Church-State Groups Seek Equal Play For Atheist Concert At Fort Bragg

By Jack Jenkins
Religion News Service

WASHINGTON (RNS) Three church-state activist groups criticized the Army for allowing an evangelical concert at North Carolina's Fort Bragg but not making similar provisions for a "Rock Beyond Belief" concert for nonbelievers.

The three groups -- Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina -- on Tuesday (July 5) complained to the Secretary of the Army about events that appear to give "selective benefits" to religious groups.

Fort Bragg hosted a Christian-themed "Rock the Fort" concert last September that was sponsored by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and was touted as "evangelistic in nature," according to the three groups.

The groups alleged that Fort Bragg chaplains promoted the event, which received "$50,000 in financial support, and $30,000 in logistical and security support" from the Army. Such actions "cannot be squared with (Army) regulations, much less with the First Amendment," the groups said.

The letter also complained that a recent attempt to hold an atheist-themed "Rock Beyond Belief" event at Fort Bragg was not granted the same venue or the same level of financial support.

Additionally, performers -- who included atheist leaders such as Richard Dawkins -- were also asked to provide "statements of intent." The event was ultimately canceled after being "crippled ... with last-minute restrictions" according to the concert website.

A news release from Americans United urged the Army to "refrain from supporting any event that promotes religion," and to support the atheist event "to the extent that this can be done consistently with the Constitution."

An Army spokesman said he would look into the groups' letter but could not comment further.

Comments

[snackynak]

08:48 PM on 07/28/2011

Hmm, one side wants to front bands that overtly promote religious beliefs, while the other side wants to front bands that promote atheistic beliefs....

How about, and just bare with me for a second... both sides pool their money together and front bands that people actually listen too?

[snackynak]

08:57 PM on 07/28/2011

****!!! I blew the grammar on that one... sheesh.

[rich3324]

06:35 PM on 07/10/2011

Many in the military view an atheist as worst than someone who is gay.

[firebirdam7]

02:39 PM on 07/10/2011

The US military should not get involved in any religious issues. If a religion wants to promote their beliefs then they need to do so off the military base. there is no room for these religions putting on a concerts just to make a dollar. they need to take their fairy tales and perform them somewhere else.

[Protect Speech]

01:28 PM on 07/10/2011

I think people are forgetting that main thing here... that there is no god

[CodyGirl]

02:02 PM on 07/10/2011

This is an ideological assertion, not a fact.

[Dan Jighter]

02:32 PM on 07/10/2011

Sounds like a statement of fact to me.

[Red Leaves]

10:06 AM on 07/11/2011

*looks around*

Nope. Still no God.

[DTOM1776]

09:58 AM on 07/11/2011

Greetings Protect Speech

Citable evidence please :)

[Red Leaves]

10:11 AM on 07/11/2011

The burden of proof rests on the claimant, and evidence must be provided with which one may base a claim on. In this case, people have, for millenia, asserted that a variety of gods exist, from the Norse Gods, to the Japanese Shinto Gods, to the African Animist Gods, down to a Semitic God of War by the name of Yaweh.

Fine. Where is the evidence for these Gods? Because until someone who claims that a God exists comes forward with clear and convincing evidence, I am no more obligated to believe that person than I am obligated to believe someone who claims he was abducted by a UFO or that he saw Bigfoot. Evidence is what we use to distinguish fact from fantasy, and much to the detriment of humanity, not a single religious person has provided a single shred of credible evidence that suggests that the God of the Bible (or of any religion) exists.

[Protect Speech]

10:37 AM on 07/11/2011

A biology book...

[UnderTheHedgeWeGo]

12:43 PM on 07/10/2011

The real issue is whether the U.S. military should be involved in "evangelical" anything. Since the military controls the movements and time of its troops it has a responsibility to supply them with a venue at which they may fulfill there personal need to worship (or not). But that's the end of it. If the multimillion dollar Billy Graham Evangelistic Association wants to put on a show they are welcome to do so. Why would the U.S. military contribute time, space or one dollar to aid in the evangelical conversion of anybody to anything other than what they already are. And having, unfortunately, done so it seems fair to offer equal funds to a competing idea.

