These kinds of allegations and lawsuits are becoming more and more common and increasingly disturbing. What the hell is going on the military? It was a decidedly religiose culture when I was in (mid-80s), but there were some open atheists and they didn’t get harrassed for it (not to the point where they needed bodyguards anyway).
Have things changed? has military culture become politicized to the point where only right wing fundies need apply?
Details, a fashion magazine not known for the world’s most hard hitting journalism, actually had one of the best articles I’ve read on this. Unfortunately it’s not available online, but it was a few months ago and IIRC the article title was ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS or something to that effect.
What’s particularly ironic to me about these articles is the disconnect between “turn the other cheek” and “drop a payload on a civilian neighborhood” among military Christians. (Note that I’m not necessarily a pacifist and I certainly believe in having a leading world military, but then I’m not an evangelical either.)
Sampiro, don’t know whether this will help or not, but this site appears to be a combination of both GQ and, apparently, the Details magazine you alluded to. Here is a link to the Details part of it:
And more specifically to their: ARCHIVE
If that’s correct, maybe you can find the article you referenced? Sounds like an interesting read…
This stuff seems to bubble to the surface every once in a while, and they usually seem to be of the Protty persuasion with a strong Calvinist bent. What about all the Catholics?
Could it be that there is a hierarchy of sorts with Christians on top, other faiths somewhere in the middle, and atheists on the bottom? Maybe even a sort of (deep?) division between atheists/soft believers and those for whom faith (of whatever kind) is an important part of their lives?
Actually, this seems to be a continuation of the efforts of some foundation I never heard of (the Military Religious Freedom Foundation - cite) This isn’t the first time -
Maybe they will have better luck with this one, or maybe publicity is all they are after.
Regards,
Shodan
Publicity for what?
Their cause. Or perhaps fund-raising - like I said, their previous law suit didn’t go anywhere, so maybe they need the cash.
Or maybe they are like that O’Hair bitch, and just enjoy the attention. Trolls, in other words.
Regards,
Shodan
Wht do you imagine their “cause” is? It’s not atheism. Many of the grievances from the Air Force Academy came from Catholics and Jews.
This one is from an atheist. If you want to talk about this case, fine - go ahead. If not, fine - we can wait and see if this suit will get thrown out like the previous one did.
Regards,
Shodan
You were trying to suggest this case was connected to a greater atheistic cause. No such cause exists, and the complainant in this case (who did two tours of Iraq as a gunner, if that makes any difference) is not even asking for money. He just wants the harrassment to stop (and if he wasn’t being harrassed, then why was he assigned a bodyguard?).
By the way, the Air Force Academy suit was dismissed only because the judge said the plaintiffs lacked standing because they no longer attended the Academy and could no longer be personally discriminated against, not because it was found that discrimination didn’t exist. It was thrown out on a technicality, not on merit.
But what about that Thou Shalt Not Kill business? What’s the explanation for that?
::d&r::
Because a more accurate translation is Thou Shall Not Murder. War with an enemy isn’t considered murder.
That depends greatly on who’s doing the considering and “collateral damage” is pushing it no matter how much it is rationalized.
That’s an interesting point. I assume you will no longer be claiming that the Paula Jones lawsuit was dismissed for lack of merit.
Oh, and cite?
Regards,
Shodan
Lack of standing and lack of merit are two different things. The PJ suit was dismissed because the judge said that even if everything Jones was alleging was true, it still did not amount to sexual harrassment (because she did not allege either coersion or retribution).
Lack of standing means you are not an allegedly injured party. In other words, I can’t sue the K-Mart if you slip and fall in front of it. Whether the K-Mart is actually lible for your injury is neither here nor there with regard to me.
As is often the case, you seem always to forget the interesting part -
IOW, he settled because the case was about to be reinstated. Cite.
Regards,
Shodan
Too bad that atheists don’t have good moral values like the religious :rolleyes: .
When I enlisted decades ago, one wasn’t permitted to openly be an atheist. One’s records and dogtags said “no preference” where religion was listed. I remember one of the sergeants at the induction center screaming and cursing at a recruit that there were no fucking atheists in HIS army.
I feel that I must be rather shielded from the brunt of nasty attitudes against atheists. I have never felt discriminated against for my lack of belief; the stories brought up here disturb me. What sort of religious accommodations must be provided to soldiers? Are there similar stories of discrimination in the military non-Christian religious persons?
I don’t at all see what Paula Jones has to do with the current case. We are not all DtC, you know – it isn’t your job to try to root out unrelated hypocrisy when this is the place for a particular debate. I should like to see the OP’s issue examined further.
What could a recruit say in response to that sort of diatribe? Did you feel as if it it were common to hide one’s atheism?