This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Conservatives Say 'Don't Ask' Repeal Would Hurt Military Chaplains

Conservatives Say 'Don't Ask' Repeal Would Hurt Military Chaplains - Comments

Godfree Gordon's Avatar Comment 1 by Godfree Gordon

Thank goodness you changed he original title...

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 11:47:00 UTC | #463890

Cartomancer's Avatar Comment 2 by Cartomancer

The whole idea of military chaplains is ridiculous and nonsensical. Also, since it is America we're talking about, unconstitutional. The army is a secular institution, just as much subject to Jefferson's Wall of Separation as any other.

Furthermore, why on earth would chaplains be any more able to counsel people on social and familial issues than, say, cooks or quartermasters? If there is a need for counseling then they should employ professional, trained counselors and psychotherapists, not demonstrably biased and unsuitable religious kooks.

And what of the counseling needs of gay and lesbian servicepeople? Surely the needs of this vulnerable and often discriminated-against minority are of incomparably greater importance than preserving the petulant smugness of odious conservative bigots?

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 11:57:00 UTC | #463892

sandman67's Avatar Comment 3 by sandman67

when all else fails use the standard shabby tactic of the faithful and wheel out the Chewbacca Defence!

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 11:58:00 UTC | #463893

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 4 by SaganTheCat

religious freedom

about time that oxymoron was treated with the contempt it demands

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:01:00 UTC | #463894

squeegee's Avatar Comment 5 by squeegee

Inch by inch, securalism is making religious thought redundant. Once homosexuality and other "threats" like atheism are non issues then the chaplains will be superfluous and unemployed.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:03:00 UTC | #463895

MojoYugen's Avatar Comment 6 by MojoYugen

"...military policy will for the first time be 'at odds with the major tenets of the major religions represented in the armed services.'"

Well, except for the whole "thou shalt not kill" thing.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:12:00 UTC | #463899

The Soilworker's Avatar Comment 7 by The Soilworker

I wish MORE of the military would have a "crisis of conscience", but not about gays. Perhaps about killing brown people all over the world, actively or passively. The military and its chaplains are ridiculous if the gays can cause them such internal 'struggles' but killing hundreds upon thousands of civilians doesn't bother them a bit.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:14:00 UTC | #463900

mlgatheist's Avatar Comment 8 by mlgatheist

"Allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the armed forces "steals from the chaplain their religious freedom," according to retired military chaplain Col. Rich Young."

This is stupid, at best.

This bigot and those like him can continue to believe whatever idiotic things that they want to believe. One can hope that the military will stop them from preaching hate and spreading homophobic ideas. But religious freedom means that you can believe what you want to believe. After DADT is repealed these bigots will continue to beleive what they believe. So their religious freedom is not "stolen" from them.

Chaplains no longer preach against interracial marriage, even though there was a time that ultra conservatives preachers, especially in the south, did preach against it.

However, it is time that the US Government get completely out of religious pandering. Get rid of all chaplians, military and non-military. A soldier can find a civilian preacher, priest, imam, rabbi, etc. whenever they need one. We should not be using government money for this nonsense.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:16:00 UTC | #463902

kizumoto's Avatar Comment 9 by kizumoto

He said the departure of chaplains as a result of the change could leave "an insurmountable void."

Only fundy chaplains would leave, a void easily filled with inclusive chaplains. That is what he is worried about, isn't it.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:18:00 UTC | #463903

amuck's Avatar Comment 10 by amuck

So it's OK if homosexuals in the armed forces lie about their sexual orientation, then these scumbag military chaplains can "honestly counsel service members".

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:19:00 UTC | #463904

cbb2c's Avatar Comment 11 by cbb2c

What about keeping quiet about the whole "Thou shalt not kill (commit murder)" thing? I don't hear them asking to keep preaching that! Oh, no. And if military chaplains were done away with, leaving soldiers to seek non-military priests, etc, then soldiers would be at risk of being told that killing is wrong. This is probably part of the purpose of having chaplains. But THIS ... oh, THIS is apparently going TOO FAR!

