Pentagon Defends Unconstitutional Policy Against Soldiers Sharing Faith

Pentagon Defends Unconstitutional Policy Against Soldiers Sharing Faith – Big Government

Pentagon personnel responded to Breitbart News’ report about court-martialing service members who share their faith in the military, which the Pentagon confirmed on May 1, and the Air Force on May 2 separately confirmed a second time.

.

Now the Pentagon claims the opposite. But these new statements instead only compound the problem, as the Pentagon’s new definitions for terms squarely contradict what the dictionary says those terms mean. All this has taken place as the first flag officer in the military has stepped forward to defy the unconstitutional policy.

In an official statement yesterday, Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a spokesman for the Pentagon’s Defense Press Office, responded to Breitbart News’ reports by saying, “Service members can share their faith (evangelize), but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith to one’s beliefs (proselytization).”

Unfortunately for the Obama administration’s leaders in the Pentagon, those definitions are absurdly false, and only confirm a central concern in the earlier columns. These definitions of evangelizing and proselytizing are contradicted by (1) general dictionaries, (2) legal dictionaries, and (3) theological dictionaries. We have not located any dictionary that supports the Pentagon’s novel and unprecedented definitions for these well-known words.

Evidently it all depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is, which is a debate the country thought was resolved in 2000. Even so, when trying to say the press is wrong, don’t do it by inventing new definitions that anyone with a sixth-grade education and access to a dictionary can confirm are utterly false.

The words “evangelize” and “proselytize” have identical meanings when referring to Christians. So to make proselyting illegal is to make evangelizing illegal.

The dictionary defines “evangelize” as “to convert to Christianity,” or “to preach the [Christian] gospel.” Likewise, the dictionary defines “proselytize” as “to convert or attempt to convert.” They both mean sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Two things to note. First, “evangelizing” means to try to persuade your listener to become a Christian, which the Pentagon just reaffirmed for the second time in two days is forbidden in the military. Second, contrary to the Obama-Holder DoD’s definition, “proselytizing” carries no connotation whatsoever of “force,” or “intrusive attempts” to do anything.

Everyone can agree that no military commander should use his authority to coerce a subordinate to adopt religious views that violate the subordinate’s conscience. But that suggestion is a strawman argument, as “proselytizing” is something entirely different.

Not only that, but this suggestion is further confirmed as false because then our earlier reports discussing chaplains would be irrelevant. An infantry sergeant answers to an infantry lieutenant, who answers to an infantry captain, and so on up to the general commanding the infantry division.

So why was the Washington Post reporting that the Pentagon’s meeting(s) with Weinstein discussed chaplains being court martialed (that is – criminally prosecuted under military law) for sharing the gospel with a fellow service-member? The chaplain is not in the chain of command. The chaplain has no authority with which to coerce the other service member.

Instead, it looks like the Obama-Hagel administration was caught red-handed contemplating policies that violate the rights of American service members, and they are literally attempting to rewrite the dictionary through a press release to offer a disingenuous explanation of why things are not as disturbing as they appear.

A second problem for the Obama administration is this proposed new rule makes it illegal for millions of Americans to serve in the military in a manner consistent with their faith. Millions of Americans who call themselves Christians – including Evangelicals, devout Catholics, and observant Mormons – believe they are required by Matthew 28 in the Bible to share the gospel with other people.

This is to be done respectfully and peacefully, at appropriate times and in an appropriate manner, but it must be done when such opportunities present themselves. To say that sharing the gospel is a crime under military law (as we reported, Weinstein in his own words calls it an act of “treason” that should be “punished” – right after calling those who do so “monsters” and “enemies” of the Constitution), is to say that tens of millions of Americans are not allowed to serve in our military. And those already serving could be prosecuted for a crime and perhaps expelled from the military.

The third problem is that it is unconstitutional. When someone joins the military their First Amendment rights are diminished, but they are not eradicated. A solider cannot write an op-ed criticizing the Commander-in-Chief, but he can live and share his faith with others. Evangelizing does not disrupt discipline and good order in the military, and therefore the Constitution does not permit the military to forbid it.

