View Full Version : Army Punished Atheist Soldier.
Tudor
03-06-2008, 08:08 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080306/ap_on_re_us/military_religion_lawsuit
TOPEKA, Kan. - A soldier claimed Wednesday that his promotion was blocked because he had claimed in a lawsuit that the Army was violating his right to be an atheist.
Attorneys for Spc. Jeremy Hall and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation refiled the federal lawsuit Wednesday in Kansas City, Kan., and added a complaint alleging that the blocked promotion was in response to the legal action.
The suit was filed in September but dropped last month so the new allegations could be included. Among the defendants are Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Hall alleges he was denied his constitutional right to hold a meeting to discuss atheism while he was deployed in Iraq with his military police unit. He says in the new complaint that his promotion was blocked after the commander of the 1st Infantry Division and Fort Riley sent an e-mail post-wide saying Hall had sued.
Fort Riley spokeswoman Alison Kohler said the post "can't comment on ongoing legal matters" and offered no further statement.
According to the lawsuit, Hall was counseled by his platoon sergeant after being informed that his promotion was blocked. He says the sergeant explained that Hall would be "unable to put aside his personal convictions and pray with his troops" and would have trouble bonding with them if promoted to a leadership position.
Hall responded that religion is not a requirement , even though the sergeant wondered how he had rights if atheism wasn't a religion. Hall said atheism is protected under the Army's chaplain's manual.
--click the link for more.
Wooo a article with both the words Atheist and Soldier. That should bring out the loud mouths.
RatedM
03-06-2008, 08:56 PM
I'm an atheist and a future soldier of the US Armed Forces. This guy has the balls to stand up for what is right and I /salute him. Being in AFJROTC, I'm one of VERY VERY VERY few with my lack of belief in God in the unit. I've never had to ever fight someone in an argument due to it.... yet, but they have had prayers like at the annual dining-in, but I'm not going to contest it despite it making me look like a tool for being different.
customerservice
03-06-2008, 09:35 PM
I'm an atheist and a future soldier of the US Armed Forces. This guy has the balls to stand up for what is right and I /salute him. Being in AFJROTC, I'm one of VERY VERY VERY few with my lack of belief in God in the unit. I've never had to ever fight someone in an argument due to it.... yet, but they have had prayers like at the annual dining-in, but I'm not going to contest it despite it making me look like a tool for being different.
wow, AFJROTC what a badass. you "/salute" him huh? good luck in the army.
anyway, as an actual member of the armed forces i have never, ever, ever had an issue with religion. this guy was most likely denied ADVANCEMENT (enlisted personnel are never "promoted") because he was a complete and utter shitbag. notice how he completely goes over the chain of command, sues the secretary of defense. hes in the army, his constitutional rights take second place to good order and discipline.
I don't really see how such beliefs would get in the way of the soldier's leadership abilities.
wow, AFJROTC what a badass. you "/salute" him huh? good luck in the army.
That's not necessary to belittle people like that. As a soldier, you should know better than to treat those that actually want to join like that. All you did here was discourage him and potentially cost us a good soldier.
And yes, that's coming from someone who is also "an actual member of the armed forces" as you felt the need to put it...get over it. You know as well as I do that army training isn't that hard as long as you want to get through it.
Anyway, these are some serious charges...I find it hard to believe that religious differences were actually cited in his promotion packet as a reason to not promote him. That kind of thing shouldn't get far before being flagged for inappropriate and unconstitutional. I'm wondering if it wasn't just that specific sergeant saying things he shouldn't have that did not reflect the truth of the matter.
I can understand flagging his record because he has a legal issue like this against the military, which is actually standard and prevents the flagged soldier from being promoted or deployed until the issue is resolved. It's usually to protect both the military and the soldier, it's not a punishment. Depending on the soldier's attitude following his suit's verdict, it might be unwise to promote him if he's demoralized and angry. It's nothing personal, and if this is indeed the case, I can understand why they paused his promotion.
Certainly awkward to see that the Secretary of Defense was even named in the lawsuit. He doesn't review every single promotion packet. Naming anyone other than those directly involved as a defendant is extreme, in my opinion.
I also have to wonder if he did anything to overtly broadcast his atheism in a way that isolated himself from others or made others uncomfortable. It works both ways.
texmaster
03-06-2008, 11:10 PM
wow, AFJROTC what a badass. you "/salute" him huh? good luck in the army.
anyway, as an actual member of the armed forces i have never, ever, ever had an issue with religion. this guy was most likely denied ADVANCEMENT (enlisted personnel are never "promoted") because he was a complete and utter shitbag. notice how he completely goes over the chain of command, sues the secretary of defense. hes in the army, his constitutional rights take second place to good order and discipline.
Exactly.