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:24:00 UTC | #463906

chawinwords's Avatar Comment 12 by chawinwords

Toward the end of the article, these words appeared:
"Harry Knox, Religion and Faith Program Director of the gay-rights group Human Rights Campaign, countered that "forcing our men and women in uniform to lie about who they are goes against the core religious tenets of all major faith traditions."

"Telling the truth is an American and a religious value," he said.

Of course, everyone should know that the religious fundamentalists in the U.S. never lie in order to forward their religious bigotry, except it is sometimes hard to explain the words of some, like David Barton, who has a whole book of lying evidence dedicated to him and -- well, let the title speak for itself: "Liars for Jesus."

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:34:00 UTC | #463907

at3p's Avatar Comment 13 by at3p

So on one hand the chaplains are worried about their jobs, being egotistical and all, and on the hand they're scared for the poor believers who will not be able to hear religious teachings and preachings. This would be "the freedom to spout bullshit and hateful messages while being paid for it by suckers who pay taxes".

First of all, they should not have a job, since their religion has a main rule which nullifies any purpose of armies. (do not kill!)


Also on this matter;

As Bill Hicks would put it:

"Anyone... dumb enough to join the military... should be allowed to join the military"

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:37:00 UTC | #463908

justinesaracen's Avatar Comment 14 by justinesaracen

Crisis of conscience for military chaplains? Ex-Cuse-Me. These men of god DON'T have a crisis of conscience that their flock carry rifles and are trained to kill? It DOESN'T cause a crisis of conscience that they are in the employ of an agency whose sole purpose is to kill or threaten to kill?
Snnnaaarrggghhptuiii. (Sound of spitting on the ground before their sanctimonious feet.)

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:39:00 UTC | #463909

Bonzai's Avatar Comment 15 by Bonzai

at3p (and esuther)


First of all, they should not have a job, since their religion has a main rule which nullifies any purpose of armies. (do not kill!)


Are you talking about Buddhists? For the Abrahamists the rule is not "do not kill". But don't murder for illegitimate reasons. Going to smite God's enemies is considered a legitimate reason. The same bible that says "don't murder" also has chapters and chapters describing when genocide is not only permitted, but mandated.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:57:00 UTC | #463915

Rosbif's Avatar Comment 16 by Rosbif

"Telling the truth is an American and a religious value,"


Surely only a liar could say this with conviction?

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:59:00 UTC | #463917

God fearing Atheist's Avatar Comment 17 by God fearing Atheist

Participants at the press conference suggested conservative chaplains may not be able to be honest in marriage counseling or may feel compelled to leave the service.


WTF! Talk about cognitive dysfunction! Do these idiots really think homosexuals are seeking honest marriage guidance from chaplains under a "Don't ask, don't tell" policy? At worst the sex of their intended is hidden (it's the policy), at best they are getting guidance from a GL support group outside the military.

If the "DADT" policy is dropped, homophobic chaplains won't even be approached by the nervous betrothed - they will just go elsewhere.

If the policy is dropped, maybe chaplains should have the option of pinning a notice to their door "I'm a homophobe" to save time, confusion, and upset.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:04:00 UTC | #463918

infinitum17's Avatar Comment 18 by infinitum17

I know a military policy that is "at odds with the major tenets of the major religions represented in the armed services": KILLING PEOPLE.

They really do not understand that there are already gays in the military. What they SHOULD do is enact a RELIGIOUS DADT: Don't ask anybody what their religion is, don't tell anybody what yours is, keep your shit to yourself, and if you don't, you get kicked out. OK, maybe I don't mean that, but you get the picture.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:19:00 UTC | #463922

crookedshoes's Avatar Comment 19 by crookedshoes

yet they are not bothered to be part of a fighting force enlisted to KILL other people. So, chaplains in the military are ok with breaking a commandment and being complicit in murder. However, their sensibilities would be hurt if gays were allowed to OPENLY serve. Stranger than fiction. I swear I am surrounded by insanity.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:28:00 UTC | #463924

Merco's Avatar Comment 20 by Merco

Why don't they just ask God the next time they see him about whether or not he approves of the policy?

