Jul 09, 2008 12:21PM GMT
Question
•
Religion - Other
What is your take on this article?
Atheist soldier sues Army for 'unconstitutional' discriminationBy Randi Kaye
KANSAS CITY, Kansas (CNN) -- Army Spc. Jeremy Hall was raised Baptist.
Army Spc. Jeremy Hall, who was raised Baptist but is now an atheist, says the military violated his religious freedom.
1 of 2 Like many Christians, he said grace before dinner and read the Bible before bed. Four years ago when he was deployed to Iraq, he packed his Bible so he would feel closer to God.
He served two tours of duty in Iraq and has a near perfect record. But somewhere between the tours, something changed. Hall, now 23, said he no longer believes in God, fate, luck or anything supernatural.
Hall said he met some atheists who suggested he read the Bible again. After doing so, he said he had so many unanswered questions that he decided to become an atheist.
His sudden lack of faith, he said, cost him his military career and put his life at risk. Hall said his life was threatened by other troops and the military assigned a full-time bodyguard to protect him out of fear for his safety. Watch why Hall says his lack of faith almost got him killed ยป
In March, Hall filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, among others. In the suit, Hall claims his rights to religious freedom under the First Amendment were violated and suggests that the United States military has become a Christian organization.
"I think it's utterly and totally wrong. Unconstitutional," Hall said.
Hall said there is a pattern of discrimination against non-Christians in the military.
Two years ago on Thanksgiving Day, after refusing to pray at his table, Hall said he was told to go sit somewhere else. In another incident, when he was nearly killed during an attack on his Humvee, he said another soldier asked him, "Do you believe in Jesus now?"
Hall isn't seeking compensation in his lawsuit -- just the guarantee of religious freedom in the military. Eventually, Hall was sent home early from Iraq and later returned to Fort Riley in Junction City, Kansas, to complete his tour of duty.
He also said he missed out on promotions because he is an atheist.
"I was told because I can't put my personal beliefs aside and pray with troops I wouldn't make a good leader," Hall said.
Michael Weinstein, a retired senior Air Force officer and founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, is suing along with Hall. Weinstein said he's been contacted by more than 8,000 members of the military, almost all of them complaining of pressure to embrace evangelical Christianity.
"Our Pentagon, our Pentacostalgon, is refusing to realize that when you put the uniform on, there's only one religious faith: patriotism," Weinstein said.
Religious discrimination is a violation of the First Amendment and is also against military policy. The Pentagon refused to discuss specifics of Hall's case -- citing the litigation. But Deputy Undersecretary Bill Carr said complaints of evangelizing are "relatively rare." He also said the Pentagon is not pushing one faith among troops.
"If an atheist chose to follow their convictions, absolutely that's acceptable," said Carr. "And that's a point of religious accommodation in department policy, one may hold whatever faith, or may hold no faith."
Weinstein said he doesn't buy it and points to a promotional video by a group called Christian Embassy. The video, which shows U.S. generals in uniform, was shot inside the Pentagon. The generals were subsequently reprimanded.
Another group, the Officers' Christian Fellowship, has representatives on nearly all military bases worldwide. Its vision, which is spelled out on the organization's Web site, reads, "A spiritually transformed military, with ambassadors for Christ in uniform empowered by the Holy Spirit."
Weinstein has a different interpretation.
"Their purpose is to have Christian officers exercise Biblical leadership to raise up a godly army," he says.
But Carr said the military's position is clear.
"Proselytizing or advancing a religious conviction is not what the nation would have us do and it's not what the military does," Carr said.
The U.S. Justice Department is expected to respond to Hall's lawsuit this week. In the meantime, he continues to work in the military police unit at Fort Riley and plans to leave as soon as his tour of duty expires next year.
-
raves +1 posted Jul 15, 2008 08:38PM GMT
Answered Yes he should because
Last time I checked, this country wasn't a Christian nation. So why do they need a Christian leader? So they can waste time praying to some God might not even exist? Hoping for some God to show up and save the day is not what I call good leadership. -
raves posted Jul 15, 2008 08:19PM GMT
Answered None of the above
hey HH! wow this is different.....well i do believe that no one has the right to judge another but at the same time people get pick on every day about everything. But my question is how can he sue the Army for it, when it was certain people who did the picking. I am sure atheist children get picked at in school but does that mean the person should sue the school? -
raves +1 Jul 15, 2008 08:33PM GMT (edited)Yo Bink!
