Keep Religion out of Military

Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) introduced a bill this week to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, a law that prohibits gay and lesbian military personnel from serving openly.

While this is welcome news, there is no guarantee of a "welcome mat" for gay and lesbian soldiers if the ban is lifted. In the years since Don't Ask, Don't Tell was adopted in 1993, there has been a rigorous effort to force religion into the barracks. Fundamentalist Christian groups have infiltrated some of our leading military bases and have made life uncomfortable for anyone who does not conform.

This first came to light in 2005 after the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs had become a bastion of Anti-Semitism and Christian proselytizing. The problem escalated as some cadets were reportedly harassed and called "filthy Jews." A chaplain who complained about the Biblical abuse was unceremoniously demoted and shipped off to Japan. To stop the attempted conversions, the military brass had to meet with the Anti-Defamation League.

Sadly, the proselytizing continues with powerful military leaders behaving more like missionaries, than soldiers entrusted with fulfilling military missions.

"Why is it acceptable that soldiers are unable to serve this nation without attending state-led religious practices they find offensive and false?" Specialist Dustin Chalker, an army medic based at Fort Detrick, in Maryland, asked in The New York Times.

The Times article said that many service members are made uncomfortable by the outsized influence of private groups, such as Officers Christian Fellowship and the Campus Crusade for Christ's Military Ministry.

"You can't and shouldn't eliminate the spiritual component in the military," argued Bruce Fister, Executive Director of Officers' Christian Fellowship, in the Times.

Excuse me, why is there a "spiritual component" in a pluralistic military whose goal is to safeguard a people governed by the United States Constitution? The very document that they are entrusted with protecting forbids a state religion.

The fact is, a service member can pray anytime he or she desires. Within a ten mile radius of almost any base is a plethora of evangelical or fundamentalist churches to choose from. Thus, no one will be denied their freedom of religion if the presence of these predatory organizations is expunged from military bases. It is time to drain the swamp.

Of course, we all know the purpose of these groups is to turn religion from a private, individual matter into a coercive team sport. "Team Jesus" is a better instrument to pressure cadets into converting -- especially if it offers ambitious soldiers a competitive advantage to rise through the ranks. (At the Air Force Academy in 2005, the football coach actually did post a locker room banner that read, "Team Jesus.")

It is also problematic that a group with the name "Crusade" is allowed anywhere near our military. In case these religious renegades haven't noticed, we are fighting two wars in the Muslim world. The very word "crusade" is a potent rallying cry for Al Qaeda to recruit terrorists to murder U.S. forces. A group with a name like Campus Crusade sends the wrong message and may endanger our troops.

Finally, religion does not always equate with moral superiority. I wouldn't doubt if the porn lobby is secretly cheering for mass conversions on military bases. A new nationwide study of credit card receipts from a major online adult entertainment provider shows that states that consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption.

"Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by," said Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School.

As we contemplate the battle over allowing openly gay people in the military, we should also consider what type of military they would serve in. As a nation, we must ensure that the military's number one priority is preparing for war, not worship. If we don't grapple with this issue, Don't Ask, Don't Tell may become, Do Tell, Live In Hell for gay and lesbian service members brave enough to come out.

Comments

[Bubba Gump]

This article is essentially trying to combine two very different points: religion in the military and gays in the military. "Blame the evangelicals" in this article is a bit like listening to South Park's chant, "Blame Canada!" Yes, there is a problem. In some circles, there is too much preaching instead of preparation for war. I'm both Christian and ex-military. I'm straight but I do not support any policy which kicks gays and lesbians out of the military just because of sexual orientation. I said so to my fellow soldiers when they asked me, and I said it this way: "Why shouldn't a gay have the right to have his head blown off for his country, just like you and me?" Especially with a military buckling from the back-door draft called Stop Loss, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is nothing but political posturing and BS, in my opinion. However, forcing the military to remove religion altogether is worse -- because many find support in their faith to face dire situations in combat and PTSD. Moreover, it's unconstitutional.

FIRST AMENDMENT to the U.S. CONSTITUTION:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances­."

