The enemy within: evangelical fundamentalism in US armed forces

[Skybird]

"The impact of religious and political affiliation on strategic military decisions and policy recommendations"

This study paper has been published on the website of the US Army War college. I find the things it points at as worrying and alarming as I found all kinds of religious fundamentalism worrying and alarming, always, thus I like the points being referred to as little as I like the Taleban in Afghanistan.

This paper analyzes the impact of a culturally homogeneous group on strategic decision-making and policy recommendations. The United States military's organizational climate has shifted steadily to the right since the Viet Nam War. Today's Armed Forces are increasingly identified with conservative Christian and Republican values. This change in group dynamics can inhibit the decision making process by preventing a thorough review of relevant courses of action, in accordance with the Rational Decision Model. The nature of in-groups and their influence on the decision process can have a deleterious effect on sound decision making, even if only inadvertently. Today's conservative voice has a strong influence on national policy decisions. This makes it imperative that strategic leaders understand the culture shift in today's military, as well as how group dynamics can limit creativity and proper analysis of alternatives. The failure to do so can cause a divergence of opinion between military and civilian leaders and thereby widen the gap in civil military relations.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil432.pdf (http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/ksil432.pdf)


Direct historical examples are infrequent due to the fact that decisions do not always lead
to military action, and their analyses often rely on subjective interpretation to determine their
correctness. That subjective analysis highlights the insidious nature of the decline; groupthink
dynamics may even suppress the possibility of a problem due to rationalization.68 Nevertheless,
Conservative voices have made their opinions known on a wide range of issues such as the B-1
bomber procurement, Strategic Defense Initiative, Gays in the military, the abandonment of the
Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty, and the doctrine of pre-emptive war. These issues all directly
involved the military, and since the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff sits on the National
Security Council, the military certainly had representation during these discussions.
For many evangelical Christians, regardless of their profession, their religious beliefs are
so strongly embedded that it is difficult to separate their personal views from their professional
opinions. Without a firm understanding of this potential pitfall, it could threaten our military’s
religious pluralism and tolerance at a time when America’s population and Armed Forces are
more diverse, ethnically and religiously, than ever before. Fortunately, the military’s unshakable
faith in Constitution makes the possibility of sustained, open conflict between military and
civilian authorities implausible, at least for the foreseeable future. The real danger to strategic
decision-making is the gradual decline in effectiveness that leaders may not notice until it is too
late.
America’s military leaders must ensure preconceived notions based on religious or
political ideology do not adversely shape the decision making process, nor can it allow intuition
based on “automated expertise” to override an objective evaluation of relevant possibilities.
Failure to do so can result in lead to an erosion of trust with civilian leadership and degrade
national policy decisions. The impact to strategic thinkers is clear, and Sun Tsu’s warning to
know one’s self has never been more applicable than it is today.


Commenting on this danger:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20061231_chris_hedges_americas_holy_warriors/


Editor’s note: The former New York Times Mideast Bureau chief warns that the radical Christian right is coming dangerously close to its goal of co-opting the country’s military and law enforcement.

[Ducimus]

Well its no big secret the fundies have had alot of clout, and the military has always been primarly republican in individual poltical leanings.

The clout of the religous right, i have to admit, find very disconcerting. Religion and state should be kept seperate, but the religious right, has other ideas.

I don't know if theres any conspiracy stuff going on, but they are very good at interjecting their dogma in peoples daily lives, in subtle ways. When i grew up, Halloween was about good fun, carving pumpkins, trick or treating, and dressing up in costume. The fun even extended into school - it was a simple holiday. These days its not allowed at school because some local christian thought it was pagan worship or some such. Even if it is, what's it to them?

Unfortunatly the evangilicals won't rest until the US is a religously controlled state, much like Iran. The effects are subtle and everwhere. I remember back in 1996, or 97, we used to see this guy around the barracks every wedsnday and sunday, dressed up in a suit, bible in hand, looking for converts. Most of us looked at him funny while drinking our beers thinking, "Is this guy serious? what a nutjob!" Well, taht guy wore the same uniform we did. That was 10 years ago, i wonder if theres more of those types now.

Whats more scary is The fundies are going after the next generation of americans. When you have kids growing up going to **** like this:

http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/
(look at movies and pictures here, its F'ing scary)

I have to wonder if the US, a few generations from now, is going to be transformed into the "Christian republic of America", much like the "Islamic republic of Iran".

[Skybird]

Whats more scary is The fundies are going after the next generation of americans. When you have kids growing up going to **** like this:

http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/
(look at movies and pictures here, its F'ing scary)

I have to wonder if the US, a few generations from now, is going to be transformed into the "Christian republic of America", much like the "Islamic republic of Iran".

Hitchens and Dawkins both call it child abuse. So does Condell. So do I.

But this paper and the article I linked to are about the army, and fundamentalists and the Chrstian right trying to get it under their influence. Let's keep the focus on that for the sake of this thread. Discussing it on a national communal level and the implications for civil US society would see this topic possibly going up in flames. Not needed! ;)

[Ducimus]

Well, like i said, they're everywhere, so to me its hard to focus on just one aspect without looking at the larger picture. Where the military is concerned the only place where it really matters is the decision makers, and how they let it effect their decision making. The rest of the miltary probably does what myself and my buddies did when it comes to evangelical influence, laugh. I got a bigger laugh when that nutjob i mentioned found somebody stupid enough to listen to the crap he had to spew.

Those guys really take themselves seriously. The barracks is not a family or church enviorment, but yet, there he was, "spreading the word". That said, evangicals might find a more receptive audience in the miltary, the saying "there are no atheists in foxholes" is patently true.

[Rockin Robbins]

American armies have always been havens for Christian faith. And that largely has been good for the military. Both north and south had great revivals in their armies during the Civil War and nobody was saying it portended any disaster. Similar things happened during WWI and WWII without invoking any Chicken Little complex. It is in the nature of those facing dangerous circumstances to think on religious issues, just as it is in the nature of people in that situation to raise hell and have fun. That is in no way dangerous to the military or political process, any more than the preponderance of socialists in political institutions is.

Conflict within the rules of civilized society is how progress takes place. Checks and balances between those of differing world views, interests, philosophies and religions works for the good of all, if not always for their comfort level.

What we are supposed to have in America is freedom OF religion, "Congress shall make no law infringing..." not "freedom FROM religion." That, sirs, is a socialist concept we cannot tolerate.

You folks would be the first to defend a crazy person standing on the street corner proclaiming black helicopter conspiracies as freedom of speech, even if he is a little irritating. OK a lot irritating. But put a Bible in his hand and have him yelling you're going to hell because he somehow thinks that'll make you want to be just like him, why can't you ignore him just like the other guy.

There are a lot more enforced "holiday trees" and "winter festivals" replacing Christmas than schools canceling halloween. I have heard of some atheists in schools trying to eliminate halloween because it was a "religious holiday." Stupid people aren't stupid because they are Christian or atheist: they're stupid because they're stupid! Most Christians are common sense people who are completely unlike your stereotype of some kind of nazis out to control the world in part of their evil empire. Do you really think the strange guy in your army unit was CAPABLE of establishing totalitarian power? I'd say he was to be pitied, not hated or feared. People just need to get a life and quit expecting everyone to be like themselves.

[Ducimus]

Theres a never ending vicious cycle thats been at work for some time. You push a group of people, they push back harder. If atheists or christians stopped shoving at each other (im ambivilant to both), and realized that their rights end, where the other persons nose begins (both literally and figuratively), then maybe that subject will finally go the way of the dodo bird. Until such time, it will be a never ending social tug of war, with no end in sight.

As an aside, people, and their views, are products of their enviorment in which they've lived. Not everyone experiences the bad things that are derived from sterotypes, others do. The trick remains to keep the bad experiences in perspective and not paint with a wide brush, but always the bad experiences remain, and they're never forgotton, so it often becomes very hard. (theres a story behind that, but its much too personal)

edit:

BTW , RR, please dont take offense at my views on this subject. My personality is often just frank bluntless, mixed with a heavy seasoning of sarchasm, with a "hell bent for leather" attitude, for want of a better term. I think im hardwired that way. Imagine my surpise when i met some long lost relatives from one of my genetic parients and found ALL OF EM are just like that. Good christ!

[Skybird]

Not dangerous, said Rocking robbins - but that is missing the point. The study for example asks the question in how far extreme religious views work like a filter through which reality must pass before a man'S reason makes any plans and and ways to adress it. It points at the risk that dangers do not get perceived just in time, or are exaggerated, because of the religous fundamentalism of the decision-makers. A German text I also read on the issue points at some statistical data, showing that since the Vietnam war the numerical relation between democrats and republicans in the military has very fundamentally changed, almost reversed accoridng to the USAWC study now, and that the link between being Republican camps and fundamentalist evangelical policies and opinions is extremely strong - its not really matching reality to say that Republicans "always" had been totally dominating in the military - this total dominance has devceloped over the past 3 or 4 decades only. also it was pointed out that the group pressure on people to join the fundamental christian orientation in units and branches of the army forces is extremely strong and reaches as far as open mobbing of people, denying them any career chances if they resist, and isolating them if they do withhold themselves from joining the belief of their units, or do not attend the service of their evangelical unit caplan. And finally, it was pointed out that in the past years under Bush, radical evangelical camps were able to push their people in up to 50% of those positions representing higher command ranks and planning and decision making positions.

Not dangerous?

So, there is a very great danger indeed, by evangelical dogma dominating percpetion of reality and decision making on questions of war and peace, and how to wage wars and with what objectives, and growing religious intolerance in the army. By influencing both the composition of the army, and the way in which threats to the US from the outside get evaluated, the thread this developement poses isheavily influencing US policy. This is not the army from the time of vietnam, and it is not the army fighting in WWII.

