Stripes letter: U.S. shouldn’t fund chaplains

[lebkuchen]

U.S. shouldn’t fund chaplains

Chaplains should not be on the government’s payroll. Federally-funded clergy members are unconstitutional. Minor religious organizations should not have to see their tax dollars spent on others spreading contrary religious teachings. Chaplains are prodigiously paid storytellers who have outlived their usefulness.

Also, the posting of the branch insignia, the cross in the Christian case, on military uniforms is a violation of federal law: One can’t post religious symbols on federal buildings; uniforms are no different.

Americans have the right to free speech; chaplains are seeking solace under an amendment that they are inherently violating. Religious jargon shouldn’t be used to convince warriors to close with and destroy our enemies, save it for the pulpit. “Tuning out” is difficult to do during a formation, while locked at parade rest and forced to listen to a chaplain bless the bombs, bullets and our fighting men. Jesus has nothing to do with the U.S. war machine and the interests of our economic and political ambitions. Is the chaplain’s message to turn the other cheek or promote Exodus’ rules on slavery? They can pick and choose passages that require absolute pacifism and messages of destruction.

Chaplains can’t understand what it’s like being a soldier; they are noncombatants. Unlike medics and veterinarians, they can’t defend anyone from foreign and domestic enemies. Soldiers shouldn’t be recommended to chaplains for psychological treatment, they are biased faith-healers and spiritualists who offer the contradictory words of ancient soothsayers. There are unbiased, well-trained professionals who base their advice on science (and not on water-walking) available to soldiers.

Those of us with no invisible means of support should not have to financially support those who do. Leave all religious funding to civilian pockets, not the government’s.

Staff Sgt. Patrick C. Hynes
Taji, Iraq

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=125&article=32999

[GrpCaptMandrake]

1. Wow! Damn! Great find!

If there had been a reference to the FSM, it would've been perfect!

Ramen!

[msongs]

2. a shocker for the stars & stripes - has this guy been punished yet?

this is about the best explanation for seperation of church and state I have read in a long time, even with the military situation as the basis.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. Even as an atheist, I have to disagree

Chaplains are funded not as promotion of religion, but for the needs of the servicemembers who would seek the services of clergy. Would it be fair or reasonable to expect people to have to make a choice between service to their country or retaining access to spiritual counsel? What of men and women serving in combat, where they are forced to come face to face with the clash between the spiritual values they have held all their lives and the reality of existence in a war zone? If you were in Iraq right now, would you want to have a new arrival having to struggle all on his own between his first act of killing someone and his beliefs as a Christian?

The role of chaplains can and should be refined, yes. But eliminate them entirely? That would be a mistake, possibly an unconstitutional violation of servicemembers right to religion. I mean, even prisoners in maximum security death row have a guaranteed right to clergy; should military personnel not even be allowed that?

[politicat]

4. Even as an atheist, I respectfully disagree with the Staff Sergeant.

Note: I am a strong atheist. I do not believe that we should pay for the Congressional Chaplain with tax dollars, I don't believe in funding Civil Air Patrol Chaplains, I believe the Boy Scouts should lose their federally protected status until they stop discriminating against atheists (and gay men and boys), I don't believe there should be religious displays on public lands and I believe that any and all religious organizations that takes a stand on politics should be taxed as a business. That said, the Military is a special case for me.

The Staff Sergent has a point - no chaplain should ever agree to pray or bless anything during formation. They should know better, and most of them do. Most of them would never ever consider mixing necessary activities with optional observances. In the case cited above, the chaplain was wrong, and should be disciplined. However, that seems to be an exception (at least in my experience with about 35 chaplains of 6 different faiths on 15 bases in 4 states and on 3 continents....)

For those posted in places where they cannot get access to non-military churches, we must provide religious personnel - preferably those who are trained to accept all faiths and none as valid, to be comforting and knowledgeable about the stresses personnel face, and to be advocates for individual liberties and religious freedom within the ranks of the military. In places like Iraq, Diego Garcia and Niwot, North Dakota :) our personnel are a captive audience and we are required to provide religious personnel.