Military officers take an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” There are honorable Christian service members who will not in good conscience be able to abide by this unconstitutional and unconscionable decree.

And this week it began. Rear Adm. William D. Lee of the Coast Guard said that he will “defy any efforts to stop military personnel from openly sharing their Christian faith.” Told that sharing the gospel is crossing the line, Lee said, “I’m so glad we’ve crossed that line so many times.” He then pledged to exercise his “right under the Constitution to tell a young man that there is hope.”

The U.S. military is the most noble and honorable institution in America. Officers like Rear Adm. Lee are an essential part of making it so. Congress should step forward to enact whatever legislation is needed to safeguard their rights, as they continue to protect ours.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

.

Politically correcting our military

The United States military is second to none, but there are two looming threats to that superiority. first there is defense cuts, which could leave our military impotent, then there is the threat of P. C. Here are some very bad signs

Military orders crosses removed from forward operating base after atheists complain

Via Fox News:

The U.S. military reportedly ordered soldiers to remove a cross and a steeple from atop a chapel and to board up cross-shaped windows at a remote American forward operating base in Afghanistan.

The removal of Christian symbols from the chapel at Forward Operating Base Orgun-E came after a solider complained — leading American Atheists president David Silverman to send a letter to the Pentagon.

“Soldiers with minority religious beliefs and atheists often feel like second-class citizens when Christianity is seemingly officially endorsed by their own base,” Silverman told Fox News. “We are very happy the Pentagon and the Army decided to do the right thing.”

Silverman said a Christian chapel on an Army base in Afghanistan could have put American troops in danger.

“It enflames this Muslim versus Christian mentality,” he said. “This is not a Muslim versus Christian war — but if the Army base has a large chapel on it that has been converted to Christian-only, it sends a message that could be interpreted as hostile to Islam.

The Army released a statement to NBC acknowledging board had also been placed over the cross-shaped windows while the base ordered new doors.

Here we go, better not risk offending an Atheist or an Islamist. I wonder what George Patton would have to say about this inanity. But there is more. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta seems to be obsessed with a gender neutral military

(CNSNews.com) - Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Thursday that whether they are male or female “everyone is entitled to a chance” to become a combat soldier in a military that will now adopt “gender neutral” standards.

“If members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job–and let me be clear, we’re not talking about reducing the qualifications for a job–if they can meet the qualifications for the job then they should have the right to serve,” Panetta said at a Pentagon press conference.

The Defense Department announced today that it would rescind its 1994 policy restricting women from serving in combat-focused positions such as infantry units, potentially opening up 230,000 positions to female service members.

Sure, IF the standards are not lowered or altered fine. Problem is, I do not trust a Liberal like Panetta, or a Leftist like his boss, to NOT change he standards. Then there is always the threat of our government caving in to UN pressure and surrendering part or all of our right to protect ourselves

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has launched an investigation into drone strikes and will review resultant civilian casualties to determine whether the attacks constitute a war crime.

Ben Emmerson, a UN special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism, formally launched the inquiry on Thursday, in response to requests from Russia, China and Pakistan.

A statement released by the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights states that the inquiry will provide a “critical examination of the factual evidence concerning civilian casualties”. [...]

At a press conference on Thursday in London, Emmerson said that the British government had already agreed to co-operate with the investigation and that he was “optimistic” that the US would do the same.

He also requested the US to release “before and after” videos of the drone strikes and internal reports of those killed, including civilians.

Of course our only statement to the UN should be short, very short. I am think two words long, care to guess which two words? Here is a hint the first words starts with a big fat “F”. Again, let this serve as a reminder that Leftists are a threat to everything that makes America free and strong. You might be feeling like you were kicked in the groin ever since election day. Well shake it off. Politics are cyclical, and do not even think of packing it is, we have too much to lose, including our opportunity to retake and rebuild our republic that the Founders gave us.

