US Military Treatment Of Atheists
 

I'm sure many of you have heard about the disparaging remarks made by military personnel about Tillman and his family. Hopefully you were as disgusted by this as I. I wanted to think it was because of the publicity.
But, I was wrong and I knew I was.

Now we know the real reason there are no atheists in foxholes.

Exactly, bigotry.
I have always found that little saying to be incredibly insulting, some health care morons use it too.

there was no shortage of atheists while i was in.

Good to hear.
I think it depends on who you are serving with and who your CO is.
It should not. Religion should never enter into it, it is a personal matter alone.

Reprinted from another board, with permission.

Personally I feel that the God Corps are a BLATANT infringement on church and state and should not exist in any form or fashion and should be disbanded.
They should be offered a door or a weapon and given a choice.

I presume the briefing mentioned in the quote above was a required one. As a result, everyone had to sit through the chaplain's trite little invocation. This is annoying if one is an atheist, but not the end of the world. The military does not force religious service attendence upon its members. If one is going to go on some crusade against the armed forces, I can think of at least a 100 better causes, rather than whether some idiot wants to make a blanket pronouncement on people's responses when facing death.

I've always heard that most people call for their Mommy, for what its worth.

His crusade isn't against the military, it's against Christians.

I would love to hear any stories of an atheist stating that they would not attend a meeting with Chaplains, which are officers (a travesty).
Hilarity would ensure, I'm sure.
I FULLY support our troops, that is why I am against this breech of the separation of church and state and forced intrusion of their personal worship on their behalf.
There are so many things one can do than fight for the rights of our soldiers in these times?
Please, enlighten me.

Wrong as usual.
I love Christians and don't care what people believe, just what they do.
No unsolicited evangelizing, especially door-to-door/phone calls (religion or sales should be illegal).
No breech of church and state of any kind and all current needs to be eliminated. Specific to this thread the god corps.
No abuse of children by teaching them if they offend god by "sinning" or leaving the "faith" they will eternally tortured in god's personal dungeon that he created specially for them.
No using the "faith" to justify hitting kids.

Once these things stop, I will stop saying a word.

To Christians, belief is action. What we do is what we believe. Of course it varies, sometimes greatly, between Christians exactly what they believe. But in the end Christians are called to act on their beliefs. Believe and do are one in the same for us. I'm sorry that makes you hate us.

That is why 98% of those in prison are theists?
I hate no one.

Any Christian who claims to be perfect is a hypocrite. Everyone does stupid stuff, everyone makes mistakes, some make extremely bad ones. To be a Christian does mean that you are perfect or are even striving to be. It means that you are trying to better the world around you and serve your fellow man as Jesus directed.
I shouldn't have used the word hate, but I think you see my point.

Atheists can't try to make a better world? I've been involved in charity my entire life, had several that I stared and ran with my wife.
Being religious means nothing when it comes to morality, morality is genetic.
It is how we, as apes, as tribal animals, became apex animals on this planet, we get along... that is all.
Reading some special invisible friend into it just does not work.

http://www.atheistfoxholes.org/

I never said nor inferred that atheists aren't allowed to do their part to better mankind as well. I merely stated that that is a way of living that all (obviously all don't) Christians ought to go by instead of wasting time and money of things like creation museums.

First off, don't make asinine comments like that because it contributes nothing to this conversation and only makes you look like an ass, which doesn't help people take what you say seriously. You're obviously a smart dude, don't obscure that fact with near useless comments.

That out of the way..

Christian morality comes from our faith. However everyone obviously has different senses of right and wrong. Some people think it is moral to steal from the rich and give it to the poor, others think the opposite. I take much of what the Bible says with a healthy dose of salt due to the history of the church and all that jazz. I base my faith off of wait for it.. faith. I don't tell others how to live, and I try to live my life in the footsteps of Jesus. Helping my fellow man instead of competing with him or using him for my own gains, serving others before myself, etc. I try to hold myself to a higher standard but not "look down my nose" at others like many conservative Christians do (gays, etc.).

My point being with all that said is that my sense of morality in my everyday life and my more long term outlook is dictated by how Jesus said we ought to. And I think what he said about that was damn straight and true. "Let he who is without sin.." you know the rest.

The man spent his life helping people who needed it the most, and that ought to indicate (at least it does to me) that he knew what he was talking about and doing and modeling your own life after his ain't such a bad idea.

Bullitt, in fairness to rk, I don't think your brand of Christianity is what he has a problem with. Your brand of Christian faith would, I am sure, refrain from insulting soldiers who happen not to share your faith. Your brand, presumably, would not frighten children with terrifying tales of pain and torture and everlasting horror, and then use that fear to underpin a 'moral code' that seeks to dictate every aspect of life, right down to the marriage bed.