And I would rate the Iraq '03 and also the person of Bush himself war as one symptom of this dangerous developement. Look were both have led America.

[CB..]

generaly speaking you would have to feel it to be disturbing to have any group that fermently believes in armageddon to have even the most marginal influence over military decisions....as they may well generate a "self fullfilling prophecy"..why work for any possible peacefull soloution if you are 100% sure that all will end in destruction...??? that is they by definition will have precious little FAITH in any positive outcome..and may even believe any peacefull outcome to be "the work of the devil"....having had some little contact with "bouncy castle" fundamentalist christianity here in the UK, i can say without any doubt what so ever that the above mind set is nothing out of ordinary at all..fairly left wing in fact as far as Fundamentalist thinking goes...

[Iceman]

Look at the world around you realistically and quit living fantasy star trek, we all will overcome nonsense, and smell the coffee.It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life....

1. The atmosphere is polluted beyond repair.
2. The food supplies are not in good shape and if they are the ones who have starve the have nots.
3. Those in power around the globe will never Never agree to share control.
4. We daily poison ourselves with pollution and crappy foods.
5. This is not just America either but it is a concerted effort by ALL.
6. WE Kill
7. WE Steal
8. We Sin against others and ourselves.

These are facts...non disputed by scientists and the like.

Please please! tell me what possible hope you have that I may believe in it.

The world offers death on a silver platter.

Christ offers life.
Tell me what is wrong with that?
Have a good day. :)

[CB..]

ah but if one is really so sure....what need is there for faith...?? one wonders

[Happy Times]

If this would be the road America takes, it will have to take it without Europe.
Good bye and good luck.

[Skybird]

Look at the world around you realistically and quit living fantasy star trek, we all will overcome nonsense, and smell the coffee.It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life....

1. The atmosphere is polluted beyond repair.
2. The food supplies are not in good shape and if they are the ones who have starve the have nots.
3. Those in power around the globe will never Never agree to share control.
4. We daily poison ourselves with pollution and crappy foods.
5. This is not just America either but it is a concerted effort by ALL.
6. WE Kill
7. WE Steal
8. We Sin against others and ourselves.

These are facts...non disputed by scientists and the like.

Please please! tell me what possible hope you have that I may believe in it.

The world offers death on a silver platter.

Christ offers life.
Tell me what is wrong with that?
Have a good day. :)

It surprises me time and again how often people that are trying to raise an impression to be "religious", are desperately hoping for doomsday and the end of the world being near. I wonder how that fits together.

And btw: that attitude has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with what this man named jesus tried to teach people.

Scriptures... :dead: In the end, Iceman, even if by fact all what you said may be true - you do not wish for a chance for man, or a better world. You want to see him fail no matter what - for your own satisfaction, and avoiding to need questioning your own convictions.

Criticising the status quo and expressing fears and concerns is one thing. and i am not taking man's survival for granted myself. But actively wishing for the worst, is a totally other thing. Can you go to sleep at night without being ashamed? Are you teaching this poison for the soul to your children as well, assuming you have any?

Maybe considering to join those Russians sectarians in the cave they occupied? They too think the end of the world is near, and there is no worth and no use in trying. They already hope for the worst, to feel legitimized.

That is queer, mildy put.

[August]

So some fundies don't like Halloween, just like some soulless athiests are trying their best best to take away Christmas, big deal, neither are going to have more than local success since the vast majority of the nation would never put up with it.

Look, the US was created by religious people, it has been run for over two centuries by religious people, and in all that time we have managed to avoid having the country turned into a theocracy. Why is that? If the threat from organized religion is as great as some make it out to be then how do we account for such a long running lack of success given the fact that athiests had little political power with which to oppose them until fairly recently?

Seems to me that the fundimentalist "threat" grows as athiests gain power themselves.

[Skybird]

Creationism is in open advance. Even at schools. A president launching wars at the word of God. More evangelicals than ever missionizing a bigger crowd - than ever. Internal analysis of the army voicing concern.
Religous right and neocons in unholy union being successfulk in disabling some vital parts of america's guaranteed, most vital and elementary freedoms.

No problem all that. But beware the wicked evil atheists! ;) Well, Peking is fearing the Dalai Lama, another of these wicked evil atheists, accusing him of planning civil unrest and rebellion. Okay, when peking says so, it must be true. :lol:

You have a theocrat sitting in your White House right now, August - and you do not even see it when standing right in front of it.

I agree though on the pilgrims and founders having been religious people - somethign that often is overseen in europe. However, if these pilgrims really have been as intolerant and deaf for the voice of reason as the evangelical lords of TV today, is something different. If that would have been the case, the constitution, the bill of rights, the amandements and some more would not have been possible, and Thomas Jefferson and Ralph Waldo Emmerson would have ended on the stake. Actually, witch burning was not that bwide-spread and often practised as in Europe - whose climate of intolerance and supression these pilgrims tried to escape.

[antikristuseke]

Most christians who have been in power have not been backwards bible literalists, its those people who are the threat not the christians who put common sense before scripture.

[August]

Creationism is in open advance. Even at schools. A president launching wars at the word of God. More evangelicals than ever missionizing a bigger crowd - than ever. Internal analysis of the army voicing concern.
Religous right and neocons in unholy union being successfulk in disabling some vital parts of america's guaranteed, most vital and elementary freedoms.

No problem all that. But beware the wicked evil atheists! ;) Well, Peking is fearing the Dalai Lama, another of these wicked evil atheists, accusing him of planning civil unrest and rebellion. Okay, when peking says so, it must be true. :lol:

You have a theocrat sitting in your White House right now, August - and you do not even see it when standing right in front of it.

I agree though on the pilgrims and founders having been religious people - somethign that often is overseen in europe. However, if these pilgrims really have been as intolerant and deaf for the voice of reason as the evangelical lords of TV today, is something different. If that would have been the case, the constitution, the bill of rights, the amandements and some more would not have been possible, and Thomas Jefferson and Ralph Waldo Emmerson would have ended on the stake. Actually, witch burning was not that bwide-spread and often practised as in Europe - whose climate of intolerance and supression these pilgrims tried to escape.

Obviously you have never heard of Cotton Mather Skybird. Evangelicals are nothing new in my country. I know you don't like our President but as much as you underestimate the power of 18th century American religion you way over estimate the influence of todays current crop of televangelists on the government of my country.

[Happy Times]

What is the number of these evengelicals? I have heard numbers 80-100 million?:hmm:

[Skybird]

What is the number of these evengelicals? I have heard numbers 80-100 million?:hmm:
Usually you will read numbers in the range of 20-35% of the population. However, their grip at influencing positions they gain by allying with the politcial conservatives (much of their values ARE conservative's values) is overproportional, and as I said in the opening posting, currently around 50% of the deciding, command-making and otherwise influential positions in the miliutary are in hands of evangelical fundamentalists, gaining them during the reign of Bush. Also it was reminded that it is no rare phenomenon that persons not submitting to the overall conservative evangelical c,limate in a given unite, can become being intimadated, mobbed, put under pressure to submit, and their careers being put in question if not submitting, and this does not seem to happen rarely. Bush also publicly support creationsim being taughed at school although the supreme court has ruled that this is against the constitution, and in the past years we have had time and again reports on local school and cities where some kind of scandals, confrontations and attempts of fundamentalists to make school subjects of teaching their religious views, especially on creationism. the problem her eis that it no longer is a purely american problem. They have succeeded in letting it swap into europe as well, and it is expanding. They are so successful in propagating it, that even in Islam now their has shown up creationism, and it does not even try to hide that it just adaßts to the different religious figures they have, else it totally copies the american model of creationism.

Since both Blair and Bush have argued in public statements and interwiews with their morals, and since the religous right in America has called for the Iraq war si nce years before it was laucnhed, it should be obvious that it is emerging to be a real threat indeed - at least one war already has been launched because of partially being influenced by this thinking. Such braindead reasoning we simply cannot afford. The study also is about how religous views filter perceptions and decision making in the military, and therefore: form the reality the military feels competent to adress with its means and tools. Now, here is where the danger starts at the latest.

August's one mistake is, that - like often - he only accepts things to happen if they are happening in the open, plain and easy to be seen, uncovered, unhidden. For him some rule or law is written on a paper, and reality matches it, always, undisputed. If the constitution says this or that, it cannot be imagined by him that massive violation of this paragraph may be the rule of the day. And the US has remained unchnaged since decades and centuries, the past decades since the WII for example have not taken place and have not chnaged the poltiical moral face of the country - not at all! Since he is minimizing the danger that way, it appears to him that atheism suddenly is a so much greater a threat, when comparing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4mWiqkGy-Y

Well, atheism is not the threat - only when it comes in the name of materialism, and not in the name of reason. And that is the realms of big business, and corporaion'S megalomania. And here indeed - it all has become a threat. to our constitutional order. To our freedoms. To the transparency of our political system of checks and balances. And here it goes into a strange alliance with fundamentalists, who also try to cloud the transparencies of policy-making. Not in the name of atheism of coursek, but in the name of their own scirpture-depending views.

All that is already bad enough. But where big business even lends itself to the cause of religous fundamentalism, it even gets worse. Think of military procuring projects, as mentioned in the study.

Well, however... :lol:

[Fish]

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4mWiqkGy-Y



Well, at least it hit people! 444 commensts till now. :D

[Tchocky]

Look at the world around you realistically and quit living fantasy star trek, we all will overcome nonsense, and smell the coffee.It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life.... If this is religion...yikes.

The world offers death on a silver platter. Er, yes. The last thing we all do is to die. Are we to let that cloud our judgement and give up any sort of hope? Now I know why it's called blind faith.