But the military has no business involving itself in religious issues.

[CodyGirl]

01:02 PM on 07/10/2011

You must substantiate through actual facts that the funds expended by the military were used for the purpose of "evangelical conversion" if you want to protest this event taking place on a military base. I also assume that you are opposed to having an atheists-organization sponsored event on a military base.

[UnderTheHedgeWeGo]

03:45 PM on 07/10/2011

First of all there is no sense in having these conversations if everyone is not prepared to be honest. Do you actually believe the Billy Graham EVANGELIC Associatio­n wasn't there to evangelize? From what I've read in their own materials they were very open about their purpose.

I'm pretty confident that the atheist association's desire to put on a show is ONLY to counter balance the Evangelical Christian association. In any other circumstances it would be inappropriate. I'm sure that both the atheist association and I would rather the military (and the government in general) would refrain from attempting to influence the religious choices made by American citizens.

[FaceTheTruth00]

07:50 PM on 07/09/2011

Please stop bashing people out of anti-religious bias and educated yourselves to the truth.

http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2011/07/06/1106397?sac=

The atheist group has the same damn opportunity, if they can raise the money.

Sorry, you can't have something for nothing. And you can't demand someone give you the same thing as someone else, at a discounted price.

I have a feeling that you all would be livid if it was the other way around and a religious group was asking the post to pay for their fees because they couldn't raise the money.

As you can see, each religious group has their OWN fund. If the atheists don't have a fund, that's their problem. Create one and raise their own money.

[Dan Jighter]

09:48 PM on 07/09/2011

See http://rockbeyondbelief.com/2011/05/10/we-just-received-a-50000-donation-from-the-stiefel-freethought-foundation/

Among other things, note that the Stiefel Freethought Foundation is pledging $50,000. So that excuse is gone.

[FaceTheTruth00]

07:38 PM on 07/09/2011

The bottom line here folks, is, this is NOT a religious issue, but a money issue.

It costs x dollars to stage the events in question. Being of large numbers on post, the Christian group was able to raise the money to pay the fees, quite easily. The money came from PRIVATE donations from soldiers/family that attend services there. There was absolutely no money from Ft. Bragg.

Now the atheists, being of much smaller numbers (less than 10% of the Christian group) could not raise the same amount of money. So, post leadership offered them a smaller venue that they could better afford.

That was not sufficient for the atheists. They wanted the same venue etc. that the Christian group had, but they wanted to pay only a fraction of the cost, and have Ft. Bragg pick up the rest.

Please tell me how that is fair? It's not the fault of the post leadership, the Army or the local community that the atheist group can't raise the needed fees. It's like walking into the Ritz-Carlton and demanding the penthouse suite that your neighbor got, except you can only afford to pay for the single room.

It doesn't work that way. If you can afford the fees, you get the venue. If you can't then you can: raise more money, take the smaller venue, or cancel your event.

It it absolutely not up to Ft. Bragg to subsidize the costs for the atheist group.

[FaceTheTruth00]

06:39 PM on 07/09/2011

I live right next to Ft. Bragg, so I know all about this story. The information here is misleading in that NO taxpayer money was used to fund the Christian concert.

The money came directly from donations from Christian soldiers who attended services on post.

If you read this story, you get the idea that Ft. Bragg was throwing money out to Evangelicals. That is absolutely not true. I don't fault the HuffPo on this though, as the atheist group has been parroting this to all media.

The fact is, the money for the Christian concert came from the soldiers who go to services on post. If the atheists couldn't raise enough of their OWN money as well, it's not up to the govt. and taxpayer to fund it.