The problem isn't Christianity, or religion, (though as most of you know, I'd prefer to live in a world without religion) rather the problem is a particular type of person/culture and how that transforms Christianty into a repressive and, I personally think, dangerous creed. This holds true for most religions. We've seen how such a cultural interpretation of Islam can lead to repression, violence and arrogant assertions of absolute truth.

Rk has a tendency to lump them all together in his posts, but I very much doubt he lumps them all together in his mind. We engage in shortcuts, and after a while, it's easy to stop putting in the same caveats every time.

Oh I know Dana, I'm not trying to get on his case or anything. I'm just not a fan of some of the broad sweeping statements, etc.

Exactly. I see this all the time at my school. I go to a private Christian college and it seems to draw some very close-minded and conservative borderline fundamentalist folks. Which is fine, people can believe what they want. But when they start discriminating against others and act like they are a cut above the rest, etc., I take offense.

There are roughly 2.1 billion Christians in the world. To say anything that includes "all", and for that matter probably the word "most", is silly. That's 2.1 billion humans, and accurate generalizations are almost impossible.

All Christians believe in Jesus. :p

I agree with Dana on this, Christianity/Islam/etc isn't the problem, it is the people that control those religions.

Do all, or most, Christians do the stuff that rkzenrage is complaining about? If so, then maybe it's not so silly. If not, then they aren't the subject of the complaint.

Couple of examples:

The treatment a soldier receives when s/he is diagnosed with PTSD. An unconscionable number are treated as cowards or traitors, broken down in rank, and given dishonorable discharges. This means no help from the V.A., either.

Not that help from the V.A. is all that great. There are endless examples of wounded and/or disabled soldiers getting sub-standard care from the VA and over-burdened military hospitals.

Soldiers in the field in Iraq and Afganistan often have inadequate supplies and armoured protection, although I hear that's gotten somewhat better.

Etc. etc., etc.

Glad to hear that you love Christians, BTW. :eyebrow:

It's odd. A group of people choose to classify themselves as separate from the rest of humanity, but they also want immunity from criticism - because they claim that there are no defining characteristics to their classification.

If you don't have any characteristics, then you aren't a group. If you do, then you are subject to criticism.

Also, I think its high time we heard moderate Christians condemning, publicly and boldly, the behaviour and attitudes of the fundementalists....

Yeah, tell that to the moderate Muslims too... yeah right. :headshake

I am married to one, my closest friend, many of my other friends are and many in my family are you fucking simpleton.
They all know how I feel and what I do to fight what "The Church" does and support me because they know that they hypocrisy harms the religion far more than anything else.
Precisely, you don't say homosexuality is a sin, don't use contraception if you need it, breech church and state, threaten kids with hell or use to bible to justify hitting them or push your religion on others... I can give a fuck what you believe.
We ALL believe things that are wrong, everyone.

rk I don't actually think we should be telling moderate christians to condemn their fundamentalist brethren more thoroughly I hear them condemning bigotry in the fundamentalist congregations all the time.

(but I also hear/read a lot of moderate moslems condemning fundamentalist Islamists....which was my point.)

Another disciple said to him, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father." But Jesus told him, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead." (Matthew 8:21–22)

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)

"For I have come to turn `a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'" (Matthew 10:35–36)

"From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." (Luke 12:52–53)

"Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." (Mark 13:12–13)
"Think not that I come to send peace on earth: I came not to send
peace, but a sword."
Matthew 10:34

- Matthew 26:52
"... all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."

No they don't. If the complaint says all, most, or just Christian, then it is silly and unfair.

Separate? No, being a Christian doesn't separate them from the rest of humanity any more than driving a red car does.
Horseshit, you are trying to say all Christians are the same, because they are Christians... all Christians do the same things, think the same, act the same. That's patently ridiculous.
Are all Texans the same, think the same, act the same? I think not.

So they aren't all the subject of the complaint.

If I complain that Republicans did something nefarious, or that Democrats are spineless, please in the future take it as given that I am not referring to the ones who did not do the thing I am complaining about; rather I am complaining that the ones who did not do it are too few. I'd rather not put that caveat in every post, but when it comes up, feel free to check that the standing caveat is still in effect.

Punctuation would be a nice addition to your diatribes. It took me 30 seconds to decipher your first sentence, you simpleton.

Your argument sounds suspiciously like the old bromide, "some of my best friends are - (insert group of your choice - Afro-American, gays, homeless, lawyers, etc., etc.)."

I can't remember who said it - Jung, maybe? "Be careful whom you hate, for those are the ones you will most come to resemble."

They are all the subject of his complaints, over and over and over and...
If you want to make that caveat, either put it in the post or your signature. He's a homicide bomber, making no caveats.