Amazing how quickly some will blindly believe someone just because they file a lawsuit :rolleyes:
Exactly.
Amazing how quickly some will blindly believe someone just because they file a lawsuit :rolleyes:
I only said his religious beliefs wouldn't get in the way of his leadership abilities. Whether the charges are true or not is yet to be seen.
texmaster
03-06-2008, 11:19 PM
I only said his religious beliefs wouldn't get in the way of his leadership abilities. Whether the charges are true or not is yet to be seen.
I wasn't talking to you individually.
I wasn't talking to you individually.
I know, I just wanted to clarify my post, because it could have been taken either way.
silverspade14
03-06-2008, 11:49 PM
I have no doubt this could happen. I get it all the time from people who don't even seem that religious.
Eminem
03-06-2008, 11:57 PM
I have a feeling that he was one of those people who was openly atheist, always trying to convince others and make them feel stupid for believing in any religion. That would definitely be a bad quality for a leader, but its not his atheism that is being judged. Just his competetive spirit and God Complex.
customerservice
03-07-2008, 12:27 AM
That's not necessary to belittle people like that. As a soldier, you should know better than to treat those that actually want to join like that. All you did here was discourage him and potentially cost us a good soldier.
And yes, that's coming from someone who is also "an actual member of the armed forces" as you felt the need to put it...get over it. You know as well as I do that army training isn't that hard as long as you want to get through it.
i'm fully over it. great that he wants to join. if he really wants to, one person on EBWF isn't going to change that.
that doesnt mean i'm going to take his jrotc experience with anything less than a grain of salt. i thought people who may not know that jrotc is a high school program should know that. it bugs me when people speak about those programs as though they are all "in the know" on military issues. that's all. its like those police explorers who carry around a radio on their belt and a little felt badge on their shirt...
but seriously ratedm, thank you for serving our country.
Nefarious
03-07-2008, 02:58 AM
pushing an issue is different then expecting to be accepted. This is the liberal "entitlement" syndrome.
Tudor
03-07-2008, 04:10 AM
pushing an issue is different then expecting to be accepted. This is the liberal "entitlement" syndrome.
What the hell proof do you have of this? all anyone has been doing is making assumptions that he must have been "a pushy Atheist", yet there is no proof of that. His commanding officer even said that it was part of the reason he was denied a promotion. This really isn't that suprising for the military, but most people will be apologetic and assume the victim deserved it because every has the "If you're not white, uppclass and christian, you don't deserve to be treated equal" syndrome.
What the hell proof do you have of this? all anyone has been doing is making assumptions that he must have been "a pushy Atheist", yet there is no proof of that. His commanding officer even said that it was part of the reason he was denied a promotion. This really isn't that suprising for the military, but most people will be apologetic and assume the victim deserved it because every has the "If you're not white, uppclass and christian, you don't deserve to be treated equal" syndrome.
His commanding officer didn't say that, an NCO did. There's a difference. Apparently the reason some of us feel comfortable making that assumption is because we know enough about the army's ways and structure to know the likely events in which someone would get denied a promotion, and this comes up at the top of the list of possibilities. Perhaps until you can demonstrate a knowledge of the basic things in the military such as officers versus NCO's, you should hold your tongue when you think about lecturing people about the way the military does things.
But look who's making the assumptions here: you assume this is standard practice of the military to practice religious prejudice. You assume we all automatically display racism, classism, and religious bias simply for NOT blindly siding with the plaintiff.
Take your prejudices against the military and anyone who doesn't instantly and blindly bandwagon with the idea that the military must be guilty anytime anyone alleges any little thing against them, and shove them.
Stanky105
03-07-2008, 06:39 AM
But look who's making the assumptions here: you assume this is standard practice of the military to practice religious prejudice.
Well, gee golly, its not like they never had problems with racism and sexism, their record just reaks of a nice clean slate, as long as you don't ask, don't tell, that is.
That said, the soldier in this article does indeed sound like a very outspoken person who is just causing a shit, and I am not giving the story any more credit than that. We may eventually find out more, and we can comment better then.
Take your prejudices against the military and anyone who doesn't instantly and blindly bandwagon with the idea that the military must be guilty anytime anyone alleges any little thing against them, and shove them.
Spare me, the military is a big organization of humans, thats it. Don't treat it like its holy.
IrishNed
03-07-2008, 07:48 AM
... But look who's making the assumptions here: you assume this is standard practice of the military to practice religious prejudice. You assume we all automatically display racism, classism, and religious bias simply for NOT blindly siding with the plaintiff.
