Call To Courtmartial General For Talking about God

For those that don't get it - what if he had given a speech that was hostile to christianity? if he had mocked it, saying that the greatest gift in his life was becoming a rational atheist?

why did he need to participate in military uniform?

It was his uniform and he is entitled to wear it. He is also entitled to express his personal beliefs. This really is a nothing issue. Some group with absolutely no authority didn't like it and they are free to express their beliefs as well. The man broke no regulations so this thread is about the sum of the consequences.
 
For those that don't get it - what if he had given a speech that was hostile to christianity? if he had mocked it, saying that the greatest gift in his life was becoming a rational atheist?

why did he need to participate in military uniform?

It was his uniform and he is entitled to wear it. He is also entitled to express his personal beliefs. This really is a nothing issue. Some group with absolutely no authority didn't like it and they are free to express their beliefs as well. The man broke no regulations so this thread is about the sum of the consequences.
an officer doesn't just get to wear their uniform for anything, and when they are wearing it they are representing more than just themselves, which is where the issue of appropriateness comes in.

as for broken regulations, the mrff says he did, specifically that he broke regulations prohibiting the endorsement of a particular faith.
 
For those that don't get it - what if he had given a speech that was hostile to christianity? if he had mocked it, saying that the greatest gift in his life was becoming a rational atheist?

why did he need to participate in military uniform?

It was his uniform and he is entitled to wear it. He is also entitled to express his personal beliefs. This really is a nothing issue. Some group with absolutely no authority didn't like it and they are free to express their beliefs as well. The man broke no regulations so this thread is about the sum of the consequences.
an officer doesn't just get to wear their uniform for anything, and when they are wearing it they are representing more than just themselves, which is where the issue of appropriateness comes in.

as for broken regulations, the mrff says he did, specifically that he broke regulations prohibiting the endorsement of a particular faith.

I believe I already said the mrff is entitled to express their beliefs. They can believe generals are required to move about on pogo sticks if they like. Show me actual reg he broke.
 
i think it'd be tough to say that his speech at the prayer breakfast, in which he attributes all accomplishments to his faith, as something other than an endorsement of that faith.

Which he is free to do. Nothing in 2.12 prohibits it.
They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief
 
For those that don't get it - what if he had given a speech that was hostile to christianity? if he had mocked it, saying that the greatest gift in his life was becoming a rational atheist?

why did he need to participate in military uniform?
It's leftist butthurt, nothing more.

if he blathered on about being an atheist, I'm sure peole would have bitched, but not call for a full courtmarshall

leftist are just so weak, it's amazing they can drink coffee at all

it's either 'black' or with 'cream'
 
i think it'd be tough to say that his speech at the prayer breakfast, in which he attributes all accomplishments to his faith, as something other than an endorsement of that faith.

Which he is free to do. Nothing in 2.12 prohibits it.
They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief

Yes, I read that. Are you saying he was assigned to do that speech?
 
i think it'd be tough to say that his speech at the prayer breakfast, in which he attributes all accomplishments to his faith, as something other than an endorsement of that faith.

Which he is free to do. Nothing in 2.12 prohibits it.
They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief

Yes, I read that. Are you saying he was assigned to do that speech?
No, i'm saying that by choosing to give that speech over the importance of prayer and how he's needed it in his life and how god has made him able to be the officer he is and accomplish the things he has, it's difficult to say that as a leader he is not endorsing, very publicly, that belief set.
 
How does that apply?
i think it'd be tough to say that his speech at the prayer breakfast, in which he attributes all accomplishments to his faith, as something other than an endorsement of that faith.

Which he is free to do. Nothing in 2.12 prohibits it.
They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief

Yes, I read that. Are you saying he was assigned to do that speech?
No, i'm saying that by choosing to give that speech over the importance of prayer and how he's needed it in his life and how god has made him able to be the officer he is and accomplish the things he has, it's difficult to say that as a leader he is not endorsing, very publicly, that belief set.

Nothing in 2.12 says he can't do that. It says "officially endorsing". So unless he was telling the audience that his personal beliefs constitute the official position of the Air Force, he was in violation of nothing.
 
"That was our nation; a constitution, written for flawed sinners, with the moral compass of the Bible. So does it work? Has it worked? Yes. How do we keep it working? We get back to that moral compass and we pray."

that's not an endorsement of christianity?
 
"That was our nation; a constitution, written for flawed sinners, with the moral compass of the Bible. So does it work? Has it worked? Yes. How do we keep it working? We get back to that moral compass and we pray."

that's not an endorsement of christianity?

"Officially endorsing" is what is prohibited. Did he or did he not claim that was the official position of the Air Force?
 
"That was our nation; a constitution, written for flawed sinners, with the moral compass of the Bible. So does it work? Has it worked? Yes. How do we keep it working? We get back to that moral compass and we pray."

that's not an endorsement of christianity?

"Officially endorsing" is what is prohibited. Did he or did he not claim that was the official position of the Air Force?
he did not. but his rank, in uniform, speaking about life in the military

it could reasonably be construed that it was an official endorsement.
 
"That was our nation; a constitution, written for flawed sinners, with the moral compass of the Bible. So does it work? Has it worked? Yes. How do we keep it working? We get back to that moral compass and we pray."

that's not an endorsement of christianity?

"Officially endorsing" is what is prohibited. Did he or did he not claim that was the official position of the Air Force?

But, he did officially endorse it as he is in uniform. You have to listen to what he is saying.
 
Had he been wearing civilian clothes then this might have been avoidable. It was broadcast world wide on GOD tv.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top