Soldiers wrongly punished for skipping religious concert

[NeoDevin]

That's not relevant to this discussion IMO. To be honest, I'm not sure what your point here is exactly. Are you saying that a religious concert is proselytizing?

Not every religious concert is proselytizing, but this one in particular was.

 

[waht]

Coming straight from Rock-the-Fort Website:

http://www.grahamfestival.org/Festival/pgview.aspx?pgid=88&cid=26

http://www.grahamfestival.org/assets/resources/263/pdfdoc.pdf

4. New Christians in your Church
Jesus’ mandate to disciple the nations is still in effect (Matt.28:19). The Rock the Fort outreach is designed to channel new believers into your church, so you can encourage them to further spiritual growth. The future of the church lies in reaching and discipling the next generation.

Reignite your faith
and find power to live a life
that radiates God’s love.
Discover the victory He has
for His children and equip yourself to share it with others
through this dynamic course. You’ll also find practical
help on reaching your friends for Christ and be equipped
to serve and encourage them at the Rock the Fort event.

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/3656/rockthefort.png

 

[drankin]

Yep, the purpose of that organizatoin is to proselytize. Apparently, someone didn't get the memo.

 

[nismaratwork]

That's not relevant to this discussion IMO. To be honest, I'm not sure what your point here is exactly. Are you saying that a religious concert is proselytizing?

I'm saying that a religious concert which includes exhortation to proselytize, and even hands out cards to get others there to proselytize... is yeah... I'm going to go on a limb and say that falls under the article mentioned.

Of course... I'm late in my reply... damn.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yep, the purpose of that organizatoin is to proselytize. Apparently, someone didn't get the memo.

Or they did... and this is as others have alleged, just the most visible and undeniable tip of an iceberg.

 

[Proton Soup]

''Twould be my pleasure good sir!



http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/pdf/GeneralOrderGO-1A.pdf

It's a standing order, (GO-1A) General Order-1A subsection 2j.

apparently, that applies in AOR countries

http://www.centcom.mil/en/countries/aor/

• Afghanistan
• Bahrain
• Egypt
• Iran
• Iraq
• Jordan
• Kazakhstan
• Kuwait
• Kyrgyzstan
• Lebanon
• Oman
• Pakistan
• Qatar
• Saudi Arabia
• Syria
• Tajikistan
• Turkmenistan
• U.A.E.
• Uzbekistan
• Yemen

 

[nismaratwork]

apparently, that applies in AOR countries

http://www.centcom.mil/en/countries/aor/

• Afghanistan
• Bahrain
• Egypt
• Iran
• Iraq
• Jordan
• Kazakhstan
• Kuwait
• Kyrgyzstan
• Lebanon
• Oman
• Pakistan
• Qatar
• Saudi Arabia
• Syria
• Tajikistan
• Turkmenistan
• U.A.E.
• Uzbekistan
• Yemen

True, and there is more that applies to the USA... Mugaliens cited it in an earlier thread I believe... I can dig it up if you really want.

edit: We have more Areas of Responsibility than those, which are only the AOR of Central Command (CENTCOM)

 

[BobG]

''Twould be my pleasure good sir!



http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/pdf/GeneralOrderGO-1A.pdf

It's a standing order, (GO-1A) General Order-1A subsection 2j.

That clause should be considered in light of the context it's presented. Military personnel in the CENTCOM AOR are not allowed to try to convert the residents of the nation they're stationed in.

In other words, it's illegal for Christian soldiers to be handing out Bibles in Iraq or Afghanistan as they patrol the streets, etc. Nor should military chaplains be trying to convert the local populace. The chaplains are there to serve US military personnel; not spread their religion across the world.

That clause has nothing to do with an outside entertainment group entertaining US troops.

I do agree that there would appear to be problems with the concerts that general scheduled, but your reference is still irrelevant.

 

[nismaratwork]

That clause should be considered in light of the context it's presented. Military personnel in the CENTCOM AOR are not allowed to try to convert the residents of the nation they're stationed in.

In other words, it's illegal for Christian soldiers to be handing out Bibles in Iraq or Afghanistan as they patrol the streets, etc. Nor should military chaplains be trying to convert the local populace. The chaplains are there to serve US military personnel; not spread their religion across the world.

That clause has nothing to do with an outside entertainment group entertaining US troops.

I do agree that there would appear to be problems with the concerts that general scheduled, but your reference is still irrelevant.

Was that a request for further citation? I'm not highly motivated to do so, but I respect you, if you want me to find the relevant standing orders for any given region I can and will. It's not going to help however, the UCMJ is clear in all regions, in or out of theatre.

Here's an indirect reference, but you can check the relevant articles and SO's.
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/newsletters/2009-03/inbox1.html

[Much Preceeds this]
Here Mr. Fister mistakes Constitutional and military regulation for persecution. Religious Proselytizing is regulated by the US Constitution Amendment One, UCMJ Articles: 92, 88, 121, 133, 134 and CENTCOM General Order 1 A, Part 2, Section J, relating to theaters of war. In addition, the Military Entrance Processing Command has issued new regulations to prevent religious proselytizing of recruits at its Military Entrance Processing Stations. The United States Supreme Court has ruled:

Impermissible governmental endorsement of religion occurs whenever a public official — such as a military officer — takes any action that “‘conveys" or attempts to convey a message that religion or a particular religion is favored or preferred.” (quoting Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 38, 70 (1985).

Reduced to 5 simplest terms, the Supreme Court has held that the Establishment Clause prohibits any official action that promotes religion generally or shows favoritism toward any particular faith. Government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to "non-religion.” Allegheny, 492 U.S. at 604. Government or its representatives may not demonstrate a preference for one particular sect or creed (including a preference for Christianity over other religions).”); Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228, 244 (1982)

“The clearest command of the Establishment Clause is that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another.”

Furthermore, limits on proselytizing by military chaplains and superior officers were clearly spelled out by a federal appeals court over twenty years ago. "The primary function of the military chaplain is to engage in activities designed to meet the religious needs of a pluralistic military community," the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in 1985, in Katcoff v Marsh. Army chaplains were hired to serve military personnel "who wish to use them," the Court observed; they are not authorized "to proselytize soldiers or their families." Proselytizing by chaplains or the officer corps is a discriminatory, unconstitutional endorsement of religion that results in the religious harassment of our military personnel.

It is imperative that Christian proselytizing be contained and restricted to willing participants without the specter of command influence and only to the extent allowed by military regulation .

Based on the above military regulation and civil law, I submit that based on their current modus operandi, unregulated or unmonitored Christian evangelical organizations, churches and evangelical protestant military Chaplains allowed to operate by means of dogmatic, coercive and overt Christian proselytizing is unconstitutional.

Richard Baker
Colorado Springs Chapter President
Military Religious Freedom Foundation

Again... there are standing orders for each AOR, but they all prohibit proselytizing.

This concert also had nothing to do with entertainment, nor do many such. I've talked to members here who've described religious themed events that are just that... fun, themed events. There's a WORLD of difference between that, and marketing in the form of a concert.

One is fine, and probably necessary if not at least humane and legal. The latter is illegal, and blaming a Sgt. for it is not only absurd, it's a blatant lie.

edit:To be blunt BobG, I'm not guessing here... if you want to make a point, please make it, but there are a world of citations and law that agrees on my aforementioned point. If you want to delay, I understand, but please just issue a challenge directly and demand citations. I'm happy to provide them, especially when they are overwhelmingly in support of my position.