Court Martial for sharing Christian faith

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by dukebound85, May 1, 2013.

  1. macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
  2. Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #2
    Yeah, I agree, it's disturbing people would be trying to convert to other religions whilst serving in the military.
     
  3. macrumors G5

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #3
    What I find disturbing is that they are banning proselytizing, yet they don't define it.

     
  4. thread starter macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #4
    Then you must not be in favor of the bill of rights if you truly believe that. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion and all.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #5
    here's one way they define it. From your article ...


    It's really pretty standard stuff. As a California state employee I've been trained numerous times on just this sort of thing. I applaud bosses not assuming their subordinates share and partake in their faith. It's quite liberating.
     
  6. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #6
    They would have to change the uniformed code of military justice to even think about a court martial for this . I would suggest the author read up on court martials also.
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    DesertEagle

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2012
    Location:
    /home @ 127.0.0.1
    #7
    "Private Joker, do you believe in the Virgin Mary?"
     
  8. 63dot, May 2, 2013
    Last edited: May 2, 2013

    macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #8
    Sharing one's faith should be OK. But for any commanding officer to "order" somebody under them to follow any faith is simply wrong. Like the article said, it's different if that officer invites you. There has to be some right to freedom of speech but it's also obvious that any form of coercion should not be tolerated.

    I had a friend who was a company captain in the US Army and he got very gung ho about Amway and shared the concept to fellow soldiers under him. He didn't coerce them but he was told not to talk about Amway and I agree with his superiors. However, had he invited them to a bible study, I don't see a problem with that. I think it should be case by case and while the problems caused from "inviting" fellow soldiers to a MLM business (which can lose money) is quite obvious and not good for the order of the troops, it's not any loss for a soldier to join a bible study brought on by the captain or anybody else. We have freedom of speech and religion, but something like Amway crosses the line. When a soldier gets into the downline of the captain, or even vice versa, a financial relationship is formed which can greatly influence the order of the whole group of soldiers. But it would be a stretch to say that company B got all screwed up because they are in a bible study together. Religion and the free expression of it is commonplace and accepted in the United States, but maybe not so much signing up people for a business opportunity which can lose money. Religion is a strong force here, but nowhere near the passion that can erupt when it comes to business deals. We only have so many cases in court due to religion, but business deals gone bad practically keeps the court system busy all the time. It's common sense.

    Now let's say decades from now the MLM model totally catches on in a manner virtually everybody can make money, then I don't see it as a problem for soldiers to share such business opportunities among the troops, but no MLM is there yet and will currently cause more bad feelings than not in any group of people.
     
  9. Guest

    Sky Blue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    #9
    How is having your commanding officer force you into a religion freedom of religion?
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    #10
    When you serve in the military, you do not follow the same jurisdiction like any ordinary civilian, on active duty you are to follow the military's example and since they are bound to the government, the separation of church and state extends to this branch.

    That's how I see it.
     
  11. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #11
    If I start hassling people at my work place i'll be fired, same deal here.

    We have freedom of speech but there are limits to what we can say and where.
     
  12. Huntn, May 2, 2013
    Last edited: May 2, 2013

    macrumors G3

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #12
    Why are you disturbed? The armed forces have always had Chaplins, but superior officers should not be pressing subordinates to adopt their preferred religion.

    I believe its the standard definition: : to induce someone to convert to one's faith.

    The point of this issue sailed right over your head. There is no move to prevent individuals from worshiping as they see fit.

    In the military (at least when I was in the USN), you could handle problems by writing substandard fitness reports, NJP (Non-judicial punishment), handled at the C.O.s discretion, or a Court Martial. When it comes to punishing an Officer, they might want their day in court if their career is going to be adversely effected. In no way, shape, or form, should a superior be pressuring a junior into making a religious commitment. As far as equals, I could see if someone's proselytizing starts to become an issue in a unit, some action would need to be taken.
     
