Posted on 08/27/2007 11:28:31 AM PDT by F15Eagle
But let's keep those ramdama-ding-dong dinners at the White House and Foggy Bottom. Maybe TROP will kill us more slowly.
fyi
As I asked on the other thread concerning this, are they being disciplined for promoting Christianity or for promoting Christian Embassy? It is carved in stone, thou shalt not shill for an organization whilst in uniform without the permission of thy superiors. I rather think that is the situation here.
I really wish they could be forced to explain the discrepancy. I’d love to hear it.
I honestly don’t know. But I’m 99% sure that had it been the moon gawd cult, it would have been quietly swept under the rug. Can’t upset the jihadists you know. After we rammed our buildings into their stolen airplanes and all that.
Pitiful.
I see. So much easier to assume the worst of the military leadership.
Subtly outrageous! Consider it stolen.
Who is the pagan who decided to discipline these fine generals?
Oops. When ever I copy/past, the breaks between where the quote left off and where I start yammering want to disappear.
I’ll be more careful in the future, promise.
They should have every right to endorse in or out of military uniform.
Service in the military should not be construed as slavery or having to reject your own religious convictions. Even if it was in support for this wonderful organization they have EVERY right to...
You can end the story right there. You don't get to do "promotional fundraiser videos" for anybody while in uniform. Period. It wouldn't have mattered if these guys were doing videos for the Bowflex - you can't help a private organization raise money while in uniform.
What? and offend the ACLU?? and a black rock stuck in a building 8,000 miles away? That rock might get mad, don’tcha know.
Have you heard a story about officers being punished for endorsing islam? Maybe there has been. I don’t recall it though.
Please post if you find it.
They aren’t being punished for being Christians - it says right in the article that the organization in question has a prayer meeting in the Pentagon. They’re being punished for using their positions as officers, to raise funds for a private organization.
I was an Army officer, and am a Christian. Their free exercise of religion has not been infringed in any way. They can worship wherever, whoever, and whatever they want. They just can’t do fundraisers *while in uniform.*
Then I stand corrected. Thank you.
Well it seems like we bend over backwards, *since 9/11*, to accomodate the moon gawd cult. The DOJ was having a special outreach to them.
U.S. sponsors Islamic convention
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070827/NATION/108270070/1001
“The Justice Department is co-sponsoring a convention held by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) — an unindicted co-conspirator in an ongoing federal terrorist funding case — a move that is raising concerns among the Justice’s rank and file.”
“You can end the story right there.”
Wrong on all accounts.
Re-read the article concerning the tacit approval of a muslim center by a senior officer.
On Okinawa Island marines were mandated to BE IN UNIFORM whilst cleaning Buddhist temples grounds for the Okinawans to show the goodwill of the military.
Military need NOT check in their rights when in uniform.
Instead of being more careful with your copy and paste techniques, I would recommend a closer reading of the amendment to which you make reference.
To wit, can you point me to the law Congress made that is forbidding the behavior in question?
There is, after all, nothing in the Constitution that specifically prohibits officers from fraternizing with those of lower rank, but it is still a rule to be followed, right? Just like the rule that was violated here.
Interestingly, they CAN appear in uniform in photos associated with their positions as directors of Christian organizations like Officers Christian Fellowship, of which I’m a member and in whose quarterly (or so) magazine, Command, I regularly see what look to be official military photos.
Colonel, USAFR
The point you seem to be missing is the whole “getting permission” to help a private organization make or raise money.
my pleasure - steal away!
:)
My hostility comes from the constant, continual and nearly all encompassing attack against all Christian identification’s by a large segment of our society.
Even going so far as to demand that a cross that is part of a war memorial in the San Diego area be removed because it “violates the separation of church and state” issue.
So, yeah, I may have jumped the shark on this particular episode, but only by a bit.
“They just can’t do fundraisers *while in uniform.*”
Promotional or fund raisers? Now we are parsing meanings and there are many examples that I have seen where this was totally blown out the door!
