Christianity and proselytizing in the military (thread slice)

[reed11b]

Wow, very impressed by the open mindedness of the participants in this forum. After seeing both gay and female soldiers serve with distinction in combat, I must say that I am ready to recognize both serving openly in combat roles. Maintaining the "good old boy" system simply becouse the "good old boys" may act violently is not in the best interest of the military. Might help to end this ridiculous forced christianity the military is so fond of right now. It is one of my biggest hesitations on accepting a commision, since as an enlisted men I can avoid it easier then as an officer.
Reed

[CR6]

Originally Posted by reed11b

Might help to end this ridiculous forced christianity the military is so fond of right now. It is one of my biggest hesitations on accepting a commision, since as an enlisted men I can avoid it easier then as an officer.
Reed

I haven't SEEN (i.e. experienced or witnessed) any examples of Christianity being forced on anyone in 16 years of commissioned service. I'm familiar with the problems of evangelicalism at the AF Academy, but it's not as though the officer ranks require bible study participation. Truth in lending, I am a Roman Catholic; however that's between God and me. It's never affected my professional relationship with other officers or soldiers. Your experience may be quite different.

As for openly serving homosexuals, Ken White had an excellent point in this thread, stating that as American society becomes more tolerant, so too will the Army.

[William F. Owen]

Originally Posted by CR6

As for openly serving homosexuals, Ken White had an excellent point in this thread, stating that as American society becomes more tolerant, so too will the Army.

Personally, and speaking from a British Army perspective, I'd like to see a little less toleration when it comes to racists, alcoholics, delinquents, and all other forms of behavioural abnormality and bigotry, however expressed.

I don't want or think that armies should be composed of high minded warrior poets, but they should aspire to hold to solid secular values, that their society prizes.

[selil]

Originally Posted by CR6

I haven't SEEN (i.e. experienced or witnessed) any examples of Christianity being forced on anyone in 16 years of commissioned service. I'm familiar with the problems of evangelicalism at the AF Academy, but it's not as though the officer ranks require bible study participation.

Personal experience nearing on 20 years ago was just the opposite. Started in bootcamp if you didn't go to chapel on Sunday you were a dirty filthy heathen (Drill Sgts words) and forced to do scut work or PT. Made the "Idle hands are the devils workshop" saying very real.

When I got to fleet I was a married Marine (Spouse was issued prior to enlistment) and told by company commander and loudly by 1st Sgt that I and my spouse would find a church every Sunday and report such or my off base housing permission would be revoked leaving spouse and new born in a lurch.

This was true at both Pendelton and MCAGCC and was a theme of the company commander welfare visits to our off base home (usually quarterly).

[Entropy]

Like CR6 neither me nor my wife have ever exerienced any kind of proselytizing. The worst I ever saw was that one of my former wing commanders opened every staff meeting with a prayer.

[BayonetBrant]

I haven't SEEN (i.e. experienced or witnessed) any examples of Christianity being forced on anyone in 16 years of commissioned service

I saw a bunch of people run thru the wringer for being the wrong brand of Christian. You can imagine how the 2 wiccans in the unit were treated.

[CR6]

Originally Posted by William F. Owen

Personally, and speaking from a British Army perspective, I'd like to see a little less toleration when it comes to racists, alcoholics, delinquents, and all other forms of behavioural abnormality and bigotry, however expressed.

I don't want or think that armies should be composed of high minded warrior poets, but they should aspire to hold to solid secular values, that their society prizes.

Point well taken William in that respect for others, honesty, adherence to standards, and a strong work ethic are examples of the values that an army should require of its soldiers. That being said, those values are not incompatible with homosexuality (nor do I think you said they were). The behaviors you describe should not be tolerated, but that's not the same thing as society (and by extension the armed forces) accepting openly gay people.

[reed11b]

Originally Posted by CR6

that's not the same thing as society (and by extension the armed forces) accepting openly gay people.