Christ offers life.
Tell me what is wrong with that? I suspect that if you had been born in India you wouldn't be saying this. I mean that religion is more or less accidental, incidental, and past it's shelf life.

[Iceman]

Look at the world around you realistically and quit living fantasy star trek, we all will overcome nonsense, and smell the coffee.It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life....

1. The atmosphere is polluted beyond repair.
2. The food supplies are not in good shape and if they are the ones who have starve the have nots.
3. Those in power around the globe will never Never agree to share control.
4. We daily poison ourselves with pollution and crappy foods.
5. This is not just America either but it is a concerted effort by ALL.
6. WE Kill
7. WE Steal
8. We Sin against others and ourselves.

These are facts...non disputed by scientists and the like.

Please please! tell me what possible hope you have that I may believe in it.

The world offers death on a silver platter.

Christ offers life.
Tell me what is wrong with that?
Have a good day. :)

It surprises me time and again how often people that are trying to raise an impression to be "religious", are desperately hoping for doomsday and the end of the world being near. I wonder how that fits together.

And btw: that attitude has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with what this man named jesus tried to teach people.

Scriptures... :dead: In the end, Iceman, even if by fact all what you said may be true - you do not wish for a chance for man, or a better world. You want to see him fail no matter what - for your own satisfaction, and avoiding to need questioning your own convictions.

Criticising the status quo and expressing fears and concerns is one thing. and i am not taking man's survival for granted myself. But actively wishing for the worst, is a totally other thing. Can you go to sleep at night without being ashamed? Are you teaching this poison for the soul to your children as well, assuming you have any?

Maybe considering to join those Russians sectarians in the cave they occupied? They too think the end of the world is near, and there is no worth and no use in trying. They already hope for the worst, to feel legitimized.

That is queer, mildy put.

"are desperately hoping for doomsday and the end of the world" I prefer to look at things they way they are not thru rose colored glasses.Drink some more coffee.

"you do not wish for a chance for man, or a better world" I never said this at all I said I look at things they way they ARE not How I "wished" they were.

See you on the other Skybird..you and others here will keep your heads in the sand until the very end which is your "choice", I and Christ merely offers another way....what, as I asked above, is EXACTLY your plan?...you don't have one..period.

I am in no cave and I fear nothing. I have no weapons in my home to protect myself from evil men as I believe that he who kills with the sword will die with it.Do not mistake me for some crazy person I have a great job ,great family, nice home...and tommorrow it is cast into the fire to be tried.

The harvest is great and the laborers few Skybird...it is my hope sincerely that you and all here will be counted as wheat and not chaff.I'm a laborer.But just like in the days of Noah when the time is near the Door will be shut and it will be too late for ya then.

Please do me a favor and not lump me in with "Religion"....belief is not religion.

God and Christ and myself included do not hope or pray for the worlds demise...don't be silly and try to discount what I say by throwing that bs up...I know where you come from Skybird and I know your mind...it is fleshly and you and others here concern yourselves with fleshly things....but the big game the big show being played out behind the veil is for your soul.

Almost harvest time...

[Skybird]

:dead:

"If I knew that the world is bound to perish tomorrow, I would still plant an apple tree today ."

(Martin Luther)



It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life....
1. The atmosphere ... 2. The food ... (yaddayaddayadda)
These are facts... non disputed by scientists and the like.
Please please! tell me what possible hope you have that I may believe in it. The world offers death on a silver platter."

(Iceman)



Get a visum for Russia, Iceman, and join those men in the cave. They are your real brothers, believe me.

[Deamon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4mWiqkGy-Y :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Brilliant!!!

Seldome had such a good laught. :up:

[Skybird]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4mWiqkGy-Y :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Brilliant!!!

Seldome had such a good laught. :up:
You should see his 27 others.
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=patcondell&p=r
Be aware that the quality of his speeches is varying and some are weak, but most are very nicely thought out.

[Deamon]

You should see his 27 others.
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=patcondell&p=r
Be aware that the quality of his speeches is varying and some are weak, but most are very nicely thought out. Already watching :ping:

Not that I would agree on everything but his sense of humor is pricelss :lol:

[Happy Times]

:dead:

"If I knew that the world is bound to perish tomorrow, I would still plant an apple tree today ."

(Martin Luther)



It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life....
1. The atmosphere ... 2. The food ... (yaddayaddayadda)
These are facts... non disputed by scientists and the like.
Please please! tell me what possible hope you have that I may believe in it. The world offers death on a silver platter."

(Iceman)



Get a visum for Russia, Iceman, and join those men in the cave. They are your real brothers, believe me.

Anyone care to lighten me were this apocalyptic mentality comes to these evangelicals?
Something like 90% of Finns belong to the Lutheran church but we have very little fundamentalists. Its often said Lutherans are never "happy" and are constantly trying to make things even better and work harder. So they dont have time to think about the afterlife all the time.

[Fish]

I and Christ .

I think that must be, Christ and me. :hmm:

[CB..]

i feel it comes from the fundamentalist unconcious (?) desire to by pass the need for faith...hence the literal interpretation of the various scriptures..here's a good example...
whilst i was working in a hospital a while back...one of the ward assistants (a fundamentalist Christian) was amazed to the point of confusion by the fact that one of the patients was a Christian..and yet was ill....this completely contradicted the literal interpretation of the Bible...where-as all illness had been taken onto Christ as part of the sacrifice he made etc..ergo no Christian could ever become ill...

i kid you not.....the literal interpretation of scripture ...(again i cannot emphasise enough just how "normal" this type of thinking is in fundamentalist groups..it's bog standard run of the mill fundamentalist doctrine)

now this ward assistant went into a deep crisis regarding this patient even to the point of haranging the patient about his lack of faith...how could he be ill?? ..she is going to spend most of her life in such a state of confusion and cause no end of harm if she does not cotton on..(if you see the relevance of the comparison)

etc

mean-while the patient maintained that his faith was not negated by his illness..far from it ...

the fundamentalist point of view and their literal interpretation of scripture is a "low brow" attempt to avoid the need for faith entirely...faith is complicated...faith is not blind...etc etc well you know the storys same as me..

fundamentalists by their actions seek to deny the need for faith by claiming the literal truth...but because faith is anything BUT literal...and....hence the need and use for/of parable..etc..thus they are unwilling to accept that faith is a struggle...not a light switch ...and that really "does their heads in" lol

[waste gate]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

[Fish]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

As there is? China, SA?

[waste gate]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

As there is? China, SA?

I don't understand what you are asking Fish.

[Skybird]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

As there is? China, SA?
A common characteristic of both Christian and Islamic fundamentalists alike. That'S why I have some sympathy for Judaism, not for it'S content, for which I do not care that much, but for it's form and behavior. It does not try to teach me about it's greatness and truth and glory at every opportunity, but leaves me alone when I say No, and stays for itself. The same coluld be said for Buddhism, and Hinduism, at least in the forms they appear in the Western world. Give them a No, and they happily leave you alone.

That No is an answer many Christians and Muslims do not accept - and that'S when I start kicking their sectarian a$$e$. And before they, in an act of arrogant theatralic altruism, include me in their prayers nevertheless to show me how wellmeaning and superior in selflessness they are, I want them to ask me if I want to be there.

Possible that they would not like my answer to that as well. Well, life can be hard.

And now, to lead this thread back on tracks, i quote the introduction again, and what the problem is on which it all focusses:

This paper analyzes the impact of a culturally homogeneous group on strategic decision-making and policy recommendations. The United States military's organizational climate has shifted steadily to the right since the Viet Nam War. Today's Armed Forces are increasingly identified with conservative Christian and Republican values. This change in group dynamics can inhibit the decision making process by preventing a thorough review of relevant courses of action, in accordance with the Rational Decision Model. The nature of in-groups and their influence on the decision process can have a deleterious effect on sound decision making, even if only inadvertently. Today's conservative voice has a strong influence on national policy decisions. This makes it imperative that strategic leaders understand the culture shift in today's military, as well as how group dynamics can limit creativity and proper analysis of alternatives. The failure to do so can cause a divergence of opinion between military and civilian leaders and thereby widen the gap in civil military relations.

[August]

August's one mistake is, that - like often - he only accepts things to happen if they are happening in the open, plain and easy to be seen, uncovered, unhidden. For him some rule or law is written on a paper, and reality matches it, always, undisputed. If the constitution says this or that, it cannot be imagined by him that massive violation of this paragraph may be the rule of the day. And the US has remained unchnaged since decades and centuries, the past decades since the WII for example have not taken place and have not chnaged the poltiical moral face of the country - not at all! Since he is minimizing the danger that way, it appears to him that atheism suddenly is a so much greater a threat, when comparing.

And Skybirds mistake is that he sees boogie men under every rock and doesn't really understand Americans, their society or their politics as well as he thinks he does. Whatever our internal diferences we are all Americans first.

[RedMenace]

Look at the world around you realistically and quit living fantasy star trek, we all will overcome nonsense, and smell the coffee.It is not only silly but folly to believe that man will "ever" EVER! overcome it differences in faith,politics, and the like in time to save this world...face reality please and concede to the facts of life....

1. The atmosphere is polluted beyond repair.
2. The food supplies are not in good shape and if they are the ones who have starve the have nots.
3. Those in power around the globe will never Never agree to share control.
4. We daily poison ourselves with pollution and crappy foods.
5. This is not just America either but it is a concerted effort by ALL.
6. WE Kill
7. WE Steal
8. We Sin against others and ourselves.

These are facts...non disputed by scientists and the like.

Please please! tell me what possible hope you have that I may believe in it.

The world offers death on a silver platter.

