Pentagon Orders Company To STOP Making Faith Based Dog Tags

[Road Runner]

This is really sad, sick, and disturbing all at the same time.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

Well...........there is supposed to be a separation of "church and state".

I can understand the govt not wanting govt symbols on religious themed stuff.

But it's been going on for many decades, if not centuries. WHY NOW???

 

[Road Runner]

Well...........there is supposed to be a separation of "church and state".

Yes, but we also have the freedom of religion.

 

[okfine]

This is really sad, sick, and disturbing all at the same time.

So, you think that guy sells those tags for nothing?

 

[Road Runner]

So, you think that guy sells those tags for nothing?

I'm talking about that it's sad that they're ordering for it to stop not that they've been making them.

 

[daveman]

U.S. Army Orders Group to Stop Stamping Bible Verses on Dog Tag​

These products are not paid for with DoD funds. The conflict is the sissy pansy-ass atheists getting butthurt over seeing Bible verses and Christian imagery alongside US military logos, ludicrously claiming it violates the Separation Clause.

 

[daveman]

So, you think that guy sells those tags for nothing?

He sells them to individual servicemembers. The purchases are not funded with tax dollars.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The issue arose when the company was reported to the Department of Defense by Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF). Weinstein claimed that engraving religious messages on an item that displays the official military emblem is fundamentally wrong and "poisons the constitutionally-mandated separation of Church and State…” according to Fox News.

Sounds like a lot of bedwetting to me. Servicemen personally paying to have religious engravings on their dog tags is in no way an endorsement of religion by the state.

I'm not religious and personally think most of these beliefs are silly, but it certainly does not bother me if other people believe it as long as they don't try and force it on me. It amazes me how many on the left get so uptight about religion and approach it like a vampire to garlic.

 

[okfine]

He sells them to individual servicemembers. The purchases are not funded with tax dollars.

So he does it for free? It's all about money.

 

[Road Runner]

I'm not religious and personally think most of these beliefs are silly, but it certainly bother me if other people believe it as long as they don't try and force it on me.

I think you mean that it doesn't bother you as long people don't try to force their beliefs on you.

 

[daveman]

So he does it for free? It's all about money.

In the OP video, he said he donated 10K for free and told the chaplain who made the request to keep his money.

Does that sound like the company's only about profit?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Everything woke turns to Shit

 

[Muhammed]

I can understand the govt not wanting govt symbols on religious themed stuff.

The government isn't allowed to establish whether or not a bible verse is somehow "religious themed" in the first place. The first amendment strictly forbids it.

 

[AMart]

They are dog tags worn under the uniform. Are they going to ban a Christian Cross next. If that was gay rainbow crap they would promote it.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

Yes, but we also have the freedom of religion.

But that doesn't mean they can use other companies/organizations symbols for their own profiteering benefits without the authorization from the owners of said symbols.

 

[AMart]

Well...........there is supposed to be a separation of "church and state".

I can understand the govt not wanting govt symbols on religious themed stuff.

But it's been going on for many decades, if not centuries. WHY NOW???

An individual wearing dog tags, inside of their uniform, does not equate to government sponsoring 1 religion or any religion.

 

[AMart]

But that doesn't mean they can use other companies/organizations symbols for their own profiteering benefits without the authorization from the owners of said symbols.

Who is they, government?

 

[daveman]

An individual wearing dog tags, inside of their uniform, does not equate to government sponsoring 1 religion or any religion.

Remember, these are people who only support the public utterance of the word "god" if it's followed by "damn America".

 

[Yarddog]

So, you think that guy sells those tags for nothing?

If people want them it's ok. No one is forced to wear one of those dog tags and it isnt visible to anyone. If it gives a little comfort to someone who is possibly going to go out into danger and die.... I can see why commie control freak leftists are against it. They never hesitate to suck the joy out of any room, and they always do it "for the people"

 

[mikegriffith1]

Well...........there is supposed to be a separation of "church and state".

I can understand the govt not wanting govt symbols on religious themed stuff.

But it's been going on for many decades, if not centuries. WHY NOW???

Printing faith-based dog tags is not even close to violating the separation of church and state.