 

 

Will PC kill our military?

 

If this story, at Zion’s Trumpet is any indication, it absolutely will

By PAUL SPERRY- Afghan security forces, our supposed allies, are slaughtering American troops. Thirty-three soldiers have been killed by “green on blue” attacks this year alone. The situation is so bad that the training of Afghan forces has been temporarily suspended.

How has the Pentagon responded?

By blaming our troops.

Top officials believe culturally offensive behavior is the motivation behind the killings, so it’s stepped up Islamic sensitivity training for our troops.

If you don’t want to be shot in the back by your Afghan training partners, the Pentagon advises, don’t offend their religious sensibilities. Don’t kick your feet up on a table, for instance, and never ask to see a picture of their wives and kids. “There’s a percentage [of attacks] which are cultural affronts,” Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said in a recent interview.

Dempsey echoes the concerns of Gen. Sher Mohammad Karimi, the Afghan National Army’s chief of staff, who earlier this month argued both sides need to do more to “teach” foreign troops Islamic traditions and values to reduce the chance of violent reactions to cultural slights.
AFGHAN INSIDE ATTACK KILLS US TROOPS: OFFICIALS

“It is our duty to teach this to them. Our indifference about these issues causes the incident,” he said.

In the past three years, uniformed Afghans have murdered at least 97 US and NATO troops.

The Taliban has taken credit for many of the attacks, but the Pentagon has been reluctant to admit widespread infiltration of the Afghan security forces it’s training.

Standing up a national army and police force that can protect the US-sponsored government in Kabul is the linchpin of President Obama’s announced 2014 withdrawal strategy.

Some 120,000 American and other foreign troops mix closely with 350,000 Afghan security forces. Afghan trainees and guards are co-located on US bases, where they share bathrooms, gyms and mess halls.

To avoid offending them, US commanders are putting troops through intense Muslim sensitivity training. Among other things, they’ve been ordered to:

* Wear surgical gloves whenever handling a copy of the Koran.

* Never walk in front of a praying Muslim.

* Never show the bottom of boots while sitting or lying across from a Muslim, which in Islam is considered an insult.

* Never share photos of wives or daughters.

* Never smoke or eat in front of Muslims during the month long Ramadan fasting.

* Avoid winking, cursing or nose-blowing in the presence of Muslims — all viewed as insults in Islam.

* Avoid exiting the shower without a towel.

* Avoid offering and accepting things with the left hand, which in Islam is reserved for bodily hygiene and considered unclean.

Troops who violate the sensitivity rules face severe punishment.

Read more: foxnews.com

From Clash Daily:

Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2012/10/muslims-murder-our-troops-and-pathetic-pentagon-blames-us/#ixzz28EwUNcyZ

Reading this makes my head explode. This is the LAST thing this nation should be doing. We will get nowhere by placating savages, or by bending over backwards to appease mad men. I am sick of hearing how we have to be sensitive to people who possess zero sensitivity, and how we must learn to tolerate the ultra-intolerant, and understand those with no understanding. It is one thing to be kind, to be nice, it is another to be weak, if we allow our military to become weak, we are finished!

 

Obama the anti-military president?

The question begs to be asked doesn’t it? In fact, I am ashamed to say that there really is no question anymore, like they say, actions speak louder than words.

You have to give President Obama credit. It takes serious gall to tell the American military to its face that you are putting it on the road to second-class status.

That’s exactly what our commander-in-chief did at the Pentagon yesterday, as he announced nearly half a trillion dollars in new spending cuts, after already chopping $480 billion during his first three years in office. He also set out plans for drastic reductions in our force size and continuing weapons programs, including the F-35 fighter — our last best hope for maintaining American dominance in the skies.

Obama’s been trying to reassure Americans all this won’t endanger our national security or our strategic interests. Everyone in or out of uniform who’s free to speak knows better — and that with a full-scale war still underway we are standing on the brink of our weakest military posture since Jimmy Carter, and our smallest forces since before World War II.