Christ offers life.
Tell me what is wrong with that?
Have a good day. :)
God is dead,
And no one cares.
If there is a Hell,
I'll see you there.

Have a good day.:)

[Umfuld]

Skybird, I'm not against anything you say but you point to Vietnam and say how much the army's political makeup has changed since then.

Probably something to do with most of them being drafted back then, no?

[Skybird]

Skybird, I'm not against anything you say but you point to Vietnam and say how much the army's political makeup has changed since then.

Probably something to do with most of them being drafted back then, no?
Not me but the study says so, plus some German essays I read some days ago in combination with that study. And if the draft has something to do with the culture shift, then this does not change a bit the fact that there has been a culture shift indeed. But I agree in so far as that the abandoning of the draft system has something to do with the shifting to the right, if it is more symptom or more a cause can be discussed. Since the religious right has increasiongly pished for power positions in government, society and the army, I think it is a bit of both.

In Germany this fear for a shifting to the right, or an isolated "society within society", is one of the arguments why many refuse to change the bundeswehr from a conscript to a professional army. that step makes an army a more closed "secret" society", that then makes it's own rites and rules and get's "closed off" to the rest of society, it has the tendency to isolate itself in order to remain itself "clean".

[Happy Times]

Skybird, I'm not against anything you say but you point to Vietnam and say how much the army's political makeup has changed since then.

Probably something to do with most of them being drafted back then, no?
Not me but the study says so, plus some German essays I read some days ago in combination with that study. And if the draft has something to do with the culture shift, then this does not change a bit the fact that there has been a culture shift indeed. But I agree in so far as that the abandoning of the draft system has something to do with the shifting to the right, if it is more symptom or more a cause can be discussed. Since the religious right has increasiongly pished for power positions in government, society and the army, I think it is a bit of both.

In Germany this fear for a shifting to the right, or an isolated "society within society", is one of the arguments why many refuse to change the bundeswehr from a conscript to a professional army. that step makes an army a more closed "secret" society", that then makes it's own rites and rules and get's "closed off" to the rest of society, it has the tendency to isolate itself in order to remain itself "clean".

That is one reason, that makes even the Finnish left, support our conscription.

[U49]

In Germany this fear for a shifting to the right, or an isolated "society within society", is one of the arguments why many refuse to change the bundeswehr from a conscript to a professional army. that step makes an army a more closed "secret" society", that then makes it's own rites and rules and get's "closed off" to the rest of society, it has the tendency to isolate itself in order to remain itself "clean".

That makes me one of them, but the direction of the move does not matter for me.
Any move away from the rest of the society is a grave danger to us!
We follow the principle that all force in germany is monopolised by the state.
As such, the state and all it's instituitions must be strictly aligned with the people.

Using conscription is a proven way to achieve that alignment, and so far there was no convincing option discussed in germany.

[Skybird]

Using conscription is a proven way to achieve that alignment, and so far there was no convincing option discussed in germany.

That could be questioned, but it would be enough matter for a whole new thread. Also, we did have our Bundeswehr-scandals in the past years too, didn't we. So, immune to certain culture shifts the BW certainly is not. It maybe is just more difficult and thus: unlikely to happen on a wide front. In the end, every army still is a men's world, and a playing boy's secret society. Just look how language changes immediately once civilians, or worse: ladies are present. :D

[Radtgaeb]

I don't understand the militant attitudes towards faith. Yeah, there are militant sects of every faith, even the lack of faith has violent extremists...

I'm a Christian. I believe in God. I believe in good and evil. I've never killed anyone or yelled in anyone's face.

Mostly, I just keep my religion to myself. What I believe is my own choice, and what others believe is theirs. I can't control your faith. I can talk to you about it if you're interested, but I won't yell at you if you don't believe in God. Mostly, I'll just pray for you...how is this harmful?

ALL of my Christian buddies are like me in this way. In fact, it's my athiest/agnostic friends that do the more shouting at us than anything else.

I just want to let you all know that we're not all freaks that want the world to end ASAP. Would I care? Not really, if things were to go down fast, I know where I'm going...but I'd rather live a full life before any of that happens.

My message to religious radicals: God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts.

[waste gate]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

Which is why my country's constitution forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

You may notice that no mention is made concerning seperation of church and state. Only that the congress/state shall not establish a religion. See Henry VIII.

[The WosMan]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

Which is why my country's constitution forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

You may notice that no mention is made concerning seperation of church and state. Only that the congress/state shall not establish a religion. See Henry VIII.

A lot of people seem to forget the second half.

[Skybird]

I don't understand the militant attitudes towards faith. Yeah, there are militant sects of every faith, even the lack of faith has violent extremists...

I'm a Christian. I believe in God. I believe in good and evil. I've never killed anyone or yelled in anyone's face.

Mostly, I just keep my religion to myself. What I believe is my own choice, and what others believe is theirs. I can't control your faith. I can talk to you about it if you're interested, but I won't yell at you if you don't believe in God. Mostly, I'll just pray for you...how is this harmful?

ALL of my Christian buddies are like me in this way. In fact, it's my athiest/agnostic friends that do the more shouting at us than anything else.

I just want to let you all know that we're not all freaks that want the world to end ASAP. Would I care? Not really, if things were to go down fast, I know where I'm going...but I'd rather live a full life before any of that happens.

My message to religious radicals: God wants spiritual fruits, not religious nuts.
I could live with the example of yours. And I do not yell at all at people with that attitude of yours. Don't do here, never did before - just express my bewildering maybe, if I am adresssed first and somebody tells me that (and what) he believes. If he starts it, he must live with my opinion as well. Because he is free to keep his religion to himself :). I do not like missionising. It's wrong, always. I do not tell others what they should believe, if I am not asked or that they should not believe at all. I demand the same self-restriction from others, from believers as well. "Keep thy religion to thyself" - that is all what I demand of fundis of whatever a kind. And don't try to impose your religion onto public life and state's institutions. Just this. Since fundamentalists offensively try to spread their influence, by that action they become a valid target for attack and criticism in my understanding, in defense of civil society.

[Skybird]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

Which is why my country's constitution forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

You may notice that no mention is made concerning seperation of church and state. Only that the congress/state shall not establish a religion. See Henry VIII.

A lot of people seem to forget the second half.
And you seem to forget that the first amandement not only means not to make politics against free religion, but also to make laws in favour of a religion. Already the first settlers on Rhode Island, Quakers who were persecuted by the British crown, cared about the separation between state and religion, probabaly coming from their experiences with the crown, and the tradition of their services which are more unritual and more contemplative than those services of most other christian churches.

The first amendement to the US constitution does not only mean the right to demand the state not interfering with the free practicing of religion - it also means, vice versa, that the state should not intervene in religion's favour. Thus it describes a right as well as a limit of behavior. It prohibits the state to regulate or limit religion. It also prohibits that the state should help religion.

I could hardly remember any book, article, essay, statement, that would have expressed that the separation of state and church is not an intended reality in the US. It is a nation basing on the canon of values deriving from the christian-Judaic tradition - but it is no theocracy, although there are fundamentalists who would like to turn it into one - in the name of their own views. This is what needs to be fought against - not against but on the basis of the constitutional order, and it's defense.

A general view on those parts of US history that are relevant for this discussion, with some interesting details, ranging from the relation between state and private initiative concerning wellfare, over the fear of a wave of Catholic immigration in the 19th century and the importance of Jefferson, to the developement of the school system over the nation's history:

http://www.ibka.org/en/articles/ag02/kirkhart.html

The author is American, and lives in America. What he says very much is what I remember to know about the issues, so I support his evaluation.

[Stealth Hunter]

Hell, I get on a plane for a vacation in California, and people stare at me like I'm going to blow them up just because I look Middle-Eastern (and- well, it's true; but Iranians aren't terrorists...).

Ugly mess all the way around. I'm an American citizen, and damn proud to be one, as am I also damn proud to be Iranian.

[The WosMan]

The real threat comes from those who would not allow the peaceful, free exercise of religion.

Which is why my country's constitution forbids the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

You may notice that no mention is made concerning seperation of church and state. Only that the congress/state shall not establish a religion. See Henry VIII.

A lot of people seem to forget the second half.
And you seem to forget that the first amandement not only means not to make politics against free religion, but also to make laws in favour of a religion. Already the first settlers on Rhode Island, Quakers who were persecuted by the British crown, cared about the separation between state and religion, probabaly coming from their experiences with the crown, and the tradition of their services which are more unritual and more contemplative than those services of most other christian churches.

The first amendement to the US constitution does not only mean the right to demand the state not interfering with the free practicing of religion - it also means, vice versa, that the state should not intervene in religion's favour. Thus it describes a right as well as a limit of behavior. It prohibits the state to regulate or limit religion. It also prohibits that the state should help religion.

I could hardly remember any book, article, essay, statement, that would have expressed that the separation of state and church is not an intended reality in the US. It is a nation basing on the canon of values deriving from the christian-Judaic tradition - but it is no theocracy, although there are fundamentalists who would like to turn it into one - in the name of their own views. This is what needs to be fought against - not against but on the basis of the constitutional order, and it's defense.

A general view on those parts of US history that are relevant for this discussion, with some interesting details, ranging from the relation between state and private initiative concerning wellfare, over the fear of a wave of Catholic immigration in the 19th century and the importance of Jefferson, to the developement of the school system over the nation's history:

http://www.ibka.org/en/articles/ag02/kirkhart.html

The author is American, and lives in America. What he says very much is what I remember to know about the issues, so I support his evaluation.

See I make a simple statement and you jump down my throat. This is why there is such a problem because if someone even says one thing that supports religion another person gets all jumpy and offended. Cool down, have a drink. It's not even your country so why the hell are you so worried about it. There are better things to do in life then get yourself all worked up over some stupid thing that is being blown out of proportion half way across the world, especially since radical muslims are taking your countries in Europe over right from under your noses.