Take your prejudices against the military and anyone who doesn't instantly and blindly bandwagon with the idea that the military must be guilty anytime anyone alleges any little thing against them, and shove them.I side with Specialist Hall, but not blindly. It's not the Military per se, it's a People thing. The U.S. Army's First Infantry Diviision (Red One)is made up of people; and it's not unusual when people get to positions of authority, for some to push their beliefs on their subordinates, most of whom will 'go along' to 'get along.' I spent enough time in the Military to have personally witnessed Racism, anti-Semitism, and aggressive attempts to Evangelize enlisted folk by Officers and Senior NCO's, some 'Born Again' Christians. The Racism and anti-Semitism were/are even more pronounced in some Southern States' National Guard Units.
Specialist Hall is an MP in 'Red One.' He decided that 'going along' to get a promotion to a higher enlisted rank by denying his true beliefs was too big a price to pay. But his NCO and Company Commander wouldn't accept that. I admire a person who stands by his principles like Hall. He can't be looking forward to a very rosy career in the Military; but hopefully, he'll find something else.
Duke Dicky
03-07-2008, 09:12 AM
"One of our members held a MAAF meeting at his base here in Iraq and ended up being harassed and threatened with UCMJ action by a fundamentalist officer who posed as a "freethinker" in order to get in to the meeting. I forwarded the member's actual report to Jason, but I've done a sanitized write-up (deleted names and references to installations) on what happened for his protection because I expect this to make the rounds of the various interested parties. Here's the story I'm circulating:
Thought you'd be interested in this report of the first-ever meeting of Atheist service-members in Iraq under the umbrella of the MAAF-Iraq chapter of the Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers.
One of our members, a young Atheist enlisted soldier, thought he would like to see if he could generate some interest in MAAF meetings at his Forward Operating Base (FOB) here in Iraq (not the base I'm at, by the way). He got things coordinated and started hanging flyers, and after weeks of having to re-hang his flyers almost daily because some vandal kept tearing them down, he finally succeeded in having a small MAAF meeting. I wasn't there because the meeting wasn't on my FOB, but I knew he was holding it and was expecting to hear from him after the meeting. Keep in mind that this young soldier did everything right - he went through the Chaplain's office and jumped through all the hoops it takes to legally hold meetings that are religiously or philosophically based. Four soldiers attended this meeting - all of them very junior enlisted soldiers with the exception of one Major (an O-4), who claimed to be a "freethinker".
Well, to make a very long story a little shorter, the Major turned out to be a fundamentalist Christian who verbally berated the other attendees, accused them of plotting against Christians and disrespecting soldiers who have died protecting the Constitution, and threatened them with punishment under the UCMJ for their activities (said they were "going down") and said he would do whatever it took to shut the meetings down. Keep in mind that by this point, he had two of the attendees (one soldier fled when the shouting started) standing at the position of attention so that he could yell at them, berate them, and humiliate them. This apparently went on for several minutes at which time the Major shut down the meeting by saying he wasn't some "push-over Chaplain" and that he would not tolerate the meetings to continue.
The young MAAF member who hosted the meeting is absolutely freaked out about what happened, but he said he's going to continue with the meetings and isn't going to be bullied by the prayer warriors. I've advised him to immediately notify the Chaplain sponsor of what happened to get guidance while I try to figure out what to do next. I should hear something back from him tonight sometime and there's even a small possibility I might be able to score a mission to his FOB and attend one of his meetings in the next few weeks (if I do, I'll meet with the Chaplain in person).
As for immediate action, he's going to get me the names of his Chaplain sponsor and the name of the officer who disrupted the meeting. My intent right now is to make a formal report to the most senior Chaplain I can find along with possibly an Equal Opportunity complaint against the officer if we can get him fully identified. I may not be eligible to make that complaint because I wasn't there, but I can at least smooth the way for this young troop to make one if he elects to. At the very least, I can make the EO office formally aware of what happened there.
More info will follow when I get it, but right now, feel free to disseminate this information since I've intentionally sanitized it for names and locations. I will be happy to forward any words of support to him if they get mailed to my email address - he could really use some encouragement right now, I think."
I side with Specialist Hall, but not blindly. It's not the Military per se, it's a People thing. The U.S. Army's First Infantry Diviision (Red One)is made up of people; and it's not unusual when people get to positions of authority, for some to push their beliefs on their subordinates, most of whom will 'go along' to 'get along.' I spent enough time in the Military to have personally witnessed Racism, anti-Semitism, and aggressive attempts to Evangelize enlisted folk by Officers and Senior NCO's, some 'Born Again' Christians. The Racism and anti-Semitism were/are even more pronounced in some Southern States' National Guard Units.
Specialist Hall is an MP in 'Red One.' He decided that 'going along' to get a promotion to a higher enlisted rank by denying his true beliefs was too big a price to pay. But his NCO and Company Commander wouldn't accept that. I admire a person who stands by his principles like Hall. He can't be looking forward to a very rosy career in the Military; but hopefully, he'll find something else.
