Mr. K. It was Chappynash who pointed out the info regarding the Virginia Statute for a Religious a Freedom. Also, I believe that Tennessee was the state the forbade clergy from serving in legislature, but it also denied Athiests and dualist a place as well. You can talk of God, Providence etc. but the undeniable fact is that the religious foundation that lay the ground work for our system of government was Christian. Now our founders recognized the need to protect all faiths hence the Establishment a Clause and Free Exercise Clause, however, in today's liberal thinking, there is a very REAL push to remove faith expression from all public/government entities. It is a purge that guys like Mikey seek, not freedom.
Mr. K. I would recommend you adhere to your own advice. The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written by Thomas Jefferson was enacted as a law in 1786 and is NOT part of Virginia Constitution. It is the precursor to the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause in the Constitution but it in NO way "bans religion in state government." It bans official state churches and guarantees free exercise of religion. It also discusses protecting people from being seen as unworthy for public office based on the presence of or absence of beliefs. It is NOT an anti religion Statute and in fact attests to the existence of God and the necessity of faith in its opening words:
"An Act for establishing religious Freedom.
Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free; That all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,..."
Not exactly the anti-religious, Wall of Separation, no religious expression in public life, words people keep putting in Jefferson 's mouth.
Gurudori....the Constitution does not guarantee Separation of a Church and State. It states Congress shall make no law establishing religion or limiting the free exercise of religion. As, has already been stated, the area in which the White Board is found is in an alcove and considered part of Cadets personal space. Hence, the "grey area" spoken of. The Constitution does NOT promise to protect you from offense. I would fight, as would most conservatives, for the right of the Buddhist or Muslim to write out a religious text. Offense is NOT a reason for denying the right to free speech. Foul, obscene language offends me and I have to put up with it nearly every day, I don't get to deny the person their right to be ignorant of the English language. These liberal views are trying to push religious expression out of the public square and into the confines of church and home. Next you will want to remove all the steeple crosses because you don't want to see them. Someone give me one compelling reason to deny this cadet his freedom of religious expression in his personal space and the board is in his personal space. Not some wierd theory of how this COULD be perceived, but actual reason to deny.
Gurudori....what does that have to do with this issue. A cadet using a white board in his personal space ( and the alcove is his space) is not Congress establishing religion. Also, the letter of Jefferson is not meant to be a wall that prevents people in public service from expressing their sincere beliefs even in their official capacity. For precedent, read nearly every speech from an early President. The First Admendment was NEVER intended to remove religious expression but to ensure that Congress would not limit or establishment certain expressions. Why can't you people get that through your thick skulls. You DO NOT have the right to go through life unoffended. Get over yourselves.
2.12.1. All Airmen are able to choose to practice their particular religion, or subscribe to no
religious belief at all. You should confidently practice your own beliefs while respecting
others whose viewpoints differ from your own.
Very interesting, it says CONFIDENTLY, not confidentially or privately or in the confines of your own private space away from prying eyes and in an effort to offend no one. We are to practice CONFIDENTLY. Much like Paul's proclamation, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes." What I am ashamed of is the lack of backbone in the Air Force I love. I grew up on AF bases, my father, served in Vietnam and retired after 30 years as CMSgt. Nearly his entire career was spent in the Chaplain's Office both at base and command level including Exec to the Chief of Chaplains for TAC & PACAF. We all know if Mikey had his way the chapels would be closed and the Chaplains dismissed. That is HIS view of religious liberty.
So, if I understand Longcrier's interpretation, a commanding officer could not attend an overtly religious service in uniform. To do so could be viewed as endorsing one religion over another. The rules, Mr. Longcrier's, are meant to protect subordinates from a commander trying to force their beliefs on the squadron, etc. The failure in language is the apparent. For Mikey, you and others; any public display of religious devotion by military personnel, especially "fundamentalist Christians." The alcove is the cadets personal space, the white board is for personal use, the Scripture requires nothing of those who see it, and not even the Air Force has rules that protect someone from being offended. This misuse of a very bad and incorrect interpretation of religious liberty is getting old. The Air Force should tell Mikey what to do with his suit. To extend your ridiculous reading of the rules....no military personnel, while in uniform, should be permitted to participate in any religious activities because if they are seen praying, reading Scripture or singing hymns; that may be deemed by some pathetic soul as "actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious beliefs." That is where this is headed and quite frankly what guys like Mikey want. The constitution and Air Force regulations protect free exercise of religion, not Athiests from being offended by someone else's personal beliefs.
All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation