines
471% SPIKE in Female Infertility
437% SPIKE in Ovarian Dysfunction
269% SPIKE in Myocardial infarction
291% SPIKE in Bell’s palsy
467% SPIKE in Pulmonary Embolism
https://rumble.com/vt8gcv-vaxx-whistleblowers-miscarriages-increase-279-cancer-increases-296.html?mref=6zof&mrefc=3
“but yes, the “vaccines” could not have been made without the aborted fetal tissue cell lines they admit using.
Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain aborted fetal cells?
Answer from infectious disease expert and practicing Catholic James Lawler, MD:
No, the COVID-19 vaccines do not contain any aborted fetal cells. However, fetal cell lines – cells grown in a laboratory based on aborted fetal cells collected generations ago – were used in testing during research and development of the mRNA vaccines, and during production of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
It’s true that such cells have been used either in the testing or development and production of COVID-19 vaccines. The cells are grown in a laboratory and were derived from a few elective abortions performed more than three decades ago. These same cell lines are also used to test and advance our understanding of several routine drugs, including acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and aspirin, and they continue to be used for treatment research in diseases such as Alzheimer’s and hypertension.
If there is a complaint about the covid vaccine, and it’s use of human cells to develope them, then why weren’t these same people complaining about:
“Cells derived from elective abortions have been used since the 1960s to manufacture vaccines, including current vaccines against rubella, chickenpox, hepatitis A, and shingles. They have also been used to make approved drugs against diseases including hemophilia, rheumatoid arthritis, and cystic fibrosis.”
https://www.science.org/content/article/abortion-opponents-protest-covid-19-vaccines-use-fetal-cells
And then you can include:
Varicella (chickenpox) vaccines, Hepatitis A vaccines (including TwinrixⓇ) and the travel vaccine VivaximⓇ, which protects against typhoid and hepatitis A)
Rubella vaccines (given as measles, mumps, rubella and measles, mumps, rubella, varicella)
One rabies vaccine (ImovaxⓇ Rabies)
One shingles vaccine (ZostavaxⓇ II).
Varicella (chickenpox) vaccines
https://immunizebc.ca/ask-us/questions/are-human-fetal-cells-used-make-vaccines-0
There are also a number of medicines that have a reputation for being created with human tissue that weren’t:
Engerix, comvax used for Hep B is made with yeast. And the polio vaccine was created by Saulk using monkey kidney cells. Between 1955 and 1963, it’s been estimated that up to 30 million people were infected in the United States alone. Now it’s almost gone from the planet. But no human fetal cells were used and a lot has been said they were. Misinformation. Don’t tell PETA. They’ll go insane.
A good list of vaccines that used fetal cells for developement, and not necessary in the finished product, is here. And this doesn’t include all of them:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/URLs_Cited/OT2013/13-354/13-354-9.pdf
Wonder how many of these they have had?
But the point as to whether the vaccine is safe is still in the hands of the member. If the member refuses to take it, and it is ordered, as it has been, they will be discharged. It’s their decision. And it is having to do with violating their enlistment and re-enlistment contract and oath. So don’t mix apples and oranges. If they are in a career field that requires world wide deployment, then they are a problem to the mission if they can’t deploy. And the reason they are using about the aborted cells, doesn’t hold water unless you remove a number of medicines that were developed using the cell process. Some many of them have already taken.
And whistleblowers do not make decisions, they present an opinions. If that opinion is proven correct, then action can be followed up on. At the moment, it hasn’t.
wy69
It doesn't matter. If there is a crime committed against you last week or the week before, and you didn't complain to the police, that doesn't mean you can't complain at a later time about a different crime. You don't get to decide what "vaccines" they get to complain about. And besides, these are not "vaccines" -- they're experimental gene therapies.
If the member refuses to take it, and it is ordered, as it has been, they will be discharged. It’s their decision.
Does not apply to experimental drug therapies forced upon them, against the Nurmeburg codes.
And whistleblowers do not make decisions, they present an opinions.
Outrageous accusation! This was DoD OFFICIAL data on 1.4 million troops, with chain of custody proof, presented by three DoD whistleblowers that now have protection!
If you had a conscience you’d be SCREAMING FROM THE ROOFTOPS like the majority of us freedom-loving patriots here at FR! Instead you consistently support the “safe and effective” false narrative, no matter how overwhelming the mounting evidence is against these gene therapies!
WTF?
“...no matter how overwhelming the mounting evidence is against these gene therapies!”