Are you angry at the world or something? I can tell you that Christians in this country have almost zero clout when it comes to anything anymore. If these evangelicals were so horrible and evil and insane then they would command the military to come out and shoot the town leader or head of a school district every year when some moron in control decides you can't say Merry Christmas to someone because it may offend them. You have to say "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons Greetings" and then the local church can't even put up a nativity scene or some veterans cemetary in San Diego has to take down a cross. Where are these militant evangelicals at when it comes to this stuff? They must be out there strapping bombs to themselves ready to blow people up just like in Europe when some guy draws a comic and the muslims flip out and kill people.

[Skybird]

I did not jump down your throat, as you put it ( but I eventually could, to make you feel the difference ;) ), but I jumped onto a half-baked statement saying the first amandement only means the state is not to hinder religion (hiding that the first amandement also implies the state has no right to help religion, by that raising the wrong impression - and saying - that the state is not being separated from the church).

And since the original thread was about the influence of fundamentalists in the military, and the filtering of reality perception that these religious dogmas may cause in military (and political) leadership, I (Germany, europe, the world) has a very legitimate interest in what is going on in your "internal" affairs. In those areas where you influence and interfere with other nations and people in not so exclusively an internal way only, you can hardlky do so and then say the effects for others should be ignored. Because the American modern culture, no matter if you like it or not, spans the globe since 40., 50 years, and the American foreign policies are affecting the world community as well as American economical decisions do. The dollar weakness is no internal American affair, for it has reached a level where it now does threatening ammounts of damage to european key indiustries like Airbus, and it starts to costs jobs - our jobs. The financial mess of the US budget is no internal american affair. The wars America fight and may launch in the future, are not an internal American affair. Where you touch other people and nations, their political, economical, security conditions and interests, it is no internal American affair. - I for example do not care for the Voodoo religion in Haiti, for Haiti's influence on ther world is limited if not non-existend, and if occasionally in some moon-lightend night a rooster get sacrificed over a camp-fire, i must not stick my nose into toher people's business, and it does not interest me at all. But the Us is not just a small banana republic, but a major player, and what it does, becomes, changes, decides - affects several times as many people worldwide than just those 310 million american citizens living on the northamerican continent.

So the mental attitude and code of values in your political and military caste, and wether or not your military and political leadership falls under the spell of some suspicious religious dogma or not - is very well of vital concern for us in europe, and elsehwere. In Iraq, for example. Or is that also just an internal american affair that Iraqis must not care for? ;)

[Radtgaeb]

I did not jump down your throat, as you put it ( but I eventually could, to make you feel the difference ;) ), but I jumped onto a half-baked statement saying the first amandement only means the state is not to hinder religion (hiding that the first amandement also implies the state has no right to help religion, by that raising the wrong impression - and saying - that the state is not being separated from the church).

And since the original thread was about the influence of fundamentalists in the military, and the filtering of reality perception that these religious dogmas may cause in military (and political) leadership, I (Germany, europe, the world) has a very legitimate interest in what is going on in your "internal" affairs. In those areas where you influence and interfere with other nations and people in not so exclusively an internal way only, you can hardlky do so and then say the effects for others should be ignored. Because the American modern culture, no matter if you like it or not, spans the globe since 40., 50 years, and the American foreign policies are affecting the world community as well as American economical decisions do. The dollar weakness is no internal American affair, for it has reached a level where it now does threatening ammounts of damage to european key indiustries like Airbus, and it starts to costs jobs - our jobs. The financial mess of the US budget is no internal american affair. The wars America fight and may launch in the future, are not an internal American affair. Where you touch other people and nations, their political, economical, security conditions and interests, it is no internal American affair. - I for example do not care for the Voodoo religion in Haiti, for Haiti's influence on ther world is limited if not non-existend, and if occasionally in some moon-lightend night a rooster get sacrificed over a camp-fire, i must not stick my nose into toher people's business, and it does not interest me at all. But the Us is not just a small banana republic, but a major player, and what it does, becomes, changes, decides - affects several times as many people worldwide than just those 310 million american citizens living on the northamerican continent.

So the mental attitude and code of values in your political and military caste, and wether or not your military and political leadership falls under the spell of some suspicious religious dogma or not - is very well of vital concern for us in europe, and elsehwere. In Iraq, for example. Or is that also just an internal american affair that Iraqis must not care for? ;)

Like it or not, morals derived from religion/faith. Morals make laws. What do you want? NO laws whatsoever?

Iraq, though I don't support the war in any war, was not a religious issue AT ALL. It was about "WMDs" *which don't/didn't exist* (but probably more about lining the pockets of the higher-ups). We got bad information. The British got bad information. If I'm not mistaken, I think the Germans got bad information as well.

Don't bring faith into the attack on Iraq, I don't even think that Johnnie Cochran could've made that connection with coherence.

[Sailor Steve]

You may notice that no mention is made concerning seperation of church and state. Only that the congress/state shall not establish a religion.
Of course someone had to try to bring that up. Exactly how do you define the difference?

Rather than go into that argument in depth, I'll just refer you to the opinion of James Madison. After all, he was the guy who wrote the thing.
http://candst.tripod.com/tnppage/qmadison.htm

[Skybird]

[
Like it or not, morals derived from religion/faith. Morals make laws. What do you want? NO laws whatsoever?

Have you realised that somewhere above I admitted that the US is a nation in the tradition of Christian-Judaistic values? Like Germany is. But nevertheless both nations are truly secular - religions has not been allowed the power to influence the decision-making of poilitics for it's own internal interests and dogmas, and national offices and autorities are not to fulfill the interests of religion. THAT is the decisive point. The basic fundament of historically grown values of a society, and religious fundamentalism, are two different things.


Iraq, though I don't support the war in any war, was not a religious issue AT ALL. It was about "WMDs" *which don't/didn't exist* (but probably more about lining the pockets of the higher-ups).

Here you reject your own subtelty you just tried above. Both Bush and Blair were/are two people who made decisions in favor of war - and based on what they considered to be their morals, and both try to present an almost exemplaric image of being "religious" to the outside, and the media, and so itnense that it is almost pathetic and has earned them a lot of disgust and criticism for that theatralic effort. The war, btw, was only superficially about WMD, infact it was preplanned more than 10 years in advance, and had been described in papers by neocon planners since the early 90s. WMDs and Al Quaeda were just lame excuses to blind the public. We had the discussion repeatedly, so I leave it here.

We got bad information. The British got bad information.
No, the bad information was self-made, it was demanded and ordered by the leading ranks that the secret services should show up with "info" sayin Iraq has WMDs and by that to support the war, even when such infos were not available. But again, we had that discussion.

If I'm not mistaken, I think the Germans got bad information as well.
Yes? All I remember is that we and some others warned and warned and warned again about the war in general, and the highly questionable "quality" of things liike the niger-deal, the London missile memo, the AQ-link. But again, we had that discussion.

Don't bring faith into the attack on Iraq, I don't even think that Johnnie Cochran could've made that connection with coherence.
But I do, by the figure of Bush, who said that God talked to him, and who repeatedly has referred to his beliefs with regard to his policies not only with regard to Iraq). Blair also has referred to his Christian faith, with regard to Iraq. And in the early phase of the war, when first resistance was forming up in later 2003, I remember those TV pictures of American pro war-protesters , and a hysteric women almost cried into the camera that she felt so sad that those unthankful, misunderstanding Iraqi did not understand that all the Americans were tryin to bring them was God and the loving Christian truth. :dead:

This is a parade example of why fundamental religious views infiltrating the military and the poltiical decision making, as stated in the study this thread is about (!);) , are of such high concern.

[Sailor Steve]

...religions has not been allowed the power to influence the decision-making of poilitics for it's own internal interests and dogmas, and national offices and autorities are not to fulfill the interests of religion. THAT is the decisive point.
I've been trying to vocalize that for years, and never quite done it like that.

Well said!

[Skybird]

...religions has not been allowed the power to influence the decision-making of poilitics for it's own internal interests and dogmas, and national offices and autorities are not to fulfill the interests of religion. THAT is the decisive point.
I've been trying to vocalize that for years, and never quite done it like that.

Well said!
Thanks, glad that at least some guys understand what I am about, and that it is no blind anti-religious ranting or blind anti-americanism by me.

[Radtgaeb]

I never said that I thought Bush/Blair was a great president/prime minister. But I never said that I thought they were honest Christians either ;). That's just my personal standpoint. Anyone who is willing to say that God told them to go and make billions of dollars by a lie probably isn't in it for their faith.

I'm a fairly conservative Christian (Baptist). But I'm the most liberal conservative Christian you'll ever meet. I stand by separation of church and state. Yes, I said it, stand by it! I don't like the idea of a theocratic Fascist government just as much as you don't like it. Christian, Jewish, Moslem, or whatever - religion needs to be maintained in the home and the church and not in the courthouse or legislature. I understand your point there. But I digress for good from this thread.

PS: I knew WMDs were a lie. That's why I put them in quotes.

[Skybird]

I never said that I thought Bush/Blair was a great president/prime minister. But I never said that I thought they were honest Christians either ;). That's just my personal standpoint. Anyone who is willing to say that God told them to go and make billions of dollars by a lie probably isn't in it for their faith.

I'm a fairly conservative Christian (Baptist). But I'm the most liberal conservative Christian you'll ever meet. I stand by separation of church and state. Yes, I said it, stand by it! I don't like the idea of a theocratic Fascist government just as much as you don't like it. Christian, Jewish, Moslem, or whatever - religion needs to be maintained in the home and the church and not in the courthouse or legislature. I understand your point there. But I digress for good from this thread.