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1

[Zanti]

And, of COURSE, you can't resist defining religion in terms of fundamentalism, evangelism, and conservatism. But I've become so used to that smear, I wouldn't know how to respond if I DIDN'T encounter it. Why, I'd think I'd died and gone to.... Er, never mind.

And, yes, I realize that conservative Christians are the culprits in this case, but that doesn't excuse characterizing all believers as such. As ever.

All I can say is, the military has sure changed since my eight years in the U.S. Navy. On both of my ships, religious members--if discovered to be so--were given a hard time in the usual locker-room fashion. You know, not manly enough, not wordly enough. If you mentioned religion, you were assumed to be a "Bible thumper," which meant you probably weren't very tough, or very interested in sex, partying, drinking, etc. Which, of course, is precisely the attitude one encounters at progressive blogs nowadays! The Navy was ahead of its time.

Which, by the way, is why the anti-faith trend of the moment is so much like deja vu to me.

Anyway, a born-again Lt. JG (whom the CPOs and other commissioned officers made fun of for being too straight an arrow) tried to establish a Sunday service aboard my first ship. The idea lasted for two meetings, with turn-out of about five or six, including me.

So... wow. Obviously, things have changed. To put it mildly.

[LeftRight]

Zanti,

You're right, it's not fair for us to lump together all the religious people in with the bible thumpers. However, since it's the bible thumpers who are the most vocal, and are the only ones that we hear from, it's not surprising.

As for the actions of those chiefs and senior officers, it was likely just a bit of ribbing going on. We used to tease ANYONE on the ship, and 99% of the time they would tease us right back.

And FWIW about establishing services..­.. I served on two ships in my 6 years, and the first one had services every Sunday, but no chaplain, so we had a senior PO who volunteered for the Catholic services, and a CPO who volunteered for the protestant services. No one would volunteer to lead the other religions. On my second ship we had chaplains, three of them, one Catholic, one Protestant, and one Jewish.

Once on shore, though, it was MUCH worse, and I found myself avoiding any mention of church, because the bible thumpers were there, in force!

[Zanti]

"However, since it's the bible thumpers who are the most vocal, and are the only ones that we hear from, it's not surprising­."

True, and the press doesn't try to present well-rounded coverage of faith--they go for the news. As with everything else, really. And the folks trying to tell everyone else how to think, how to get "saved," etc.--they­'re the news, of course. Most believers aren't interested in converting anyone, so the majority of us aren't out there clogging up the airwaves or trying to push crank science in public schools, etc. So, really, there's nothing to report on, save for our lack of bravado and our measured ways. Neither being news.

I try to do my part by speaking up for modern mainline Protestantism, which is worlds removed from Pat Robertson, and has been for a good half century.

I see the relationship between the media and the legalistic (follow the rules, or else) Christians as mutually exploitative. The media gets news; the thumpers get their version of faith (rule-bound, unloving, and inflexible) pushed front and center. Of course, the "rules" in question are of their own choosing.

Yes, we had lots of friendly teasing, too, but this was something different, really--nasty cracks made about the Lt. JG when he wasn't around. Part of it, I think, was his high I.Q.--he was an unusually bright guy, and very much not into the party scene of the other officers.

[LeftRight]

The ONLY time that I ever bowed to the pressure of religion when I was in the military was when I was graduating boot camp, and they INSISTED that we at least bow our heads when the words "Let us pray" were spoken.

After I was out of basic, I NEVER did that again! I went to many military events where there was a religious aspect, but I never again bowed my head for ANYONE!

[JohnFromCensornati]

Keep religion out of everything except churches.

[WBum]

I have to stand for a religious prayor at every military ceremony I attend, always Christian of course. Sometimes there are aproximately 1,000 personnel in attendance. I look around and only a few are standing without their heads bowed. The coercion is both official and unofficial. I don't believe that the world or universe was conjured or created from the imagination of a singular being. Yet, I have to treat other's beliefs with respect while mine are being insulted. That is not liberty or justice for all.