I didn’t say there wasn’t a problem with the vaccines. What I said amounted to the reason they are declining the shot that has nothing to do with the success or failure of the therapies. They are using religion improperly as an excuse rather than attack the issue head on as the vaccines being a failure. And the reason they are doing that is they thought it was a legal and an easy way to get out of the shots even though they signed the contract and repeated the oath. The military did exactly what they were told to do by the commander in chief/president.
“If you had a conscience you’d be SCREAMING FROM THE ROOFTOPS like the majority of us freedom-loving patriots here at FR! Instead you consistently support the “safe and effective” false narrative, no matter how overwhelming the mounting evidence is against these gene therapies!
Firt of all, I think having 35 years (plus) of military employ, active over 20, department of the army, 4, and DOD, 12, before medical retirement, that would qualify me to be both a patriot and freedom loving as I supported that for about half my life. But, like I said, you’re mixing apples with oranges, The military has ordered members to take the vaccine. If they refuse for any unwarranted reason, like this one, they are punished. In this case, by discharge. Religious beliefs do not apply in this situation. It is an excuse. Their own personal history displays that.
Now if you want to argue the possibility whether the vaccines are safe and effective from the tall tales that have been applied to them, we have no argument. But I displayed the reason the actions are being done. And while I was working in the system all those years I learned why they are done. This is not the real world. They have rules called regulations, directives, and other written and verbal actions expected to be accomplished for the betterment and/or accomplishment of the mission. In the outside world the employee can just walk unless they are under contract at which time they will be sued. Punishment. In the military, they member is discharged. Punishment. The member signed the contract and for it they are paid, clothed, housed, fed, and medically treated along with their immediate family. But they are expected to follow the rules, also. This is why we have police in the outside world for those laws (rules).
But you can get another job after being fired in the outside world. You can’t re=enlist if you are fired from that one. And that’s why they are using religion as an excuse to protect their rank and positions along with retirement pay and the VA. So they aren’t patriots on this topic, this is for their needs. They are con men trying to get around it with the wrong reasons. Patriots take it head on and honest.
Also, if you are going to get personal with me, I have nothing left to talk to you about. I showed you the reason I said what I did, and besides being legal it is honest. Don’t waste my time with my mother’s boots.
wy69
You don't know that. You never met ANY of them, and you don't want them to have any rights because you already made up your mind -- you are entirely sympathetic with exactly the type of bureaucrat issuing a sweeping edict that the good judge is talking about:
[Judge Reed O'Connor (N.D. Tex.):]
Our nation asks the men and women in our military to serve, suffer, and sacrifice. But we do not ask them to lay aside their citizenry and give up the very rights they have sworn to protect….
People in the military are not sheep or experimental subjects, and to force them to take these experimental gene therapies is against the law. It's actually KILLING and MAIMING service members, but bureaucrat pencil-pushers insist on maintaining "readiness" by hiding the damning data (their own data they are hiding) and continuing their campaign to deny all servicemember rights, including legal against experimentation, and potential religious objections.
You think your military experience somehow makes you more qualified to pass judgment on these people, but it doesn't -- it actually has made you more myopic, more callous and less likely to recognize their rights under the law.
....written and verbal actions expected to be accomplished for the betterment and/or accomplishment of the mission."
How does killing and maiming your own members, not from combat mistakes but from bureaucratic catastrophe, enhance the mission? How does it improve "readiness"? We know from the data -- now including their own internal data they tried to hide -- it did not, does not, and never will improve readiness -- a harsh misstep that many of us questioned from DAY ONE. And now, today, this attitude, reflected by you, is responsible for REDUCING readiness and morale, because there's no courage among those entrenched clerks, bureaucrats, a$$-kissing "commmanders", politically-beholden generals, and DoD hacks that are responsible for propagating the myth of the magic "vaccines".
But you can get another job after being fired in the outside world.
Not that simple. General and Less-Than-Honorable discharges are mroe often a kiss of death unless you only want a job as a dishwasher (or your dad is President).
“General and Less-Than-Honorable discharges are more often a kiss of death unless you only want a job as a dishwasher (or your dad is President).”
You’re still missing the point. Trying to get around something by not challenging it face up is just as bad as making people do what they have chosen to do but now want to do it their way because the kitchen got too hot.
“You never met ANY of them”
I don’t have to. I know what they are using to plead out of shots you, and they apparently, feel are unsafe. But they have the opportunity to say no and be discharged. It’s no different than saying no on a job outside and being fired. And do you think they will give them a letter of recommendation? Doubt it. And they are not being up front about their concerns with the shots by using a unrelated procedure to get their wishes done. And it’s backfiring on them so now they go to the press to get sympathy.
“...you don’t want them to have any rights because you already made up your mind...”