Bigotry is bigotry, so I am a little confused how being intolerant towards bigotry is not the same as accepting openly gay people.
Reed

[CR6]

Originally Posted by reed11b

Bigotry is bigotry, so I am a little confused how being intolerant towards bigotry is not the same as accepting openly gay people.
Reed

My statement was that the Army may become more tolerant as society does, whereas William stated he would like to see less tolerance for "behavioural abnormality". I read that as being opposed to openly gay soldiers serving. Perhaps I mis-understood him.

[CR6]

Originally Posted by CR6

Perhaps I mis-understood him.

I see that I did indeed misunderstand. Apologies William.

[Stevely]

Originally Posted by reed11b

Wow, very impressed by the open mindedness of the participants in this forum. After seeing both gay and female soldiers serve with distinction in combat, I must say that I am ready to recognize both serving openly in combat roles. Maintaining the "good old boy" system simply becouse the "good old boys" may act violently is not in the best interest of the military. Might help to end this ridiculous forced christianity the military is so fond of right now. It is one of my biggest hesitations on accepting a commision, since as an enlisted men I can avoid it easier then as an officer.
Reed

I never once saw an example of "forced Christianity" during my time in service. Do you have specific examples of this widespread practice, or are you perhaps only so open-minded where it comes to sexual practices and not religious faith?

[reed11b]

Link
Forced may be too strong a word, but when attending services is strongly hinted to be a factor for promotion, it is not in good keeping with separation of church and state. Most chaplains and leaders realize the difference between the need for spirituality and the false belief that there style of spirituality is the only style. Most, but not all. I have seen army chaplains refuse to try and meet the spiritual needs of non-Christians (primarily Buddhist and Wiccan). I also recognize that the problem seems to be worse in support units then in combat units (the exceptions seems to be medical and aviation units). Is the problem 100% across the military? Of course not, but it is still a bigger problem then is acceptable.
Reed

[jkm_101_fso]

Originally Posted by reed11b

but when attending services is strongly hinted to be a factor for promotion

You are kidding, right?

[Cavguy]

Originally Posted by reed11b

Link
Forced may be too strong a word, but when attending services is strongly hinted to be a factor for promotion, it is not in good keeping with separation of church and state. Most chaplains and leaders realize the difference between the need for spirituality and the false belief that there style of spirituality is the only style. Most, but not all. I have seen army chaplains refuse to try and meet the spiritual needs of non-Christians (primarily Buddhist and Wiccan). I also recognize that the problem seems to be worse in support units then in combat units (the exceptions seems to be medical and aviation units). Is the problem 100% across the military? Of course not, but it is still a bigger problem then is acceptable.
Reed

One event does not a trend make. There are over 500,000 of us now on active duty, and a like number in the reserves. There's going to be a few zealots and nutcases. I have never seen it as a problem in any unit I have been in.

If you do have a problem, immediately go to the IG and/or EO officer. It's illegal and you have nothing to fear.

In 11 years on active duty, I have never once encountered religious discrimination due to my practice or non-practice of religion. There are some evangelicals on active duty who wear their faith on their sleeve, but the vast majority keep it to themselves.

Agree it does depend on where you are, component of the army, and your chain of command. Some small local ARNG units might be more difficult given the geographic limitations.

[reed11b]

There are over 500,000 of us now on active duty,

The "us" in your statement gives more weight to your words with me then anything else. Those I can not stand say "My" Army. Thanks for your service and input.
Reed

[Adam L]

Originally Posted by Cavguy

If you do have a problem, immediately go to the IG and/or EO officer. It's illegal and you have nothing to fear.

I have no experience with this sort of action in the military, but wouldn't it be similar to any other bureaucratic agency? In my experience, filing a serious complaint or allegation can quite often end your career even if the charges are found to have merit. People are often labeled as complainers or troublemakers (If they don't just get accused of doing it to get ahead or make up for some personal deficiencies in their duties.) No one would dare to do anything overtly to stymie your progress, because they are afraid of the multi-million dollars they probably would be forced to pay in damages , but you are often ostracized and forced out. Again, I am not saying I have any knowledge or experience to say this about the military, just personal and second-hand experience with it outside of the military.