[CodyGirl]

06:54 PM on 07/09/2011

Thanks for your perspective as a "neighbor" who lives close to Ft. Bragg about what is going on here. My understanding is in agreement with what you are saying. It appears that only $30,000 of taxpayers' money was spent on security & traffic & crowd control for the event since it was held on the military base so the base administrators had to provide these services. This seems reasonable to me & I suspect, to most of the Fayetteville area community who did not have to bear the costs of the event out of "civilian" funds since the concert was held for soldiers.

Atheists seem to be making a mountain out of a mole hill & trying to turn this into a civil liberties issue. I'm glad to get your close-up point of view. Thanks.

[UnderTheHedgeWeGo]

07:01 PM on 07/09/2011

So, $30,000 isn't money?

[joemondo]

07:11 PM on 07/09/2011

$30k of taxpayer funds to promote a religion?

[Naturechaplain]

04:45 PM on 07/09/2011

As a chaplain for many years I would have to say the chaplains who promoted this event are as culpable of sectarian and civil ignorance as the commanders in charge. Evangelizing (from any faith perspective) is inappropriate and unacceptable in any publicly supported institution (whether military, prison or school).

[CodyGirl]

05:18 PM on 07/09/2011

Please define "evangelizing" for us. Does what happened at the concert in question meet that definition? How?

[FaceTheTruth00]

06:41 PM on 07/09/2011

You need to get the real facts. This was a concert sponsored and paid for COMPLETELY out of the donations of those religious members who attended services.

All Ft. Bragg did was provide the venue. And the venue was there for the atheists, except they couldn't raise the money out of their own pockets, so they've been crying discrimination.

They have absolutely the same opportunity. It's no one's fault but their own that they can't raise the funds.

[UnderTheHedgeWeGo]

07:02 PM on 07/09/2011

"This was a concert sponsored and paid for COMPLETELY out of the donations of those religious members who attended services."

Where does this information come from?

[logicanada]

04:12 PM on 07/09/2011

While Rome was set upon conquering the earth at any cost, other cultures were set upon repelling Rome by use of scientifically proven methods. I wonder who prevailed ?

[CrazyEyes]

07:23 PM on 07/09/2011

Lack of education, in this case.
You obviously have no idea about the history of Rome.

[logicanada]

11:00 AM on 07/10/2011

Do tell.

[Dan Jighter]

03:23 PM on 07/09/2011

Okay, this is getting ridiculous. The last several comments I responded to here are for things easily found on the Rock Beyond Belief website.

Dear ignorant theists, if you have questions, go online to the Rock Beyond Belief website (http://rockbeyondbelief.com/) where they have the line up and an explanation for the event and answer your own question. If you don't know what you are talking about with regards to this event, look it up before commenting online. Note that many of you not only seem too lazy to do the obvious website search but display your ignorance with prejudice against atheism. This is not welcomed. Really, stop asking questions you aren't interested in the answers too and wouldn't look up yourself.

Dear intelligent and tolerant theists, thank you for being tolerant and/or doing the obvious website search to answer your own basic questions.

[bbriani3842]

03:27 PM on 07/09/2011

(patting Dan Jighter on the back)

Keep up the good work ... stay the course ... can I upload a beer to ya? MGD ok for ya?

[Dan Jighter]

03:39 PM on 07/09/2011

MGD sounds good!

[CodyGirl]