From what I got out of the article and past instances there is an insitutionalized preference and drive to be not just Christian but certian types of christian are even preferred. In the case of the children I hope everyone fights back but are there really any Atheist children. To me Ateism is an adult decission based on knowledge. But if the school condoned the bullying or enforced a religious program or preference they would be braking federal and consitutional laws. Which seems to also be the case in the Military -
raves Jul 23, 2008 08:18PM GMTyeah i dont really see to many atheist children......but other religions i do. so you mean to tell me the military allowed him to get mistreated. in my opinion he should go after who did the mistreating. it was very childish of them........hell im Christian but i believe everyone should be treated with respect no matter what...except child predators of any kind, i don't like them.....
other than that every one should be treated equally!! -
raves Jul 23, 2008 08:41PM GMTTheir are atheist children. I was one and really didn't even realize it for years. My children were raised with out religion in the home. Now the country tends to shove it down the throats many different ways. Like their friends parents trying to teach them it. Another example of when people should mind their own busines
The Military is the one that mistreated by not onl;y allowing but encouraging this crap. So he is going aftre them -
raves Jul 09, 2008 02:35PM GMTHow the hell do you read that into what I said? You're a bit sanctimious yourself, maybe as much as the guy you wrote about!
Sometimes the protest is just for the sake of attention-getting protest. I chose to believe that is the case here. Not every occasion of complaint is an altrusistic, constitionally inspired, defense of our rights! Sometimes it's just bullshit. -
raves Jul 09, 2008 02:43PM GMTThis is not the first or only time this has been brought up in refernce to the US Military and religious bigotry or discrimination. Sp do ypou back the military on forcing christianity on a soldier or do you back the 1st Amendment?
Do you coach many of your sommenst with religious terminology? -
raves +2 Jul 09, 2008 12:51PM GMT (edited)It says a lot of nothing?? No, it encapsulates everything. Read the article......NO SURPRISES.....meaning it clearly shows what's wrong with our military, our government, and our country's way of thinking.....which has been pathetic for 8 years.
As a writer, I understand that sometimes less, is more. -
raves Jul 09, 2008 12:56PM GMT (edited)No it was ambiguous at best. As a writer as you say you should be clear in your statements. But as a Obama supporter I understand you take his lead and say nothing, thinking it sounds important. At least he and Bush have that in common as well
But I wiil ask. What kind of a writter are you and do you do it for a living? -
raves +1 Jul 09, 2008 03:30PM GMTWell, I appreciate that, but I don't often promote things via sites like SH, since my nom de plume is my real name, and I'm admittedly quite outspoken......you never know what kind of nutjob will track you down.
Back to my posts---constant and consistent??? I can't argue with that, but that just means I believe in what I say. Being inconsistent would be more of an issue, no?? -
raves Jul 09, 2008 04:49PM GMT (edited)I didn't say I don't promote, I pick and choose where to promote. One of the luxuries of not being in it for the money, only for the pleasure of doing it.
BS has been constant and consistent for 8 years, but thankfully Bush will be headed back to the ranch soon so his failures will only be felt by his family, not the world. -
raves +1 Jul 09, 2008 07:52PM GMT (edited)LOL......you just LOVE to assume, don't you??
And I'm not a writter, I'm a writer.....that's the second time you've spelled it incorrectly...should I assume you failed English?
I've been published in a number of highly respected literary publications, magazines, and quarterly's, so....no.....I'm not exactly equal to the kid with his notebook....
I want nothing more than to replace Dumbya with a competent leader who can begin to fix this mess that the Republicans caused. John McSame is definately NOT that person---he's simply more of the same, hence his moniker---and since the only other viable candidate is Obama, I think we need to give him a chance.
Albert Einstein was considered an incompetent
Abe Lincoln brought nothing to the table
Seems the incompetent, and the so-called unaccomplished have done rather well at times. I'm willing to take a chance on someone new, if it doesn't work out, we can replace him in 4 years. I won't be as foolish as the Busheeple were and vote for him twice if he fails. One thing for sure...it can't get any worse.
Answered Yes he should because
HH, I heard about this situation before and I was in no way surprised. The 1st Amendment does guarantee separation of church and state, but what does that mean these days? Almost nothing.And isn't this the day they vote to make it legal to violate our right not to be illegally wiretapped?