Back to me again, huh? It doesn’t matter one bit about what I feel about the religious or legal positions of any of them or the military. I just state facts. So find some facts that were wrong that I said that were not with a backup site and educate me. Otherwise, your opinion is respected, but not evidenced.
“General and Less-Than-Honorable discharges are more often a kiss of death”
The only reference to the behavior of a discharge is a code on a DD 214. And a vast majority of possible employers have no idea what that code is. They can ask for a DD 214, but they will have no idea what they are reading except the written in English part.
“You think your military experience somehow makes you more qualified to pass judgment on these people, but it doesn’t — it actually has made you more myopic, more callous and less likely to recognize their rights under the law.”
First of all, they are not being denied their rights. There is no right anywhere where it says you can refuse a direct order if it is not a direct act that could destroy people or priority A property. A member can refuse an unlawful or illegal order as per Art. 92. But until someone of authority in this country says that the vaccines are unsafe and should not be used, to include all the other vaccines that used the same process I already mentioned, they are legal. Failure to obey is dereliction for unwillingness and therefore punishable. And because it determines them non-worldwide capable, discharge. It’s the member’s determination. And using religious beliefs that have not been in effect since before most of them were born and are still being used in drugs, reeks of dishonesty. This may be part of the reason a vast majority are denied.
They are attacking this particular vaccine. I guess they can’t get any more over the counter pain pills like common tylenol or can’t get shingles, flu, hep, or measles/rubella shots. They used the same process. Remember, the excuse they are using is not if the vaccines are safe, but how they were made. Kinda telling there isn’t it?
As for my having experience in a field makes me a little more qualified to determine past practices, the UCMJ, the interpretation of regs, directives, and written orders, unless you have walked in my shoes, you don’t know. How much time do you have in this area? And it couldn’t be too much as you fail to recognize that the military works by discipline created by directives and an obligation you swore to uphold. This is why people put themselves into the line of fire downrange so you won’t have to see it here. Takes a special person. And not one that improperly uses religious reasons that don’t apply to get out of something that they wouldn’t face square up. Makes it hard to trust them.
We’re talking in circles and you continue to go after me for stating facts. You don’t want to discuss anything, you want to prove me wrong in your opinion. And remember, I’m saying they shouldn’t be awarded a waiver for the issue as they are attacking the wrong thing and you do. Very few have been awarded.
Please stay on the topic if you wish to continue this discussion. And the topic is, I thought, the military’s actions against members that refuse the direct order to get the vaccination. You still insist on trying to destroy me with unrelated topics. If you’re going to do that, then troll somewhere else.
wy69
I don't have time for a full response but you know as well as I do that job applications routinely require you to disclose your discharge status. Less-than-honorable or dishonorable are a huge smear against your record. You must disclose it, or could be fired for it later if they were to find out, or even prosecuted in some circumstances (gov't job such as the Post Office). It's not incomparable to a convicted felon disclosing their status, when asked, on an application.
Here's how the Pentagon "gets around" the leaked DoD data that we know shows they've lied about the effects of the experimental gene therapies they wantonly call "vaccines".
---
Treasonous Pentagon Now FLOODING Its Own Medical Database With Fabricated Injuries for 2016-2020 in Order to Make Explosive Covid Jab Injuries of 2021 Look “Normal”
It turns out that the Pentagon is now adding random numbers to the DMED codes for the years 2016 through 2020. Two whistleblowers told The Blaze‘s Daniel Horowitz that the Pentagon is actively tampering with the data to push a false narrative.
https://noqreport.com/2022/02/10/treasonous-pentagon-now-flooding-its-own-medical-database-with-fabricated-injuries-for-2016-2020-in-order-to-make-explosive-covid-jab-injuries-of-2021-look-normal/
“Treasonous Pentagon Now FLOODING Its Own Medical Database With Fabricated Injuries for 2016-2020 in Order to Make Explosive Covid Jab Injuries of 2021 Look “Normal.”
DMED provides remote access to a subset of data contained within the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). DMSS contains up-to-date and historical data on diseases and medical events (e.g., hospitalizations, ambulatory visits, reportable diseases, etc.) and longitudinal data relevant to personnel characteristics and deployments experience for all active and reserve component service members.
But not everyone can just dial into this information. DMED is available to authorized users such as U.S. military medical providers, epidemiologists, medical researchers, safety officers or medical operations/ clinical support staff for surveying health conditions in the U.S. military. Civilian collaborators in military medical research and operations may also have access to DMED with documentation supporting their arrangements. Bottom line is to get into personal information they must be approved or they violate HIPAA thus the patient’s privacy.