See, that I can accept. Blaming individuals involved for doing something that is not truly condoned throughout the whole military is just fine for me, especially when you can site personal experience that would make you think that's what's going on. I can accept that and admit it could also be possible.
Well, gee golly, its not like they never had problems with racism and sexism, their record just reaks of a nice clean slate, as long as you don't ask, don't tell, that is.
Never said they didn't. But to suggest it's an official policy or something that is constant and consistent throughout is irresponsible and ignorant.
Spare me, the military is a big organization of humans, thats it. Don't treat it like its holy.
I would hardly consider telling someone to stop automatically assuming the military is completely guilty and people who speak against it are completely innocent as treating the military as holy. Yes, the military has its problems, it makes bad moves. It's not evil, though, and just because someone feels they have been wronged by the military, as opposed to irresponsible individuals within the military, doesn't automatically make it so every single time.
Grow up: give people on both sides of any dispute a fair shake instead of latching onto key words intermixed between disputable facts to make a decision.
Stanky105
03-07-2008, 03:41 PM
My point was that if I was to picture you speaking your last 2 posts out loud, you would be yelling and flailing while convulsing in a chair, and I attempted to slap you. If you had simply stated:
give people on both sides of any dispute a fair shake
instead of:
Take your prejudices against the military and anyone who doesn't instantly and blindly bandwagon with the idea that the military must be guilty anytime anyone alleges any little thing against them, and shove them.
your point would have been short and clear. The military organization does indeed have some history of bigotry and fucked up rules, this doesn't in any way make all servicemen evil, nobody said it did.
My point was that if I was to picture you speaking your last 2 posts out loud, you would be yelling and flailing while convulsing in a chair, and I attempted to slap you. If you had simply stated:
instead of:
your point would have been short and clear. The military organization does indeed have some history of bigotry and fucked up rules, this doesn't in any way make all servicemen evil, nobody said it did.
That's a wonderful assumption that I'd be flailing about. You can shove that one too. Who the fuck are you to think you know whether I'm emotional and unhinged over something just because you don't like what I say through text?
Once again, just because someone tells someone else off, doesn't make him a raving lunatic. So chill the fuck out, get off my balls, and once again: get the fuck over it.
And if you think that guy wasn't making generalized statements about the military, maybe you need to reread this...
This really isn't that suprising for the military, but most people will be apologetic and assume the victim deserved it because every has the "If you're not white, uppclass and christian, you don't deserve to be treated equal" syndrome.
My response was more than warranted. So piss off with your lecturing me about ranting and raving and my word choice.
Stanky105
03-07-2008, 04:21 PM
That's a wonderful assumption that I'd be flailing about. You can shove that one too. Who the fuck are you to think you know whether I'm emotional and unhinged over something just because you don't like what I say through text?
Once again, just because someone tells someone else off, doesn't make him a raving lunatic. So chill the fuck out, get off my balls, and once again: get the fuck over it.
LOL, oh the irony. You need a hug.
And if you think that guy wasn't making generalized statements about the military, maybe you need to reread this....
Well, what he said has some basis of truth, although I would disagree with the "upperclass" part, if anybody has had available power to avoid military service it would be them. I suppose I need to state that of course not all upper class citizens avoid the military, so you don't flail off and write another paragraph stating that some do and some don't.
The military has continuously been moving in the direction of equality though, I don't deny that. I would simply not be surprised if being an open atheist would snag some problems, it sure as fuck does in most areas of government.
My response was more than warranted. So piss off with your lecturing me about ranting and raving and my word choice.
Well, its just that you have a lot of rant and not much meaning.
LOL, oh the irony. You need a hug.
What crawled in your ass and died? What the fuck is your problem? i didn't even say anything wrong but you feel this need to patronize and talk down to me and be an ass. What's the fucking deal?
Well, what he said has some basis of truth, although I would disagree with the "upperclass" part, if anybody has had available power to avoid military service it would be them. I suppose I need to state that of course not all upper class citizens avoid the military, so you don't flail off and write another paragraph stating that some do and some don't.
Again, with the "flailing" bullshit. Where the fuck do you get "flailing" from? Why are you targeting me with your horseshit? Seriously, get the fuck off the internet and go address whatever's really pissing you off instead of taking it out on strangers on the internet. It's only the mature thing to do.
And for the record: I come from a fairly wealthy family, wealthy enough across all branches and generations to not need to serve, but someone in each family has all the way back to the Revolution. So to that assertion all I'd do is laugh at how stupid you sound suggesting it.
The military has continuously been moving in the direction of equality though, I don't deny that. I would simply not be surprised if being an open atheist would snag some problems, it sure as fuck does in most areas of government.