PS: I knew WMDs were a lie. That's why I put them in quotes.
Okay, then you are a secular theist andl conservative believer by your own words, and I am an atheist and anti-theist, and nevertheless I think we would not have any problems between us if we were neighbours or colleaguesl for example. Nice to meet you! :)

[The WosMan]

Skybird, I am not ignoring the first part. The first part is what everyone always seems to focus on. I guess my main problem is our American society seems to be degrading into a very anti-christian, anti-religion atmosphere (and this is coming from a guy that goes to church only a few times a year). While it is important to keep government and religion seperate, it is also another thing to use government and the courts as a hammer to smash away at moral society and organized religion. The ACLU and atheists who have an agenda can't leave well enough alone using lawsuits to scare people and government. It really isn't too far from what the Communists did to organized religion in Russia.

All you need to do is research Congressman Albert Herlong when he entered into Congressional records the Communist Goals back in 1963 that had been obtained from a communist group that had been arrested. These goals outline how to destroy American society. Since this time period many of these have been done. The most telling in regard to the subject is 27 and 28.


27) Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
28) Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."


If you want to read the rest here is a link http://www.glennbeck.com/news/03212002.shtml (http://www.glennbeck.com/news/03212002.shtml). I find it scary.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

If you want to read the rest here is a link http://www.glennbeck.com/news/03212002.shtml (http://www.glennbeck.com/news/03212002.shtml). I find it scary.

The fact that you seem to think #27 and 28 is more worrisome than say #41 (Parents) or #42 says a lot about you.

[The WosMan]

I was pointing out those relevant to the discussion but yes, those are bad as well and are already well under way.

[antikristuseke]

I dont see how elimination of prayer from public scools leads to the destruction in the american society, but thats just me.

[Iceman]

Skybird I just love ya...:up:

Don't know if ya saw a movie called "Who Killed The Electric Car" but it made me think of you.You should watch it if you have'nt seen it.I happen to live where they took some of them to be turned into borg cubes.The Mesa Arizona GM proving grounds.

"They enemy within?" wow what a topic.

I mention the above movie for Skybird when he says I hope for failure of the planet.The planet doesn't need me to hope for it's failure yet I realize my position in life and will effect and speak where I can to contribute to the "harvest" of God which does not mean Death has to occur before the benifits of God can be realized.

Be fruitiful and multiply. I have.
Fear God and keep His commands. I try.
Believe in the only begotton of God, Jesus Christ. I do.

Skybird me and you are like two men standing across a river trying to have a conversation...you want me on your side and I want you to cross to mine. I have been on yours already and there is no life or hope there. All I can do is try to show the way I got across. If you fall in or jump in for that matter there is nothing I can do about it and I accept it, yet would still try to throw you a line even if you spit in my face and swim back to your side.Many here are impressed with your claim to know something about the mind and marvel after you I am not one of them.You do not fool me Skybird...what you think is knowlodege is not and I am afraid you have a rude awaking coming.

Christ did not involve himself or try to take command of the Roman army there is no need.Flesh and Blood is not all there is to life.An army is preparing to ride though...


Revelation 19
[11] And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
[12] His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
[13] And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
[14] And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
[15] And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
[16] And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
[17] And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
[18] That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.
[19] And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.
[20] And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
[21] And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

http://www.cyberhymnal.org/img/r/e/v/RevelationIllustratedPrint24.jpg

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Skybird me and you are like two men standing across a river trying to have a conversation...you want me on your side and I want you to cross to mine. I have been on yours already and there is no life or hope there. All I can do is try to show the way I got across. If you fall in or jump in for that matter there is nothing I can do about it and I accept it, yet would still try to throw you a line even if you spit in my face and swim back to your side.Many here are impressed with your claim to know something about the mind and marvel after you I am not one of them.You do not fool me Skybird...what you think is knowlodege is not and I am afraid you have a rude awaking coming.
I must say ... as an atheist, I have the greatest pity on a man who needs an omnipotent being (even rather generously assuming he exists) to find "life or hope" in his existence.
I was pointing out those relevant to the discussion but yes, those are bad as well and are already well under way.

We can discuss that too...

27) Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch"
28) Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state"
Quite frankly, as an atheist, I fully support #28. AFAIK The practical effect of allowing prayer in US schools (generally executed in a classroom) often places atheists (who are a minority) in an untenable situation.

For #27, from an atheist point of view, the Bible hardly needs further discrediting, scientifically (won't get past Genesis) or morally (by Exodus the general flow is obvious), but since most Christians seem totally oblivious to this (see Kansas or the votes) it is reasonable. I wonder how many people will be Christians if, starting from Primary School, atheists get "equal time" to go through the Bible in churches.

The "religious crutch". If you take the viewpoint that deities don't exist (as an atheist does), then how much more value does a God have over the "Invisible Friends" that a child often has? Since most can agree that the Invisible Friends are a crutch that's best grown out of when maturing, the logical extension is that religion is a crutch, though most atheists are too polite or too fearful of retribution from the religious majority to say this out loud.

[Tchocky]

Skybird me and you are like two men standing across a river trying to have a conversation...you want me on your side and I want you to cross to mine. I have been on yours already and there is no life or hope there. All I can do is try to show the way I got across. If you fall in or jump in for that matter there is nothing I can do about it and I accept it, yet would still try to throw you a line even if you spit in my face and swim back to your side.Many here are impressed with your claim to know something about the mind and marvel after you I am not one of them.You do not fool me Skybird...what you think is knowlodege is not and I am afraid you have a rude awaking coming.
Do you have to be quite so insulting and patronising?

[August]

Do you have to be quite so insulting and patronising?

I didn't read that as insulting or patronizing. Well maybe a bit patronizing but certainly orders of magnitude less than Skybirds usual.

[Iceman]

The enemy within:Heathenistic,Athesitic nonsense in US armed forces...

ok now break this thread apart and see what happens.The topic title invited my responses get over it Tchocky.

Spin it however you want Skybirds God less pov is not shared by everyone.

[waste gate]

The more I think on it the more apparent it becomes that the reason people of faith have actually volunteered and are now reaching places of rank in the all voluntary US military is a rather simple one. They believe in something outside of themselves.

Those patriots believe in God and their country. I have nothing but admiration for their courage and sacrifice. May God and their countrymen, whom they fight for, bless them.

[Tchocky]

ok now break this thread apart and see what happens.The topic title invited my responses get over it Tchocky.
You postulated a wonderful scenario where Skybird spits in your honest face rather than accept your aid, even though there's only death and hopelessness on his side of some mystical river. Sorry if I find that a little....abstract.

[Skybird]

Skybird me and you are like two men standing across a river trying to have a conversation...you want me on your side and I want you to cross to mine. I have been on yours already and there is no life or hope there. All I can do is try to show the way I got across. If you fall in or jump in for that matter there is nothing I can do about it and I accept it, yet would still try to throw you a line even if you spit in my face and swim back to your side.

You overestimate the importance you have in my life. And that river you talk of - I have already left behind long time ago, and moving on. Whomever you believe you see on the other side - it is not me. Maybe worth for you to find out about that figure.

-----


Since nobody apparently has read the study, or has anything to comment on it, I assume we can leave this thread here now.

[waste gate]

Skybird me and you are like two men standing across a river trying to have a conversation...you want me on your side and I want you to cross to mine. I have been on yours already and there is no life or hope there. All I can do is try to show the way I got across. If you fall in or jump in for that matter there is nothing I can do about it and I accept it, yet would still try to throw you a line even if you spit in my face and swim back to your side.

You overestimate the importance you have in my life. And that river you talk of - I have already left behind long time ago, and moving on. Whomever you believe you see on the other side - it is not me. Maybe worth for you to find out about that figure.

-----


Since nobody apparently has read the study, or has anything to comment on it, I assume we can leave this thread here now.

Let it go Iceman. Long ago Skybird jumped the shark.

The term jumping the shark alludes to a scene in the TV series Happy Days (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Days) when the popular character Arthur "Fonzie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonzie)" Fonzarelli, jumps over a shark while water skiing. The scene was so preposterous that many believed it to be an ill-conceived attempt at reviving the declining ratings of the flagging show.

[Iceman]

Skybird me and you are like two men standing across a river trying to have a conversation...you want me on your side and I want you to cross to mine. I have been on yours already and there is no life or hope there. All I can do is try to show the way I got across. If you fall in or jump in for that matter there is nothing I can do about it and I accept it, yet would still try to throw you a line even if you spit in my face and swim back to your side.

You overestimate the importance you have in my life. And that river you talk of - I have already left behind long time ago, and moving on. Whomever you believe you see on the other side - it is not me. Maybe worth for you to find out about that figure.

-----


Since nobody apparently has read the study, or has anything to comment on it, I assume we can leave this thread here now.

Let it go Iceman. Long ago Skybird jumped the shark.

The term jumping the shark alludes to a scene in the TV series Happy Days (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Days) when the popular character Arthur "Fonzie (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonzie)" Fonzarelli, jumps over a shark while water skiing. The scene was so preposterous that many believed it to be an ill-conceived attempt at reviving the declining ratings of the flagging show.

http://www.ezthemes.com/previews/f/fonzi.jpg:up:

[LtCmdrRat]

Quote from Mr. Robbins:
"What we are supposed to have in America is freedom OF religion, "Congress shall make no law infringing..." not "freedom FROM religion." That, sirs, is a socialist concept we cannot tolerate. "
So I think when I was immigrating to USA I had wrong ideas of liberties.
I hoped that America had both freedom of religion and freedom from religion
I hoped that America has tolerable culture but America doesnt tolerate socialism ideas( does rights even read Marx?)
Freedom of speech is left for your private conversations with your friends in private house.
I hoped that America has good judical system and I was right that Justice in America is the best staff that money can buy.

ps EVERYTHING ABOVE IS JUST MY SARCASM.
My neighbour is really missing America but America from yesterday not today's America. Is he right?