Pensacola, FL.- We were allowed to promote & attend organizations (IN UNIFORM) like Special Olympics, etc...community events helping kids read & homework ad-nauseum . . . ooooh, but they are sanctioned by the military “gods” making it ok for that huh?
Did they consult Islam first? /s
Glad to see somebody gets it.
Yet a mosque gets built separately on our grand military institution. While it has always been a hall shared for all services...
“Jesus wept.”
Re Your post #10.
You’re right! George Washington said “When I put on the Soldier, I did not take off the Citizen”.
FWIW, there is a moral imperative for commanders to mandate Christian exposure of their personnel on active duty.
Unlike other scenarios in a free society, a military establishment mandates immediate obedience to orders from senior ranked officers and line officers in combat 24/7.
The commanding officer therefore, has incurred a responsibility for his juniors to insure they are provided with an opportunity to be provided the Gospel if they are unbelievers and an opportunity to receive proper pastor-teacher guidance as believers while they are serving under the command of others.
Both the gift of pastor-teach and the gift of evangelism are spiritual communication gifts given by God the Holy Spirit to certain believers. The spiritual communication gift of pastor-teacher is given to a person to spiritually discern the appropriate part of the Word to be taught to the believers in his midst per God’s Plan, so that they are in the right place at the right time to perform by His Plan.
Likewise, the spiritual communication gift of evangelism is given to some believers to communicate to unbelievers.
Unlike the common citizen who incurs the responsibility to find his own pastor-teacher and continue obediently in faith through Christ in his daily studies, the military serviceman, is also under the legitimate authority of his commanding officer to obey 24/7 the orders of his seniors.
Likewise, his seniors bear the responsibility to God to insure pastor-eachers are made available to the serviceman for their spiritual growth, only possibile through faith in Christ through daily intake of Bible doctrine by their appropriate pastor-teacher.
Recent ecumenical perspectives fail to recognize the significance of God the Holy Spirit in the continuing sanctification of each and every believer, every day and moment of their lives. Many worldly officers believe they are able to substitute a worldly system of counterfeit belief independent of faith through Christ and still advance in good works. Such thinking is good for nothingness, not only jeopardizing the sanctification and spiritual growth of their juniors, but also placing their commands at risk of divine discipline, being in the wrong place at the wrong time on the battlefield which is deadly.
IMHO, if our commander-in-chief was remaining in fellowship through Christ in all things, he would relieve those in the chain of command who seek such counterfeit substitutes to God’s Plan and place the US armed forces at risk, without divine guidance through faith in Christ.
LTC Maginnis apparently has not received the Marxist's liberal homosexual loving dimocrat party's memo that: Christianity is bad and the peace loving Islamic murderers are the current religion that the homo Marxist's endorse.
No. Have you heard about officers endorsing an Islamic organization and not being punished?
Why?
Service in the military should not be construed as slavery or having to reject your own religious convictions. Even if it was in support for this wonderful organization they have EVERY right to...
No, they do not. Not without an OK from their superiors.
“The point you seem to be missing is the whole “getting permission” to help a private organization make or raise money.”
Yes, this unconstitutional idea stinks to high heaven. Get permission to promote... ??? I do not care if they make money or not...it IS their right whether the military says so or not...this concept needs to be challenged and rightly so.
First of all, because of the lack of appropriate punctuation this actually reads that the officers asked for approprisate corrective actions be taken. Nay, nay, nay. It was the superiors who did the recommending.
The officers had the approval of their Lord and He takes precedence over any man in authority. They were serving their God and more power to them. Oh, and BTW, they also have the first amendment on their side. They were exercising their right to free speech and they were NOT making a LAW for the establishment of a government religion. In America we have the right (all of us citizens) to practice the religion of our choice. Any time, any place. It's all America. Not little pieces and patches of this land. Why is that so darned hard to understand? Could it possibly be that some folk are trying to make it into something it is not, just to suit their own preferences? Oh, surely not. But IF they were, they'll have to take their preferences elsewhere.