  13. elistan, May 2, 2013
    Last edited: May 2, 2013

    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #13
    .
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #14
    This didn't happen in a vacuum. Certain areas in the U.S. military have become widely known for religious coercion. For example, in the previous couple of decades, you practically had to be a Baptist** to attend the Air Force Academy. There have been hundreds of articles about it in recent years. It started hitting the news in 2004 or so. Here is an old article about it:

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/2011-03-13-Air_Force_Academy_13_ST_N.htm

    The problem has been described as coercion and bullying by fellow cadets, being tolerated or encouraged by the officer staff, along with officially-sponsored events. In the context of life in an academy, which is intended to be a near-total experience, that is unconstitutional. The orders are "back off". If people refuse to back off, they are disobeying orders, and are subject to discipline. Seems simple to me.

    "What is it about the First Amendment that you don't understand?"


    ** (More correctly, Fundamentalist/Authoritarian (Christian), often Protestant now-- back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, such personalities were more often Catholic.)
     
  15. macrumors G3

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #15
    As I remember to go to a U.S. Military Academy you needed the recommendation of a member of Congress. I could see a wide diversion of standards depending on who you approached to get the recommendation.
     
  16. macrumors 68040

    renewed

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bemalte Blumen duften nicht.
    #16
    What I find disturbing is they are trying to take the right to praise God away from those who protect us. People are treading on thin ice without realizing it.

    God is patient and forgiving but as the past has shown He has His limits.
     
  17. AhmedFaisal, May 2, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 16, 2013

    Guest

    #17
    <snip>
     
  18. macrumors 68040

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #18
    You really don't understand what they are banning, do you?

    There's a difference between praising God and forcing your religion down someone's throat (especially someone you outrank) - you understand that right?

    The former - absolutely protected.

    The latter - absolutely NOT protected - and it shouldn't be.
     
  19. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #19
    Well, I'm sure if He works on it enough He can become even more patient and forgiving.

    Considering some of His past decisions, He could do with a little personal growth and maturation.
     
  20. 63dot, May 2, 2013
    Last edited: May 2, 2013

    macrumors 601

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    Platte
    #20
    There is quite a difference between BAPTIST and FUNDAMENTALIST. I once held somewhat conservative Christian beliefs but never considered it similar to Baptists, which tend to be a conservative yet mainstream church. I am more mainstream Christian these days and may find more in common with a Baptist. Trust me there is quite a big difference between the two. Shamefully, a lot of non mainstream Christians who are conservative wear their non-denominational badge of honor and look down on "established" churches whom they think are lukewarm. And so say Baptist=Fundamentalist would be about the same to say that usually republican members of the evangelical fold like a Church of Christ or Assemblies of God must be the same as Mormons, because they are both usually republicans and probably voted for Mitt Romney in the last election.

    That being said, it doesn't shock me that maybe a lot of Air Force Academy students are Baptists. It is the largest mainline and (usually if white) conservative Christian denomination out there, and ranks up there in terms of sheer numbers with the large group of similarly voting, yet different politically conservative Catholics. While I don't see a lot of fellow green party members going to the Air Force Academy (which I personally don't consider bad in any way), it's still going to likely attract moderates and conservatives much more than liberals.

    Regardless of political leaning, any dedicated student can make this a more than worthy four year education that can prepare a student for further graduate study if they wish. Yes, it does take high grades and a congressional member's approval, but it's no more Harvard than it is some unilateral Baptist Fundamentalist brotherhood.
     
  21. macrumors 65816

    aerok

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2011
    #21
  22. Ugg
    macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #22
    Tempest. Teapot. Non-story.

    It's never been ok to use time paid for by the federal govt. to promote one's own religious values. Much less coerce underlings into believing what you believe.

    Why the outrage?
     
  23. macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    This seems like a good move.
     
  24. macrumors G3

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #24
    Was that the last plague or locust infestation? :rolleyes:

    Stop misrepresenting the situation. The subject is proselytizing, not worship.
     
  25. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2012
    #25
    Why? We try and convert people to our way of thinking on this message board almost every day.
     

Share This Page