[waste gate]

Quote from Mr. Robbins:
"What we are supposed to have in America is freedom OF religion, "Congress shall make no law infringing..." not "freedom FROM religion." That, sirs, is a socialist concept we cannot tolerate. "
So I think when I was immigrating to USA I had wrong ideas of liberties.
I hoped that America had both freedom of religion and freedom from religion
I hoped that America has tolerable culture but America doesnt tolerate socialism ideas( does rights even read Marx?)
Freedom of speech is left for your private conversations with your friends in private house.
I hoped that America has good judical system and I was right that Justice in America is the best staff that money can buy.

ps EVERYTHING ABOVE IS JUST MY SARCASM.
My neighbour is really missing America but America from yesterday not today's America. Is he right?


In my estimation you are in the wrong thread. If you want answers to your questions, I'd advise starting something new. That is your right here in the US.

[LtCmdrRat]

Quote from Mr. Robbins:
"What we are supposed to have in America is freedom OF religion, "Congress shall make no law infringing..." not "freedom FROM religion." That, sirs, is a socialist concept we cannot tolerate. "
So I think when I was immigrating to USA I had wrong ideas of liberties.
I hoped that America had both freedom of religion and freedom from religion
I hoped that America has tolerable culture but America doesnt tolerate socialism ideas( does rights even read Marx?)
Freedom of speech is left for your private conversations with your friends in private house.
I hoped that America has good judical system and I was right that Justice in America is the best staff that money can buy.

ps EVERYTHING ABOVE IS JUST MY SARCASM.
My neighbour is really missing America but America from yesterday not today's America. Is he right?

In my estimation you are in the wrong thread. If you want answers to your questions, I'd advise starting something new. That is your right here in the US. Sir, my post above was just reaction on the mr. Robbins words published in this thread therefore I put it here.
Sometimes sarcasm is .. just a sarcasm.Guilty in grotesk but If anyone thinks that I do not love America that person is wrong, deeply wrong. To love country means to love people and I do. Not all of people but many.

[waste gate]

Quote from Mr. Robbins:
"What we are supposed to have in America is freedom OF religion, "Congress shall make no law infringing..." not "freedom FROM religion." That, sirs, is a socialist concept we cannot tolerate. "
So I think when I was immigrating to USA I had wrong ideas of liberties.
I hoped that America had both freedom of religion and freedom from religion
I hoped that America has tolerable culture but America doesnt tolerate socialism ideas( does rights even read Marx?)
Freedom of speech is left for your private conversations with your friends in private house.
I hoped that America has good judical system and I was right that Justice in America is the best staff that money can buy.

ps EVERYTHING ABOVE IS JUST MY SARCASM.
My neighbour is really missing America but America from yesterday not today's America. Is he right?

In my estimation you are in the wrong thread. If you want answers to your questions, I'd advise starting something new. That is your right here in the US. Sir, my post above was just reaction on the mr. Robbins words published in this thread therefore I put it here.
Somtimes sarcasm is .. just a sarcasm

If I misinterpreted your meaning I apologize. wg

[LtCmdrRat]

Dear W -G,
Perhaps misunderstanding was provoked by me or level of my english that is far away from perfection. My present job is killing my English...

[The WosMan]

You work in the public school system?

[LtCmdrRat]

You work in the public school system?
much easier ....but it kills English fast too .
Medical transportation, community service

[The WosMan]

I see. The local vernacular always amazes me.

[LtCmdrRat]

I see. The local vernacular always amazes me.
same story

[Tchocky]

Some very scary reports have come out of the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs. Apparently the religious environment there is rather oppressive.

[waste gate]

Some very scary reports have come out of the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs. Apparently the religious environment there is rather oppressive.

Really? Link to those reports? Or is it just you projecting your own feelings as to what AFF would be like for you?

[Tchocky]

Some very scary reports have come out of the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs. Apparently the religious environment there is rather oppressive.
Really? Link to those reports? Or is it just you projecting your own feelings as to what AFF would be like for you?
Interesting response.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071107_the_cancer_from_within/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/06/national/main919947.shtml
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E6D61138F932A25755C0A9639C8B 63
http://www.americanhumanist.org/press/HumanistSeptOct07.php

[waste gate]

Some very scary reports have come out of the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs. Apparently the religious environment there is rather oppressive.
Really? Link to those reports? Or is it just you projecting your own feelings as to what AFF would be like for you?
Interesting response.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071107_the_cancer_from_within/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/06/national/main919947.shtml
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E6D61138F932A25755C0A9639C8B 63
http://www.americanhumanist.org/press/HumanistSeptOct07.php

Thanks for the links Tchocky.

Remember that the US military academies are strickly voluntary. The cadets can withdraw at any time. And once again congress has made no law establishing any religion.

[Skybird]

Doesn't sound nice, Tchocky. It matches what I had found on evangelist mobbing in armed forces, and killing people's career chances if they do not convert. Of course it all makes mockery of the secular nature the armed forces once had, and by their historic self-definition and mottos should have.

Happy crusade everyone! :up:

[August]

Doesn't sound nice, Tchocky. It matches what I had found on evangelist mobbing in armed forces, and killing people's career chances if they do not convert. Of course it all makes mockery of the secular nature the armed forces once had, and by their historic self-definition and mottos should have.

Happy crusade everyone! :up:

Yeah watch out for us Skybird. After the Christians take us over we're gonna join forces with the Muslims and come after you! :o:D

"Onward Christian Soooooldiers... (we need a musical note smiley)"

[Skybird]

Ridiculous "jokes" cannot replace arguments. Often they illustrate the lack of these.

[Tchocky]

Ridiculous "jokes" cannot replace arguments. Often they illustrate the lack of these.
An imam and a rabbi walk into a bar...

[August]

Ridiculous "jokes" cannot replace arguments. Often they illustrate the lack of these.

Yeah just as your reply illustrates your lack of any sort of a sense of humor.

But seriously, what kind of argument do you suggest i make to a person such as yourself who knows very little of the intracacies of American society and has already made his mind up that all people who believe in a supreme being are crazy and dangerous?

Should i state my opinion based on my 48 years of experience as a US citizen? Or my 7 years of US military service, or the 17 years before that i spent as a US military dependant living on Army bases around the world? Or my current and extensive contacts within all four branches of the US military? All that stuff you have repeatedly discounted when it suits your argument.

After all how could I ever know more about my own homeland than the mighty Skybird, a foreign civilian with no military backround except maybe 2 years of conscript service in a military that hasn't seen active service since WW2? :roll:

[Letum]

Should i state my opinion based on my 48 years of experience as a US citizen? Or my 7 years of US military service, or the 17 years before that i spent as a US military dependant living on Army bases around the world? Or my current and extensive contacts within all four branches of the US military?

I wouldn't base it on that.
It's bound to lead to bias.

It might lead to a correct conclusion, but a view from outside is allways more objective.

[August]

Should i state my opinion based on my 48 years of experience as a US citizen? Or my 7 years of US military service, or the 17 years before that i spent as a US military dependant living on Army bases around the world? Or my current and extensive contacts within all four branches of the US military?

I wouldn't base it on that.
It's bound to lead to bias.

It might lead to a correct conclusion, but a view from outside is allways more objective.

I disagree. Outside observers almost always have their own preconcieved notions of reality that shape their opinions. They also tend to give inordinate weight to the radical statements of others because they lack familiarity with the subject.

[Skybird]

August, you know the diffrerence between joke and provocation. and what special knowledge about america do I refer to in this thread, eh? I linked a study of an ameircan who refers to some things about yourself and your country that you do not like, and you guys go into orbit attacking me instead, isntead of dealing with his findings. You do not wish to be reminded of your flaws and mistakes - but ignorrance will not make them go away, it just gives them time and space to grow under your protection. Sure, I read some books on America. And yes, all what those authors wrote must be wrong if it does not match August's view of america - or what? Atheists cannot be Americans and should be thrown out of the country. americans criticising it for it'S mistakes are antiamericans, they should get MacCarthynised - that is okay since it is for a good purpose, isn't it.

America today is a very different country than it was in the past. The ties between it'S attempt to become what it's constitution expressed it should be, and the opportune realities lobbies and leaders create, have worn out, and became extremely thin. the difference between the intentions of the founding fathers, and the present and future state of America, couldn't be any bigger, I think. It slowly changes towards what the founding fathers wanted it to save from becoming. Which maybe is no surprise, since nothings ever stays like it is, and everythign alsways is in movement. But as long as one does not recognize this simple fact of life, one is rejecting every chnace to influence the course of chnages for the better. Who does not see the changing taking place, also does not see any need to compensate and to adapt.

I did not refer to American's behavior. I did not comment on their cloathing style and weekend habits, and not on the way public life takes place on the street. That I do not know by experience. but I can read statistics and history books, and refer to the data given in these. And not every author is wrong simply because he does not mirror your tunnelview perceptions. Maybe they are pointing at things you do not like. that does not relieve you from having to prove their data and arguments wrong instead of messing around with my person - and in a way that has a bit more to offer than just your own life experience. That you can bring in, yes, and label it as "my experience with it is this: xyz." But actually you mismatch your subjective views of america with the one and only truth about america there is. But you cannot even be sure that you speak for a majoirty of your people. Both the study I linked, written by an american, published from a site associated with an american military academy, and those news Tchocky has linked - they both describe a specific problem defined in a clearly outlined context, that is perceived from outside the US as well as from people inside. And sometimes you can see some details from the outside that are hidden as long as you are inside, I was told that occaisonally, eventually, sometimes - it is like this indeed...