“He pointed to the Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England who in early June joined the dedication of a new Islamic prayer centre at the Quantico Marine Corps Base.”
This part was from the article. But he’s not in uniform so it’s OK? And I’ll bet there were some in attendance in uniform at Quantico, don’t you imagine?
Hubenator: They should have every right to endorse in or out of military uniform.
NS: “Why?”
- As a member of the service one does not forfeit ones right to the constitution, nor ones rights.
Hubenator: Service in the military should not be construed as slavery or having to reject your own religious convictions. Even if it was in support for this wonderful organization they have EVERY right to...
NS: “No, they do not. Not without an OK from their superiors.”
- No doubt this has been going on for quite awhile now. I understand the military’s tortured logic for getting permission from “their subordinates.” This is what needs to be challenged and changed via the courts. However, you seem to be one to love the way things are in the military, as far as this is concerned.
* It is time to change this unconstitutional concept *
You are right. They can promote all they want to. However, they cross the line when they wear their uniform, or endorse as LCDR Fan of Fiat instead of just FoF.
I certainly would be upset if they showed up in a CAIR video.
And nobody is saying that they cannot be members of the Christian Embassy, or any other religious organization. But they were appearing in an advertising fund-raiser for Christian Embassy in uniform. That is not something that is allowed by military regulations, nor is it something protected by the Constitution.
No doubt this has been going on for quite awhile now. I understand the military’s tortured logic for getting permission from “their subordinates.” This is what needs to be challenged and changed via the courts.
Why?
However, you seem to be one to love the way things are in the military, as far as this is concerned.
I spent almost 30 years in the military. I hope so.
I do not care if they make money or not...it IS their right whether the military says so or not..
_____
They are free to leave the military any time its rules are too confining. And what you do and do not care about in the context of the rules governing military behavior are not really the subject of this thread.
And I gather that all they needed to do was to do their thing in civilian clothes and all would have been fine ... their rights as citizens have not been impeded in the slightest.
And no doubt as part of their duty. But they weren't out there in uniform making commercials for CAIR, were they?
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. As military officers they are required to follow regulations. If they can't then they should leave the military.
I don’t know what other things they might have been involved in. I’ll never be able to prove what they may or may not have done as a promotional video because it normally doesn’t show up except in mosques and such.
Guess we’ll see if there’s more to this story than meets the eye.
I disagree. This is certainly NOT being delegated fairly and I doubt that it can done. Again, I can go on forever how we were mandated by our officers to wear our uniforms to show the military’s endorsement of many events ranging from cleaning Buddhist temples to Special Olympics, etc.
I suppose this is ok for many here because someone higher up says so... this is BS and needs to change. No doubt the many Frank Burns on this thread may not like my opinion, but that is their problem and they need to change.
“That is not something that is allowed by military regulations, nor is it something protected by the Constitution.”
No doubt I will not convince you of anything here... but FWIW this does not matter if it was emblazoned on the Pentagon in Gold or Bronze. It is still unconstitutional and it is wrong for the military to continue with this regulation, Period.
Hubenator: No doubt this has been going on for quite awhile now. I understand the military’s tortured logic for getting permission from “their subordinates.” This is what needs to be challenged and changed via the courts.
NS: Why?
- Because it is blatantly unconstitutional. It has caused many to forfeit rights they would otherwise have as a citizen...some people do everything in their military uniforms and it does not construe tacit approval...
Hubenator: However, you seem to be one to love the way things are in the military, as far as this is concerned.
NS: I spent almost 30 years in the military. I hope so.
- No doubt, I could have guessed this by how you were defending the way things are in the military. Some old things die hard and this “regulation” needs to die. You know what? I did not enjoy MASH (the program) until after I had spent some time in the military. Sure, major hyperbole is used in the show, but it worked because of the elements of truth :)
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.