Adam L

[Jedburgh]

Originally Posted by Adam L

I have no experience with this sort of action in the military, but wouldn't it be similar to any other bureaucratic agency? In my experience, filing a serious complaint or allegation can quite often end your career even if the charges are found to have merit. People are often labeled as complainers or troublemakers (If they don't just get accused of doing it to get ahead or make up for some personal deficiencies in their duties.) No one would dare to do anything overtly to stymie your progress, because they are afraid of the multi-million dollars they probably would be forced to pay in damages , but you are often ostracized and forced out. Again, I am not saying I have any knowledge or experience to say this about the military, just personal and second-hand experience with it outside of the military.

Generally speaking - because there are always exceptions - the Army is significantly different from any private sector entity in this regard. If the complaint is legitimate and follows the appropriate channels, then substantive steps are usually taken fairly quickly to rectify the situation. In such cases, there is zero negative career impact.

On the other side of the coin, I've seen unfounded allegations made by soldiers jumping the chain cause significant - albeit temporary - disruption in a unit as the allegations are followed up. And then, even when discovered to be unfounded, there were no negative repercussions upon the complainant. In the cases that I am personally aware of, the complainant was given a transfer to a new unit "to start with a clean slate" - no negative career impact.

But I certainly understand your perspective from the private sector. I will be leaving my current position in the next few weeks - my first foray into the private sector - due to repercussions from my bringing up a business-ethics issue involving senior execs. As you stated, its nothing overtly linked that could be clearly construed as retaliation - and thus open them up to litigation - but it is insidious and malicious in manner that I never saw in 22 years in uniform.

[selil]

Originally Posted by Jedburgh

But I certainly understand your perspective from the private sector. I will be leaving my current position in the next few weeks - my first foray into the private sector - due to repercussions from my bringing up a business-ethics issue involving senior execs. As you stated, its nothing overtly linked that could be clearly construed as retaliation - and thus open them up to litigation - but it is insidious and malicious in manner that I never saw in 22 years in uniform.

Not an unusual response in private industry. Money makes men do evil things. Next week ask me about un-billed revenue.

[jkm_101_fso]

Originally Posted by Adam L

I have no experience with this sort of action in the military, but wouldn't it be similar to any other bureaucratic agency? In my experience, filing a serious complaint or allegation can quite often end your career even if the charges are found to have merit.

I think that is totally untrue, but it depends who is filing the complaint. Coming from a guy who has had two congressional inquiries submitted against him, I can tell you that there is no retribution or vindication AT ALL when the results are finalized. Both congressionals against me were rediculous accusations and nothing come of them. But the Army or the member of Congress failed to reprimand the Soldier(s) that submitted them for lying and making false claims.

There are legitimate times for a Soldier to go to IG or EO with a complaint. Unfortunately, there programs are abused and have turned into a welfare system for troublemakers and sloths.

Another major component of the Army welfare system is the "Commander's Open Door" policy, which I see abused constantly. I'm not sure there is a need for such policy anymore and I wish it would go away.

You would be suprised how little pride some Soldiers have in themselves and how quick they are to threaten their peers and superiors with I.G., EO, Congressionals or Commander's Open Door (Usually the CG). Certainly not the norm, but just a few can ruin it for everyone.

[Stan]

Originally Posted by jkm_101_fso

There are legitimate times for a Soldier to go to IG or EO with a complaint. Unfortunately, there programs are abused and have turned into a welfare system for troublemakers and sloths.

Another major component of the Army welfare system is the "Commander's Open Door" policy, which I see abused constantly. I'm not sure there is a need for such policy anymore and I wish it would go away.

You would be suprised how little pride some Soldiers have in themselves and how quick they are to threaten their peers and superiors with I.G., EO, Congressionals or Commander's Open Door (Usually the CG). Certainly not the norm, but just a few can ruin it for everyone.

Well put !
The CO and IG are also in the Army. Until such time as the Army can no longer control these two dudes, the outcome will be the same.

Joining other DOD elements such as DIA will only amplify the problem to the very top, and the Sierra will eventually come right back to where it started.

Since 1974 - Abused and fraught with mindless nanur nanur doo doo. Hence the reasons real problems and issues remain unresolved.