03:59 PM on 07/09/2011

DJ, My impression of this discussion is that the atheist contributors are turning this into an ad hominem argument in order to avoid focusing on what is being said about the political, philosophical, social & cultural issues that this "Rock Beyond Belief" (RBB) concert issue raises about the relationship between communities of faith & atheist organizations (which the public probably perceives as representative of all atheists). You are trying to turn this into a issue of "prejudice" or "bigotry" against atheists, who as you yourself point out, are feeling like a discriminated-against minority. I am attempting to explain that the reaction to this demand through letters from the ACLU & other civil liberties sorts of arguments & processes for an atheist-sponsored event on a military base is sending a very different message to believers than the one that the RBB & other atheists who support their cause may think. I get the strong impression that these atheists organizations & perhaps many atheists personally have not given a great deal of thought to these questions: How do atheists build tolerance & acceptance among the dominant society of believers & people who practice a religion? What relationship do atheists want with these communities? Are demands for civil liberties for atheists (concerts sponsored by a military base?) really an effective strategy for gaining more tolerance toward atheists & non-believers? I think that if the RBB concert ever comes about, it will not have the desired result for its sponsoring groups.

[Dan Jighter]

05:14 PM on 07/09/2011

The fact of the matter is your comments have a lot of ill-informed nonsense showing clear ignorance of what this Rock Beyond Belief event is and serious misconceptions about atheists. Worse yet, you don't even seem to care if you have your facts right, you are merely interested in winning yet another argument against atheists. Rather than actually appreciating the fact that atheists want to have an event and respecting their right to do so, you are fact more interested in finding some way to make this an argument against atheists on how confused they are.

You aren't interested in how atheists build tolerance and acceptance. Otherwise you wouldn't make intolerant remarks about atheist revivals. You are just interested in winning an argument against atheists. That's all you are ever interested in.

The comments about atheist revivals and atheists being confused are simply bigoted. You are truly clueless about us atheists. And worst of all you seem completely disinterested in getting a clue.

[Dan Jighter]

05:14 PM on 07/09/2011

Atheists haven't thought about the issues you raised because mostly there is no overall atheist strategy or goal. There are a diversity of goals with a diversity of tactics. The generally agreement amongst atheists is that we need a diversity of tactics and that one of the most important goals is visibility. This concert provides viability while also standing up to military proselytizing by evangelicals. That good! Note that seeking tolerance and viability through activism and events does not make one a religion. Otherwise homosexuality would be a religion too. Atheists currently have a mere social movement and our fight over constitutional rights and out campaigns are more akin to the gay rights movement than any religion.

Note that if atheists get obsessed over mixed messages, the culture is so against us that we couldn't win. Some religious people will see whatever atheists do as offensive or acting like a religion. It would be nice to minimize the mixed messages. But the priority, especially with atheists in the military, is to protect atheists rights NOW. The priority is also atheists simply being visible and standing up for ourselves. RBB does that. That's more important then obsessing over what sort of message that sends, which is an issue we can't win on anyways.

[CodyGirl]

02:38 PM on 07/09/2011

According to the Fort Bragg website, there are 55,000 soldiers stationed there. If the proportion of atheists among this population is similar to the general US population (Gallup poll 2011), this suggests that there are approximately 4,400 atheists among those stationed there. Of course, we don't know if the soldier population mirrors the general population in terms of the number of atheists As I understand it, the atheists concert didn't materialize in part because the sponsors needed to find a smaller venue than the 10,000 seats facility it was originally planned for, which was the same venue for the evangelicals concert. This change of venue seems reasonable & rational given the demographics in terms of predicting the possible attendance among the military base population for such an event. Why is the ACLU charging that the atheists groups were treated unfairly or "unequally" when obviously the predicted attendance at this atheist group sponsored event was not likely to be equal for causes beyond the military base administrators' control? What do these atheists groups mean by "equal"?

[Dan Jighter]

03:02 PM on 07/09/2011

With the Gallup Poll 2011, your numbers look off. Was that nones, people who say no to "do you believe in god", or people who label themselves atheist? There is a range of people who are effectively atheists who don't call themselves atheists, making estimates of the number of atheists difficult. In any case, do you people ever bother even looking at the Rock Beyond Belief website? I mean, really, most of your guys questions are answered there. The demographics are (found under The Great Rock The Fort Swindle):

Christian: 30-40,000 [including about 10,000 Catholic]
Buddhist: 208
Hindu: 70
Islam: 165
Jewish: 168
Wicca: 36
A Druid Fellowship: 1
No Religious Preference 9,472
Atheists: 212

[CodyGirl]

04:09 PM on 07/09/2011

Thanks for making my point! 212 self-identified atheists among 55,000 soldiers at a concert venue designed for 10,000 attendees. No wonder they were asked for find a smaller venue.