Not in my and, apparently, many others' experiences. Once again, it's not the military, its individuals within the military that would still be assholes like this in any other line of work.
Well, its just that you have a lot of rant and not much meaning.
And that warrants you busting my chops and acting like an asshole? get off your high horse. You're the one flailing about what's being said in this thread. I'm seriously sitting here either rolling my eyes or chuckling to myself over some of the audacity displayed by some here, and nothing more.
I'm done putting up with your shit. You sound ridiculous trying to talk about me and how you "know" I'm physically responding to everything. But you go ahead and keep on going and show the whole world how inept you are at actually making a point about what you disagree with so you have to comment on the people making the statements instead of the statements themselves to make yourself feel smart.
Stanky105
03-08-2008, 12:02 AM
What crawled in your ass and died? What the fuck is your problem? i didn't even say anything wrong but you feel this need to patronize and talk down to me and be an ass. What's the fucking deal?
*hugs you* Shh, Shh.
And for the record: I come from a fairly wealthy family, wealthy enough across all branches and generations to not need to serve, but someone in each family has all the way back to the Revolution. So to that assertion all I'd do is laugh at how stupid you sound suggesting it.
I suppose I need to state that of course not all upper class citizens avoid the military, so you don't flail off and write another paragraph stating that some do and some don't. .
*sighs* :banghead::banghead:
Not in my and, apparently, many others' experiences. Once again, it's not the military, its individuals within the military that would still be assholes like this in any other line of work.
I am simply stating that I would not be surprised to hear than an atheist ran into some bumps. (Although in my opinion the person in the article is purposely pushing buttons, like I already said.) The military organization does have bias in its history, wether it come directly from certain enlisted percentages from different social groups, biggoted higher ups or messy "laws" that try to fudge issues. (Don't ask, don't tell.) But no, the concept of "military" itself cannot be biggoted, since it has no consciousness, if that is your only point?
And that warrants you busting my chops and acting like an asshole? get off your high horse. You're the one flailing about what's being said in this thread. I'm seriously sitting here either rolling my eyes or chuckling to myself over some of the audacity displayed by some here, and nothing more.
I'm done putting up with your shit. You sound ridiculous trying to talk about me and how you "know" I'm physically responding to everything. But you go ahead and keep on going and show the whole world how inept you are at actually making a point about what you disagree with so you have to comment on the people making the statements instead of the statements themselves to make yourself feel smart.
Rar!!! Rar Rar Rar!
Seriously, grow the fuck up, and quit hounding me over "flailing" when I did no such thing. You're acting like a jackass.
Stanky105
03-08-2008, 12:20 AM
Seriously, grow the fuck up, and quit hounding me over "flailing" when I did no such thing. You're acting like a jackass.
The original point of my posting was to point out that the military indeed does not have a clean slate and a suspicious eye is not unjustified, the concept of which appeared to be the thing that set you off to begin with.
Ill repeat my last post: I am simply stating that I would not be surprised to hear than an atheist ran into some bumps. (Although in my opinion the person in the article is purposely pushing buttons, like I already said.) The military organization does have bias in its history, wether it come directly from certain enlisted percentages from different social groups, biggoted higher ups or messy "laws" that try to fudge issues. (Don't ask, don't tell.) But no, the concept of "military" itself cannot be biggoted, since it has no consciousness, if that is your only point?
The original point of my posting was to point out that the military indeed does not have a clean slate and a suspicious eye is not unjustified, the concept of which appeared to be the thing that set you off to begin with.
Then you were mistaken, and look fucking stupid for how you reacted to me for it.
What set me off was someone copping the attitude that the military MUST be guilty simply because a member of a minority group felt wronged by it without considering any of the details regarding the case. That's the same attitude that when it hears about someone in the military raping a local thinks that's a condoned and promoted part of military culture.
I never said the military has a clean slate.
I never said the military was innocent.
I never said the military never makes a wrong move or decision.
So shut the fuck up, and quit acting like I'm some ignorant kid. Read my posts and don't fucking assume that because I say something that disagrees with one extreme I must be promoting the other extreme instead of a moderate view similar to your own.
You read something into my posts that wasn't there, that I never said, and tried to belittle me and provoke me, acting like a fucking jackass, and ruining an otherwise interesting conversation.
Just because I refuse to blindly support the plaintiff doesn't mean I blindly support the military.
And before you accuse me of "flailing about" again, I'm not. I'm not uppety, excitable or otherwise jumpy or anxious. I'm annoyed. That's all. I'm annoyed that you felt the need to single me out and patronize and belittle and mock me over sentiments I never even expressed in manners that were unnecessary, immature, and served no purpose in carrying an intellectual conversation forward.