Chaplains can be invaluable with regard to the latter, especially when NCOs and officers try to overstep their secular authority and force religious practices on those under their command. MAAF (Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers) has documented at least two cases where a superior officer forced a group to hold morning prayers until the Chaplain reminded the officer that such practice was contrary to the UCMJ.

The Methodist Chaplain on my husband's base defended him against a Staff Sergeant who wanted my husband to be punished for having Druid on his dogtags. My husband got to keep his dogtags and his expressions of faith, even in the face of his St. Sgt's vehement disapproval. Without that understanding chaplain, DH could have done some punishment unjustly.

And finally... when a member of the military has a personal problem that may or may not require psychological treatment, but does require someone to talk to, the chaplain is a better choice than the psychologist. A visit to the psychologist's office is reported to the member's superiors... a visit to the chaplain is not. A Chaplain can serve as a sounding board for things like grief and homesickness, normal feelings that everyone has a right to keep private. (How would you like it if your boss was notified every time you needed to talk to someone about losing a friend or missing your wife? Especially in an environment where feelings of loss and loneliness are considered weak and wussy.) Most chaplains are very good about getting someone who does need psych help into treatment, but about half of what we shrinks do is done adequately by a religious professional who has a background in psych (i.e. a minor or an undergraduate double major).

I see the chaplaincy as a calming force - a reminder to personnel who are all too often caught up in the business of boredom, death and routine that there is something more to life than just watching for snipers, setting up mines, and repairing equipment. I'm no fan of religion, and I'm not much of a fan of most religion pushers, but there are situations where the religious are a positive influence.

[Squatch]

5. This guy is an asshole.

"Chaplains can’t understand what it’s like being a soldier"

Somebody should introduce him to the story of Chaplain Watters, Medal of Honor recipient.


*WATTERS, CHARLES JOSEPH

Rank and organization: Chaplain (Maj.), U .S. Army, Company A, 173d Support Battalion, 173d Airborne Brigade. Place and date: Near Dak To Province, Republic of Vietnam, 19 November 1967. Entered service at: Fort Dix, N.J. Born: 17 January 1927, Jersey City, N.J. Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty. Chaplain Watters distinguished himself during an assault in the vicinity of Dak To. Chaplain Watters was moving with one of the companies when it engaged a heavily armed enemy battalion. As the battle raged and the casualties mounted, Chaplain Watters, with complete disregard for his safety, rushed forward to the line of contact. Unarmed and completely exposed, he moved among, as well as in front of the advancing troops, giving aid to the wounded, assisting in their evacuation, giving words of encouragement, and administering the last rites to the dying. When a wounded paratrooper was standing in shock in front of the assaulting forces, Chaplain Watters ran forward, picked the man up on his shoulders and carried him to safety. As the troopers battled to the first enemy entrenchment, Chaplain Watters ran through the intense enemy fire to the front of the entrenchment to aid a fallen comrade. A short time later, the paratroopers pulled back in preparation for a second assault. Chaplain Watters exposed himself to both friendly and enemy fire between the 2 forces in order to recover 2 wounded soldiers. Later, when the battalion was forced to pull back into a perimeter, Chaplain Watters noticed that several wounded soldiers were Lying outside the newly formed perimeter. Without hesitation and ignoring attempts to restrain him, Chaplain Watters left the perimeter three times in the face of small arms, automatic weapons, and mortar fire to carry and to assist the injured troopers to safety. Satisfied that all of the wounded were inside the perimeter, he began aiding the medics--applying field bandages to open wounds, obtaining and serving food and water, giving spiritual and mental strength and comfort. During his ministering, he moved out to the perimeter from position to position redistributing food and water, and tending to the needs of his men. Chaplain Watters was giving aid to the wounded when he himself was mortally wounded. Chaplain Watters' unyielding perseverance and selfless devotion to his comrades was in keeping with the highest traditions of the U.S. Army.

-------------------

No, Chaplain Watters is not the kind of person who we want to be paying for. :sarcasm:

[lebkuchen]

6. In "We were soldiers once and young" (the book)

stories were told about the chaplains' inability to comprehend what had happened at Ia Drang. They had arrived in their clean uniforms to "administer" the word of God to the wounded, who had horrible injuries, cavalierly did their job with a "pat on the back" and moved on.