That's what this whole feud is about, isn't it? Determining the preference of an invisible man who nobody has seen. I want to get this over with and to deal with more important issues, like whether Santa prefers chocolate chip or raisin cookies.

Joking aside, their fantasy God HAS made his preference clear. If the liberal chaplains recognize that discriminating against homosexuals is wrong, then why do they subscribe to the notion that a book that tells us to stone them to death is the ultimate good? It would be like me wanting to be a Nazi, but to treat the Jews with respect.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:00:00 UTC | #463927

sara g's Avatar Comment 21 by sara g

So once again they are pouting that someone is being intolerent of their intolerence. Gah!

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:00:00 UTC | #463928

TrickyDicky's Avatar Comment 22 by TrickyDicky

8. Comment #484683 by mlgatheist on April 29, 2010 at 1:16 pm

"However, it is time that the US Government get completely out of religious pandering. Get rid of all chaplians, military and non-military. A soldier can find a civilian preacher, priest, imam, rabbi, etc. whenever they need one. We should not be using government money for this nonsense."

In the UK NHS (state) Hospitals have chaplains paid out of state funds (they are paid nearly twice the salary of a qualified nurse) and most patients think they just come in from local churches on a voluntary basis.

Although mainly C of E the other religions are now getting on the band wagon.

Nice little earner!

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:01:00 UTC | #463929

Billy Sands's Avatar Comment 23 by Billy Sands

He argued that chaplains will be "muzzled" if the policy passes and that "soldiers and families [will] no longer have the benefit of the full council of God."


News flash: you never had it in the first place - retards!

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:14:00 UTC | #463930

Rosbif's Avatar Comment 24 by Rosbif

The need a Judge like this:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article7111593.ece
over there in the states.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:22:00 UTC | #463932

ev-love's Avatar Comment 25 by ev-love

For a moment there I thought the headline referred to the British election and the Tories!


Mind you, they're still fieding plenty of candidates who used to support Section 28!

ev-love

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:32:00 UTC | #463934

prettygoodformonkeys's Avatar Comment 26 by prettygoodformonkeys

Shee-it, a li'l crisis o' conscience never hurt no one.

....'cept'n it'l make Bishops disappear......

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:39:00 UTC | #463935

sgturner59's Avatar Comment 27 by sgturner59

Do the chaplains find a problem with serving in the military when the Judeo-Christian command says "Thou shalt not kill."?

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:43:00 UTC | #463937

phasmagigas's Avatar Comment 28 by phasmagigas

carto.

Furthermore, why on earth would chaplains be any more able to counsel people on social and familial issues than, say, cooks or quartermasters?


I recall a reborn xtian talking to an ex priest (who by chance was actually gay) who was in deep conversation with him regarding the existence of hell, i wanted to ask him if hed like the opinion of the roofer down the street as he would be no more or no less privy to such arcane information. i'm not knocking the ex priest here, heck he was an EX priest afterall.

from article
steals from the chaplain their religious freedom


funny how when you know you are simply wrong you have to start inventing ways to circumvent acknowledging that you are merely ignorant or bigoted, similar games played by creationists.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:44:00 UTC | #463938

Stella's Avatar Comment 29 by Stella

Oh. My. God.

People, and Americans in particular, are just mind boggling stupid. The older I get, the more pronounced this stupidity seems. I wonder if I will even be able to bring myself to leave my house by the time I am 70.

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:48:00 UTC | #463940

Dr. Syn's Avatar Comment 30 by Dr. Syn

"Why would we ask these people to carry the burden of this administration's political agenda?" he asked.


"Instead of OUR agenda?"

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:49:00 UTC | #463943