HIPAA was established to provide greater transparency for individuals whose information may be at risk, and the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights (OCR) enforces compliance with the HIPAA Privacy, Security, and Breach Notification Rules.
“...you know as well as I do that job applications routinely require you to disclose your discharge status.”
Nope, not exactly. Employers are permitted to ask limited questions related to an applicant’s military service. Questions that are relevant to work experience and training received are permissible. However, an employer should not ask an applicant the reason they were discharged from the military. Employers can obtain information from military discharge papers (DD-214) on a limited basis, but said review should be related to the job. Military discharge questions have to be carefully asked, as such questions may result in obtaining medical disability information on an applicant - information protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Military discharge questions may also lead to disparate impact based upon race or violation of state military discharge anti-discrimination laws.
To obtain information about an applicant’s military service, an employer is permitted, with consent, to make inquiries pertaining to dates of military service; duties performed; rank during service at the time of discharge; pay during service and at the time of discharge; training received and work experience. However, asking a veteran to reveal the nature of their discharge is considered private and not readily available to employers for use during the pre-employment process. That has to be approved by the applicant.
Additionally, if using a background check provider, Form DD-214 is considered a record that falls under the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. §1681), one of which mandates that the applicant provides authorization to the employer when requesting military records. The background check provider should only provide Permissible Military Information to employers that excludes information related to medical history or the nature of the discharge.
You keep talking about experimental drugs. No one of any authority is saying they are testing and have determined through the rules of the FDA, that experimental drugs or vaccines can be used. And at the moment, the determining group, the FDA that receives the Emergency Use Authorization from the developing groups like Pfizer or Moderna, and using established criteria, determines the use of the product for consumption.
So again, until you can find someone of authority to say they are experimental within the ruling of the governmental organization like the FDA, and in this particular case, the POTUS who has the final say on the use of the products by the military, then determining the drug experimental is a non player. And it is approved by those organizations that make that decision. It’s law, not personal feelings. Feelings or opinions by people don’t get anywhere until they can convince someone of their opinion. And you don’t change rules by disregarding them. That is not going to get anything done but conflict where someone can get hurt. There are ways to make a case. This isn’t one of them.
And the troops trying for a waiver for the use of the vaccines are not saying it is experimental, but that it was using fetal cells in it’s mix. That is false. And they know they don’t have a case to get the waiver they wish with that tactic. If they are pushing to determine whether the vaccine is safe or not, then say so. There are ways to do that without violating the rules they swore an oath to before this came up. So don’t try to use God as an excuse to get your way, do it honestly.
wy69
If it relates to a sensitive position they can -- security clearances, etc. Also if you get a government job, none of your time in the military can be counted toward civil service retirement points. And that's just for a general discharge -- not for dishonorable.
Getting anything other than an honorable discharge is significant -- especially considering the lies and deception that the courageous "refuseniks" are having to deal with. If anyone is less than honorable it's the lying leadership of our military and government.
It turns out religious discrimination has been widespread in the DoD for a long time, and has only gotten worse. And no, it has nothing to do with particular ingredients or methods of manufacture in this or any other “vaccine”.
I read it as a young 2nd LT, I aspired to be a Sam Damon, but the message delivered by the author was how political connections are a more successful path to success than true courage and leadership.
I never aspired to be a lifer, and I had a couple of superiors who made sure I would never make Major…lol. No complaints, the Army treated me well.
Zipper, you are incorrect when it comes to military time not applied to civil service retirement. I was able to add in my 8 years active duty after 5 years of federal civilian service. It all added up to 16 years combined, and a small pension of a bit over $1000 a month.
“It turns out religious discrimination has been widespread in the DoD for a long time...”
Good point. But you are aware, I know, that the military is contradictory to Christian based religion on many points if for any reason, because of its need to exist.
In comparison, if you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A warrior, someone who is walking the uncharted path between righteousness and the perverse.
The acceptance of religion in the military is very hard to balance. On one hand, you have the good citizen, we hope, treating people in a societal accepted way. Yet tomorrow, that person could be out with the intent to kill another human or die trying. But if everyone in the world would be that first person, there would be no need to protect by either giving the ultimate cost or making the other side give it up.
So calling it an attack by the DOD is not measurable. In what they are required to do, there really is no religion. They try to provide the opportunity. But the overall decision is for the individual member to make. And if they are not capable of performing the needed acts to protect the country and their families, then they should support other ways. The member decides to do it and bets his/her life on the outcome. No one can make that much of a decision for them. They do it. And skirting around it is not the person I want next to me in a firefight.
wy69
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.