My point was that the plaintiff most likely did indeed do something related to him being an atheist that reasonably would annoy the people around him, and invite ill will towards himself that was not a product of these people simply disliking atheists like he claims. While these actions against him are not necessarily appropriate and actually do illustrate a degree of abuse of power and those responsible do need punishment of some kind for it, the extent that he is taking this lawsuit is possibly an indicator of how obnoxious he might have been about his atheism around his unit. There is no reason for the Secretary of Defense to be named as a defendant in this case, that's excessive. Beyond the individuals that actually made comments regarding his atheism as a part of official decision making regarding him, no one else needs to be named in this trial.
That is my point. The past mis-deeds of the military have no bearing in this. They exist, sure, but they are unrelated to this case and do not happen to be relevant to this particular case. All that is relevant are the comments regarding religious preference used in official decision making regarding the career of a soldier.
Stanky105
03-08-2008, 12:46 AM
Well, in that page of angst you said several things that I wanted to hear from you. My work here is done.
Well, in that page of angst you said several things that I wanted to hear from you. My work here is done.
What work? What I said there is what I've been saying the whole damn time? And what angst? I have no angst, smart guy, all I have is a feeling of being dogged by some jerkoff who thinks he knows something about me that I don't but isn't true.
Get off your high horse, you don't know shit about what you're talking about in regards to me. You say you "got me to say what you wanted" but I said it well before you started this crusade of busting my chops as if I said the polar opposite of what you wanted to hear. But the bottom line is I didn't say what you didn't want to hear and just because I don't say exactly what you want doesn't make me automatically saying the opposite of it.
And just because I get annoyed at someone nagging me and heckling me does not make me flailing and full of angst. Get a fucking clue: if someone pulled this shit on you, you'd be annoyed too. Go crawl back under your rock.
IrishNed
03-08-2008, 07:21 AM
"One of our members held a MAAF meeting at his base here in Iraq and ended up being harassed and threatened with UCMJ action by a fundamentalist officer who posed as a "freethinker" in order to get in to the meeting. ... Here's the story I'm circulating:
Well, to make a very long story a little shorter, the Major turned out to be a fundamentalist Christian who verbally berated the other attendees, accused them of plotting against Christians and disrespecting soldiers who have died protecting the Constitution, and threatened them with punishment under the UCMJ for their activities (said they were "going down") and said he would do whatever it took to shut the meetings down. Keep in mind that by this point, he had two of the attendees (one soldier fled when the shouting started) standing at the position of attention so that he could yell at them, berate them, and humiliate them. This apparently went on for several minutes at which time the Major shut down the meeting by saying he wasn't some "push-over Chaplain" and that he would not tolerate the meetings to continue. ...
As for immediate action, ... My intent right now is to make a formal report to the most senior Chaplain I can find along with possibly an Equal Opportunity complaint against the officer if we can get him fully identified. I may not be eligible to make that complaint because I wasn't there, but I can at least smooth the way for this young troop to make one if he elects to. At the very least, I can make the EO office formally aware of what happened there.You, yourself, tell us you weren't at the meeting; so everything you report is 'Hearsay.' Even if you complain to the E.O. Officer or the I.G., it would not be about anything about which you have first hand knowledge or which directly affected you. So, you don't have a Case!
Tthe Major was out of line (i.e., misrepresenting himself as a "freethinker" to gain entry to your friend's meeting, and then disrupting the meeting: pulling Rank and threatening attendees). Unfortunately, low ranking enlisted types don't have much of a 'track record' when they go up against Field Grade Officers. Welcome to the U.S. Army!
Next MAAF Meeting, check everyone's dogtags before allowing them entry. If the Major shows up, tell him it's an EM-only meeting.
Next MAAF Meeting, check everyone's dogtags before allowing them entry. If the Major shows up, tell him it's an EM-only meeting.
Or start voice-recordings of meetings. That way, if the major denies saying something that comes up on an audio recording, *he's* looking at charges of lying to a field-grade himself. Definitely not a good thing. Remember, it's all about covering yourself and knowing how to play the game.
Dayve
03-08-2008, 10:19 AM
Lol... Christians trying to suppress people who don't believe in their fairytale, i'm so not surprised.
Duke Dicky
03-08-2008, 10:50 AM
You, yourself, tell us you weren't at the meeting; so everything you report is 'Hearsay.' Even if you complain to the E.O. Officer or the I.G., it would not be about anything about which you have first hand knowledge or which directly affected you. So, you don't have a Case!
Tthe Major was out of line (i.e., misrepresenting himself as a "freethinker" to gain entry to your friend's meeting, and then disrupting the meeting: pulling Rank and threatening attendees). Unfortunately, low ranking enlisted types don't have much of a 'track record' when they go up against Field Grade Officers. Welcome to the U.S. Army!