No one could be so foolish as to believe that these cuts will not harm our national security, no one. No one could ever argue seriously that this will not cost our world standing, nor could anyone make the case that we no longer need to be able to fight two wars at the same time.

Part of Obama’s rationale is his declared belief that America no longer needs to have a military big enough to fight two wars at once — even though that’s been our historical experience more often than not (think the European and the Pacific theaters in World War II, Vietnam and the Cold War with Russia, Iraq and Afghanistan).

More important, President Obama doesn’t understand that our military’s role isn’t just fighting wars. It’s providing a strong strategic presence that will influence events in our favor — and away from that of adversaries and rivals. Even he admits these drastic cuts can only come through shrinking that presence world-wide, which means deep cuts in our forces in Europe and the Middle East, while expecting a shrinking navy (which could wind up with barely 230 ships by 2020) and air force to keep our interests safe in the Pacific region — where China is surging.

Go read the rest, if you can stand to. Frankly, I came away so angry and disgusted that I could barely read it all myself.

Not content with repeatedly kicking American businesses in the nuts, no longer content with using the EPA as a weapon against our domestic energy development, Obama has now decided to gut our military.

Common sense, and history tell us that this will come to no good, no good at all. But, once more a committed Leftist administration somehow sees weakening our national defense as a good thing for humanity. And, to be blunt, I cannot think of a more committed Leftist than Obama. Certainly we have never had a president as committed to Leftist ideals as Obama have we? FDR? Carter? Wilson? Maybe, but Obama will take a back seat to none.

And again, the desperate need to re-take the Senate, and the White House this November is so clearly illustrated.

Oh no, social engineering vs our military

Stacy, at The Other McCain has the scoop on how repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell could be bad for our military

This is going to work out real smooth:

Four branches of the military have begun sending training material to 2.2 million active and reserve troops as a prelude to opening the ranks to gays, with instructions on, for example, what to do if an officer sees two male Marines kissing in a shopping mall.
Key themes are that sexual orientation will no longer be a bar to service, that all service members must respect each other, and that the partners of gay troops will not receive the benefits of heterosexual spouses.
“We are going to make [gay ban] repeal training expeditiously,” said Maj. Joel Harper, an Air Force spokesman at the Pentagon. “It’s great training.” . . .
The Marine Corps, which a Pentagon survey found holds deep opposition to lifting the ban, plans to publicly release its training material April 1. A Marine source provided copies to The Washington Times.
The vignette about seeing two male Marines kissing is part of a list of scenarios to help instructors prepare commanders for incidents likely to arise.
“Situation,” it begins. “You are the Executive Officer of your unit. While shopping at the local mall over the weekend, you observe two junior male Marines in appropriate civilian attire assigned to your unit kissing and hugging in the food court.
“Issue: Standards of Conduct. Is this within standards of personal and professional conduct?”

Look, if the military allows Gays to serve, and they serve honorably, I am all for it, and I am sure our service men and women will not mind. What I fear is that the social engineers will, well, use this as an opportunity to foist their agenda onto our fighting forces. That will only harm our military, and that can never be allowed to happen. Smitty, of The Other McCain, serving currently in Afghanistan, worries about, well the same thing I do. Well, that AND the dancing

Iran testing the waters

Iran, emboldened by a weak, and spineless American president, and events in Egypt is testing Isreal’s resolve

Get ready to rumble? The anti Israel forces are out on blogs and twitter threatening Israel if they defend themselves as usual. The two Iranian warships are allegedly going to pass through the Suez Canal to reach Syria. Israel is of course watching this closely and will act if provocative. The cowardly Pentagon here wouldn’t comment on the situation. Oh btw, Egypt controls the Suez Canal, and is going to allow this provocation. But remember, these “democracy loving” Egyptians just want to be free, and don’t want to cause any problems.

Iran is playing with fire, and Israel is fully capable of making them pay, but damn wouldn’t it be nice if Presuident Obama stood up in FULL AND ABSOLUTE support of our best ally at times like this?