[bbriani3842]

03:20 PM on 07/09/2011

Same opportunities as everyone else .... duh ...

[Reason Rules]

02:17 PM on 07/09/2011

Thanks Huff Po for posting this story, but what about posting the story of the 80 companies who refused to fly American Atheist banners on July 4? The banner stated, "Atheism is Patriotic Atheist.org" If this would have happened to any other minority group, it would have been headline news.

[bbriani3842]

03:21 PM on 07/09/2011

I didn't even know this occurred ...

[Reason Rules]

03:56 PM on 07/09/2011

I am not surprised, it barely got any media coverage. To their credit, CNN did a 5 minute story on it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWz7RFaYtHc&feature=feedu, but you can get the full story at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geZ9A_HlarM.

Some of the companies flat out refused, some of the pilots feared for their lives, and others were afraid that xtians would boycott their businesses. The good news is that 17 companies did accept and 25 pilots did fly the banners.

[UnderTheHedgeWeGo]

07:06 PM on 07/09/2011

I'm an atheist but I see no reason whatsoever for a company to fly a flag supporting anybody. Companies make money, why would they chance jeopardizing their profits to support me?

[Reason Rules]

08:01 PM on 07/09/2011

Wow, well at least you are open and honest. Too bad restaurants in the south had to open up their lunch counters to serve African Americans. Too bad restaurants in CA were ordered to stop allowing smoking in their restaurants. I guess it really cut into their profits, not.

[Allen Reed Jensen]

01:19 PM on 07/09/2011

My problem with an atheist concert is it's whole purpose to mock the faiths of others. I wouldn't want a anti- Catholic or Anti-Mormon concert. Unless atheism is a religion in and of itself, I don't think they need a concert of their own. Many of these "separation of church and state' people won't be happy until the position of Chaplain is illuminated. Are there any atheist Chaplains?

[Dan Jighter]

02:04 PM on 07/09/2011

"My problem with an atheist concert is it's whole purpose to mock the faiths of others."

No, it isn't.

http://rockbeyondbelief.com/about/

We are not interested in just being a counter-event to the offensive Rock the Fort concert. We are also not interested in putting on an anti-christian, anti-religious, or anti-anything event. Rock Beyond Belief is A Day of Fun and Entertainment for the Rest of Us.

"Are there any atheist Chaplains?"

Actually, it has been in the news that they are trying to get secular humanist chaplains: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/us/27atheists.html?_r=1

[CodyGirl]

04:04 PM on 07/09/2011

You claim that this event is not anti-religion. This is not the assumption that most members of the Fayetteville NC community will make when they see that Richard Dawkins was invited to be a featured speaker at this event. This is based on Dawkins' own writings & public statements about religion, not on wild conjecture by people who are "prejudiced against atheists."

[Allen Reed Jensen]

10:48 AM on 07/11/2011

Thank you for your reply. It was quite informative. The links were great.

[bbriani3842]

03:22 PM on 07/09/2011

" ... until the position of Chaplain is illuminate­d."

Does this involve a light bulb or something?

[Allen Reed Jensen]

10:47 AM on 07/11/2011

Ha! I must have misspelled it and used spell check without really looking at it.

[Debbie338]

11:54 AM on 07/09/2011

My father was a career Army officer who won medals for valor in two wars. He was an atheist. He never "came out" as one because he said he'd worry more about his own people doing him harm than he worried about the enemy.

The military has a definite hard line Christian attitude and it is extremely pronounced in the service academies. Atheists who speak up are ostracized.