Next MAAF Meeting, check everyone's dogtags before allowing them entry. If the Major shows up, tell him it's an EM-only meeting.
Those aren't my words, but I hear what you're saying.
Lol... Christians trying to suppress people who don't believe in their fairytale, i'm so not surprised.
About as expected as you trying to suppress people who don't agree with your outlook on religion.
IrishNed
03-08-2008, 03:04 PM
Those aren't my words, but I hear what you're saying.Isn't this a direct quote from one of your earlier posts?My intent right now is to make a formal report to the most senior Chaplain I can find along with possibly an Equal Opportunity complaint against the officer if we can get him fully identified. I may not be eligible to make that complaint because I wasn't there, but I can at least smooth the way for this young troop to make one if he elects to. Now you tell us referring to those direct cites from your earlier postings: "Those aren't my words ..." Did I miss something?At the very least, I can make the EO office formally aware of what happened thereNo, you can't. because according to your own account of the Incident, you weren't there, either as a participant nor an eyewitness. The EO Officer (or NCO) might give you a sympathetic ear but that's about all they can do, given the fact that you were not directly involved.
You should be free to advise and/or help your fellow MAAF members who were present at the Meeting with any action they choose to take against the Major; but I reiterate what I wrote earlier: You don't have a case!
I 0_0 I
03-08-2008, 04:14 PM
I'm an atheist and a future soldier of the US Armed Forces. This guy has the balls to stand up for what is right and I /salute him. Being in AFJROTC, I'm one of VERY VERY VERY few with my lack of belief in God in the unit. I've never had to ever fight someone in an argument due to it.... yet, but they have had prayers like at the annual dining-in, but I'm not going to contest it despite it making me look like a tool for being different.
hahahha.
You are one of those kids that parade around, dressed up pretending to be real soldiers. Fucking disturbing to say the least. :lmao::lmao::lmao:
Something else I just thought of is this: what would the soldier's company/battery/troop commander and First Sergeant think about another officer coming into his AO throwing his weight around. While they may not be able to lock-up a Major, you can bet their Battalion Commander and Command Sergeant Major would be interested in why as well. It might also be worth bringing the chain of command in to the Company Commander's Open Door Policy to get a feel for things as well.
Duke Dicky
03-08-2008, 07:16 PM
Isn't this a direct quote from one of your earlier posts? Now you tell us referring to those direct cites from your earlier postings: "Those aren't my words ..." Did I miss something?No, you can't. because according to your own account of the Incident, you weren't there, either as a participant nor an eyewitness. The EO Officer (or NCO) might give you a sympathetic ear but that's about all they can do, given the fact that you were not directly involved.
You should be free to advise and/or help your fellow MAAF members who were present at the Meeting with any action they choose to take against the Major; but I reiterate what I wrote earlier: You don't have a case!
Look at the quotes around the paragraphs. It's a story I pasted that seemed relevant to the discussion. Does that clear it up? You don't have to tell me I don't have a case, I'm not them.
The only smart people are atheists.
Silverback
03-09-2008, 03:06 AM
I think there is alot of armchair legal guessing here. I would really like to know how he was conducting himself as he to was preaching his atheism. That is not to be knocking him for being one but there is no doubt that some of them preach it just as harshly as some religous people do. There really does seem to be a lack of chain of command here. I just want to really know about his conduct before he filed the lawsuit and is the lawsuit possibly just a gainer for him and possibly a get out card. I was not there but these are my questions.
ThoughtCriminal
03-09-2008, 03:19 AM
Does anyone find it ridiculous that someone would want to hold an official meeting about how they don't believe in something?
I don't believe in Leprechauns, but I'm not going start a meeting to discuss the fact that I don't believe in them, that's just fucking stupid. Do you really need group solidarity for a non belief?
I understand the kid, went through the proper channels and chain of command and was allowed to hold the meeting, he shouldn't face disciplinary action for something he's allowed to do. I just don't see the point in the first place.
Duke Dicky
03-09-2008, 04:19 AM
Does anyone find it ridiculous that someone would want to hold an official meeting about how they don't believe in something?
I don't believe in Leprechauns, but I'm not going start a meeting to discuss the fact that I don't believe in them, that's just fucking stupid. Do you really need group solidarity for a non belief?
I understand the kid, went through the proper channels and chain of command and was allowed to hold the meeting, he shouldn't face disciplinary action for something he's allowed to do. I just don't see the point in the first place.
I'd agree with you, if only 90% of the world didn't believe in Leprechauns.
I'd agree with you, if only 90% of the world didn't believe in Leprechauns.
What does that have to do with it?
Dayve
03-09-2008, 05:45 AM
About as expected as you trying to suppress people who don't agree with your outlook on religion.