[Squatch]

7. Yeah, I can see that...

you spend your life professing a belief in peace and the goodwill of man, only to come face-to-face with the horrors of war. Some shock as a result of cognitive dissonance would be expected, IMO.

[lebkuchen]

8. How does professing belief in peace and goodwill of man square with

blessing "the bombs, bullets and our fighting men"?

I agree with this part of his letter in particular:

Jesus has nothing to do with the U.S. war machine and the interests of our economic and political ambitions. Is the chaplain’s message to turn the other cheek or promote Exodus’ rules on slavery?

Incidentally, Uganda's opposition leader was just arrested for trying to run a campaign against the president of 20 years. Why not send the US troops and chaplains over there? Seems like a nobler cause to me than Iraq ever was.

[jrandom421]

10. It also had to do with the times

November of 1965, very few were aware of the savagary of war in Vietnam, especially the Pentagon and the White House. Blaming the chaplains for being "clueless" is a little harsh.

[lebkuchen]

11. I didn't write the book.

Nor do I see the Chaplain Corp showing improvement under the Bush administration. In fact, it's the Chaplain Corp that's helped turn the Iraq invasion into a Holy War, Christian v. Muslim.

"Religious jargon shouldn’t be used to convince warriors to close with and destroy our enemies, save it for the pulpit."

[Squatch]

14. That's a very harsh indictment

of a group of religious people who, in my own, personal experience, were more concerned with the sanity and spiritual health of servicemembers than on how to create a crusade.

I've attended many services in the field, when tired, dirty, and stopped-up on MRES, and the only message I *ever* recieved from the chaplain was: "Hang in there. You can do it. Remember your faith."

[lebkuchen]

16. and I listen to these chaplains' prostheletizing on AFRTS

in the "Chaplain's report" saying much the same things as the Staff SGT in the letter has reported from the field, and worse. Why should tax dollars be used to allow the chaplains to promote political propaganda in the name of God on the public airwaves?

[Squatch]

17. In order to answer your question,

I would first have to agree with this: "chaplains...promote political propaganda in the name of God on the public airwaves", which I do not believe they are doing, barring an AFN transcript or other direct evidence.

Not saying that I think you're making it up, it's just that my personal experience leads me to believe otherwise.

[lebkuchen]

18. I have tried to search for particular transcripts of "Chaplain Reports"

on-line, to no avail. I have e-mailed requests--no luck. The one I'd wanted in particular, at the beginning of the US invasion of Iraq, had to do with the glory of the US entering into the Garden of Eden to take back what was rightfully Christian.

There have been several letters to Stripes of soldiers complaining about the emphasis of Christianity in areas of the military where it doesn't belong--group prayer at company dinners, during formation, inside mess tents, and so forth. I empathize. I used to get all kinds of religious crap on my work Outlook, which is against DoD policy, before I put a stop to it. It took me three years, but by the grace of God, I was successful. :)

[HereSince1628]

9. Well, he isn't complaining about the purpose of the war

so I suspect he'll get by with his rant.

If nothing else you have to admire the clear communication of tone and intent of the guy's prose.

[lebkuchen]

12. He isn't? Read between the lines:

Jesus has nothing to do with the U.S. war machine and the interests of our economic and political ambitions.

The Staff SGT says nothing about our bringing democracy to the Iraqis. He speaks of US interests in the region, not Iraqis' interests. Pretty damning of the Bush administration, don't you think?

[HereSince1628]

13. My point is made, you must read between the lines.

I think this is a safe rant.

Flame me, but I have a hard time imagining an enlisted soldier on the line worrying about the strategic or political interests of Iraq.

You may be right that the SSG's not mentioning it is a criticism of Bush but I looked right past it.

[lebkuchen]

15. Isn't it up to the govt. to worry about the strategic/political interests

of Iraq since the soldier doesn't make that sort of policy? However, since the soldier's life is on the line for a lie i.e. that Iraq had something to do with 9-11 and had WMD, so therefore it was necessary to invade, I think there is a vested interest in every soldier's part to deconstruct the propaganda that their own government is spouting.

This soldier has done that, and not too cryptically.