No, I'm not saying that. I've never said that, despite your repeated, hysterical claims to the contrary. Quote me, or fuck off. Your call.

Isn't the point that you can be part of the same group but still not be entirely the same?

That's exactly what you said, and it's bullshit.

Well, Flint, I have to say I got pretty much the same thing as Bruce did out of this.

I guess part of the problem is that I can't believe that anyone as intelligent as you seem to be could make this statement. Part of the problem is that there's so much hand-waving and generality throwing in these discussions. Let's walk through an example.

The set of all Christians are those that believe that Jesus is the son of God and that he died in atonement for our sins.

The people who believe in Creationism is a subset of the above set. So some Christians do not believe in Creationism.

So tell me why I should take flak over Creationism, when I don't believe it?

If that's not what you're saying, then maybe you could 'splain yourself better.

What I got from Flints post(s) is that people claim to be Christians which is fine, but that you can't disown part of the group just because you don't agree or believe what they do. They're still either part of the group or they're not, and if they are, then you by association must take some responsibility for the group as a whole.

For example, if you're an American, you might disagree with some things the American government does or something any other American does, but that doesn't make you any less American, and possibly, like most people who would consider themselves American, you'd want to fix the things that you think are wrong.

I could be wrong, but that's what I got out of it.

If that's what he's saying, then I most heartily disagree. No person can be responsible for another much less for an entire group. A person can only be responsible for their own actions.

I don't think it means you're responsible. I do think it means that you can't simply say, well I disagree with that but I'm not going to do anything about, and while I'm doing that, I'm going to stay part of the group anyway. It's not just about religion if you look at it from that perspective. You could look at any club and recognise that there are rules associated with the club and if you don't adhere to them, you get thrown out of the club. You don't get the luxury of saying, I'm part of that club, except when it comes to such and such. When that happens, I'm part of a different club.

He's trolling, as usual.

That's a fucked up perspective. So you are responsible for the actions of every one of the 20,434,175 other Australians?
It's not a club, it's something we have in common, and in many cases the only thing, those 2.1 billion people have in common.

Whatever you say Bruce. There's no point in trying to talk reasonably to you when you're on another one of your crusades.

Enjoy your day.

Fuck you, you condecending bitch.

lol...Careful you don't get too upset bruce. You might burst a blood vessel or something.

Shhhhh there there bruce, let's all just enjoy some boobies and forget all about this

http://googlegirls.files.wordpress.com/2005/12/3807.jpg

What's that all about?

I didn't really enjoy the boobies, Bullitt
Can I have something else please?

I would have thought that it was obvious, but if you need it explicit, please take it as assumed.

Scuse me while I wrestle with my long hose miss..
http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y41...efighter15.jpg

damn bullitt. been saving that on your hard drive for just the right situation?

Just like I just did... great work!

No, I'm not saying that. I've never said anything like that. Not even remotely. What you're responding to is what Bruce said I said. I'm not going to argue about what Bruce said I said. I didn't say, or suggest that "all Christians do the same things, think the same, act the same" ... If I had said that, EVER, then Bruce could just go ahead and quote me. He can't. I've never said that.

Think of it this way: people "born in Texas" are part of a static, imposed group. They have no choice in the matter. That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a voluntary decision. And the decision consists of...what? What is it that people mean when they CHOOSE to call themselves something? How would you know whether to call yourself something that doesn't have any characteristics? It wouldn't exist!

Understand this: I'm not arguing the scope of the characteristics. I'm not saying, and I've never said that "all Christians do the same things, think the same, act the same" ...and I think it's fucking dishonest as hell to make the S T R E T C H to get that out of what I've said.

And I will add that it's really creepy to be topic-stalked by someone who is constantly, purposefully twisting my words to have the same, wrong meaning - that I've repeatedly correct them on. I will always welcome honest debate and genuine disagreement.

It does suck, I got a couple of em'.

I find it interesting that often, the same people who are saying they shouldn't be held responsible for the views of other Christian groups, are the ones who are often most vocal in demanding that moderate moslems should be more proactive in condemning fundamentalist Islamists. I've seen time and time again on these boards, people claiming that they rarely, if ever, hear moderate moslems speak out.

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. Different Christian communities are not responsible for other Christian communities. Moderate Moslems are not responsible for the mad mullah brigade.

Sorry to be all political and all...

But I didn't like the muscle-bound man either
Thanks for the thought though ;)

Maybe. :D Ok, maybe not.

(throws hands up in the air)
huff!

Here you go, Sundae! Or was that DanaC who was a big ol' Peggite?

Oh Clod you angel.
Both Dana and I have a warm wet spot for the Pegg.