Show me where i've ever done that? I've debated with people who don't agree with my outlook on religion, i've argued (sometimes very intensely) with people who don't agree with my outlook on religion, but i don't ever recall trying to suppress anybody that doesn't agree with my outlook on religion.
I don't recall walking into a church and telling people i'm going to do everything in my power to close the church down. I've never stopped my mother putting up a Christmas tree for my two sisters, or buying them easter eggs.
Show me where i've ever done that? I've debated with people who don't agree with my outlook on religion, i've argued (sometimes very intensely) with people who don't agree with my outlook on religion, but i don't ever recall trying to suppress anybody that doesn't agree with my outlook on religion.
I don't recall walking into a church and telling people i'm going to do everything in my power to close the church down. I've never stopped my mother putting up a Christmas tree for my two sisters, or buying them easter eggs.
Honestly, Christmas trees and Easter eggs have nothing to do with Christianity.
You've expressed time and again a desire to force all religion out of this world. You refer to it as debating people who don't agree with you, but in those debates, you tend to say things that make people believe that if you had the means to do so, you'd forcefully remove religion. If it's not your intent to send that message, you need to readjust how you debate it.
Nocturnal
03-09-2008, 04:12 PM
What the hell proof do you have of this? all anyone has been doing is making assumptions that he must have been "a pushy Atheist", yet there is no proof of that. His commanding officer even said that it was part of the reason he was denied a promotion. This really isn't that suprising for the military, but most people will be apologetic and assume the victim deserved it because every has the "If you're not white, uppclass and christian, you don't deserve to be treated equal" syndrome.
Of course he was a pushy atheist. What else should we do with our time besides persecute the christians?
Swindler
03-09-2008, 06:00 PM
jesus 1
soldier 0
Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers, therefore, it's a tie game.
Duke Dicky
03-09-2008, 06:11 PM
What does that have to do with it?
Everything, with irrational beliefs come irrational consequences. Said consequences were probably the talking points.
Everything, with irrational beliefs come irrational consequences. Said consequences were probably the talking points.
That's your opinion that the beliefs are irrational. That's pretty arrogant of you. Almost like a god complex.
Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers, therefore, it's a tie game.
2che
..........
Duke Dicky
03-09-2008, 06:18 PM
That's your opinion that the beliefs are irrational. That's pretty arrogant of you. Almost like a god complex.
Actually no, it's not my opinion that believing in something without evidence or reason is irrational. That's the definition of irrational.
Actually no, it's not my opinion that believing in something without evidence or reason is irrational. That's the definition of irrational.
I could easily turn this into a religious debate by saying "prove it" and launch you into a tirade of quoting impossible feats from the Bible as "proof" God doesn't exist, which it doesn't since it's not the word of God, and even if it would disprove Christianity you'd still have a plethora of other religions to disprove beyond it.
But that's not what this thread is about. Please, save your arrogance about your beliefs for somewhere else.
Tudor
03-09-2008, 07:13 PM
I could easily turn this into a religious debate by saying "prove it" and launch you into a tirade of quoting impossible feats from the Bible as "proof" God doesn't exist, which it doesn't since it's not the word of God, and even if it would disprove Christianity you'd still have a plethora of other religions to disprove beyond it.
But that's not what this thread is about. Please, save your arrogance about your beliefs for somewhere else.
I love when Christians say "Prove it". As if the burden of proof relies on the non-believer.
Hey TFS. I have a imaginary friend who created the world, you and me and everything in between. I even have a book that HE wrote last week that proves it. Now TFS please, disprove my imaginary friend. Good luck!
I love when Christians say "Prove it". As if the burden of proof relies on the non-believer.
Hey TFS. I have a imaginary friend who created the world, you and me and everything in between. I even have a book that HE wrote last week that proves it. Now TFS please, disprove my imaginary friend. Good luck!
Apples to oranges: God didn't write the Bible, he didn't even provide dictation for it.
Maybe you and your friend could invest the time it takes to learn about the belief systems before trying to belittle them.
That or take the time to realize I said I "would" say "prove it" but I said I'd rather avoid the religion debate because they never go anywhere anyway. I'm not going to change your arrogant minds, you're not going to disprove my religion. I just saved you, me Duke Dicky, and everyone else 30 pages of arguing in circles.
Now let's get back on topic...
This guy possibly went out of his way to make people uncomfortable with his opinions, acting arrogant about them like you two tried to do here with me in your statements, and it brought unwanted negative attention, and also unjustifiable official action against him. He should learn to be more respectful of others' differing views. Those individuals that blockaded his promotion in an attempt to punish him for the different belief he has should learn to be more tolerant and learn how to handle situations in which other people make them uncomfortable.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.