So declare what you want here: you have better findings and arguments from an independeant source (please, no official statements by the mulitary, they are brewing their own PR soup), and any data, able to prove the things linked here as obsolete and wrong, or do you just wish to go after me, and giving only biblical and constitutional scriptures whose idealistic intentions and superstitious assumptions you mismatch with the factual status of reality?

I'm sorry if I have touched a sensible issue, but we already have seen the Iraq war 2003 coming partialy from these dangerous developements of a derailing political ambition, and it affects the whole world, is not just an internal issue of America alone. We cannot afford not to be concerned. If evangelist views of the world form future decisions about war and peace, then where armageddon before remained to be one amongst many possible ways for history to choose, it now is guaranteed in an attempt to fulfill man-written scriptures in an act of self-fulfilling prophecy, and an American army made up by church-fanatics is in no way any different anymore than Islamic fanatics. Both have different names for things, but act by the same motivation of intolerance, demand to dominate, to supress, to bring every other view to inquisition.

Perception of reality dominated by religious views like these ancient superstitions leaves mankind not a single chance to ever see better days, but will lauch an endless chain of religiously motivated wars, conflicts and hate filled acts of intolerance and barbarism. In other words: in that scenario, the US would not be any better than Al Quaeda, and religiously motivated supression of any other culture and believe and religion would be the American norm - like in islam. All in the name of democracy, tolerance, peace and freedom of course. Well, today's terms do not mean anything anymore, if everybody can understand something different under the same term.

That is where the threats described in the study are leading to. Why doesn't make anyone a stupid joke about it? I'm sure that joke is coming.

By the way you and some people here totally ignore all that and wipe it off the table with some wide gestures only, and saying "it cannot be what should not be, and if it is nevertheless, then it is harmless becasue it cannot be that in america something goes wrong and is different to what the constitution says it should be like", then by that you show exactly that dangerous blindness towards internal problems, you show exactly that filtering of perception and give an example of that kind of culturally motivated arrogance - the authors are rightfully complaining about. That you help their argument by that is ironic, to say the least.

You guys all turn it into an issue "you versus evil, atheist Skybird". Atheism free of political and religious ideologies has caused mankind much fewer aggression, conquest, intolerance and hate than any of the great theistic religions, becasue it has not conviction that makes it think it miust impose them onto others, no matter what. So your attacks on my atheistic attitude are like medals of honour for me, and a confirmation of why i am against institutionalised religions in total. If I want to reassure myself of why i think it is bad for man, and a lethal threat to mankind - all i need to do is to listen to some of you guys.

[Skybird]

I disagree. Outside observers almost always have their own preconcieved notions of reality that shape their opinions. They also tend to give inordinate weight to the radical statements of others because they lack familiarity with the subject.

Tell that Lieutenant Colonel William Millonig.

[August]

and what special knowledge about america do I refer to in this thread, eh?

Ok, how about this?

Atheists cannot be Americans and should be thrown out of the country. americans criticising it for it'S mistakes are antiamericans, they should get MacCarthynised...

I don't see anyone besides you saying that is the case here in my country so where does it come from? Those so called "history books" you refer to?

[Skybird]

I refer to politicians from both parties having expressed the first part of these statements more than just once since WWII - Reagan for example was one of them. the second part is an ironic summary of the general spirit behind it. The same McCarthian spirit has been expressed here on the board oh so many times as well. So: try again.

Or better: don't. This thread has been derailed enough for the sake of avoiding to adress the primary issue from the beginning: and that was a study by Air Force Lieutenant Colonel William Millonig (if I may stress your precious patience and remind you all a third or fourth time of it), that the publishing site, a US military academy, has summed up like this:

This paper analyzes the impact of a culturally homogeneous group on strategic decision-making and policy recommendations. The United States military's organizational climate has shifted steadily to the right since the Viet Nam War. Today's Armed Forces are increasingly identified with conservative Christian and Republican values. This change in group dynamics can inhibit the decision making process by preventing a thorough review of relevant courses of action, in accordance with the Rational Decision Model. The nature of in-groups and their influence on the decision process can have a deleterious effect on sound decision making, even if only inadvertently. Today's conservative voice has a strong influence on national policy decisions. This makes it imperative that strategic leaders understand the culture shift in today's military, as well as how group dynamics can limit creativity and proper analysis of alternatives. The failure to do so can cause a divergence of opinion between military and civilian leaders and thereby widen the gap in civil military relations.

Not difficult to decide if you have any argument or knowledge to say something on that, or not.

So everybody, if you have nothing on the orginal topic to say or do not wish to do so, and only want to go after me instead - stop waste your - and more important: my and other people's - time, and just stay away. I will no longer react to offtopic comments here.

[Konovalov]

Why doesn't every one just take a little break from the religious stuff on this thread. Let's all take a step back. Even better still spend 5 minutes to purchase the new Subsim 2008 Almanac. :up: :yep:

[August]

Ignore? Hardly, it illustrates my point. It's pure gobbledegook Skybird, written to make a mountain out of a mole hill for political purposes. "Conservative Christian values"? Calling them Christians wasn't bad enough apparently, now they're "conservative" Christians. So what's next? "Neo-Christians"?

If the US military has indeed moved to the christian right since the Vietnam war, and that's very debatable given the strong religious backround of the great majority of our military leaders over the two centuries of our national history (and the fact that there are few athiests in foxholes), perhaps it's because ever since the Vietnam war the left has done all it could to alienate them. For example, calling our servicemen and women "murderers" and "baby killers" and throwing feces at them. Don't tell me it didn't happen Skybird. I've seen it with my own eyes. Or offhandedly insulting our troops intelligence like John Kerry did recently, or Algore and co trying to get military absentee ballots thrown out on technicalities like they did in the Y2K presidential election.

If you look hard enough you can find somebody to echo any argument you want to make Skybird and athiests are quite adept at using the internet to make their arguments, but that doesn't make it a valid problem. So far all you have shown with all your and Tchockys links is that there were at one time some overzealous Chaplains in the service academy of one single branch, and that the issue was addressed by the command several years ago. This does not prove that such things are prevailent in our military nor does it prove that athiesm is a better way of life.

The way i see it athiests tend to preach their beliefs (or lack thereof) with even more fervor than the most radical holy roller. Like many Muslims you are so fond of villifying, athiests walk around with the classic chip on their shoulder looking for things to get outraged about. When more than just them are worried about it then it might be a real issue, but until then i see it as just another athiest strawman argument.

[Iceman]

It's just more nonsense....the military is to serve the people, and if majority's of the people are Christian, or whatever then surprise surprise that there would be an influence...same goes for governement.The argument is athesistic nonsense.There should be an influence or else what happens you get some nut case in power with no morals or values and decides Christians should suffer a final solution. :hmm:

[Tchocky]

If the US military has indeed moved to the christian right since the Vietnam war, and that's very debatable given the strong religious backround of the great majority of our military leaders over the two centuries of our national history (and the fact that there are few athiests in foxholes), perhaps it's because ever since the Vietnam war the left has done all it could to alienate them. I thought this was religious, not political. Find me any candidate who'd have a realistic chance at office if he/she claimed to be an atheist.
Have a look at the Founding Fathers, they believed some very strange stuff, by our standards.
For example, calling our servicemen and women "murderers" and "baby killers" and throwing feces at them. Don't tell me it didn't happen Skybird. I've seen it with my own eyes. Or offhandedly insulting our troops intelligence like John Kerry did recently, or Algore and co trying to get military absentee ballots thrown out on technicalities like they did in the Y2K presidential election. And this random collection of morons are responsible for a religious shift in a secular armed service? I don't get you. The armed forces are to remain irreligious, no matter what politicians may be saying. Politicians should try the same thing.

So far all you have shown with all your and Tchockys links is that there were at one time some overzealous Chaplains in the service academy of one single branch, and that the issue was addressed by the command several years ago. This does not prove that such things are prevailent in our military nor does it prove that athiesm is a better way of life. Either A - you aren't reading the links. Or B - you're selectively reading them.
The academy chaplain staff had grown 300 percent while the cadet population had decreased by 25 percent: from six mainline chaplains to 18 chaplains, the additional 12 all evangelical. The academy even gained 25 reserve chaplains, also nonexistent in earlier times, for a total of 43 chaplains for about 4,000 cadets, or one chaplain for every 100 cadets. That article is twenty days old. Either read links or don't, but don't pretend to. It just looks silly.

The way i see it athiests tend to preach their beliefs (or lack thereof) with even more fervor than the most radical holy roller. Like many Muslims you are so fond of villifying, athiests walk around with the classic chip on their shoulder looking for things to get outraged about. When more than just them are worried about it then it might be a real issue, but until then i see it as just another athiest strawman argument.
Hypothetical situation - Would you see it as a violation of the separation of church and state if a branch of the armed services evangelised it's soldiers in one direction, claiming that unbelievers would burn in hell?

It's just more nonsense....the military is to serve the people, and if majority's of the people are Christian, or whatever then surprise surprise that there would be an influence...same goes for governement. The argument is athesistic nonsense.There should be an influence or else what happens you get some nut case in power with no morals or values and decides Christians should suffer a final solution. :hmm: So people who aren't religious have no morals or values?

[TteFAboB]

Two problems Skybird:

Starting from the last quote:
This paper analyzes the impact of a culturally homogeneous group on strategic decision-making and policy recommendations. The United States military's organizational climate has shifted steadily to the right since the Viet Nam War. Today's Armed Forces are increasingly identified with conservative Christian and Republican values. This change in group dynamics can inhibit the decision making process by preventing a thorough review of relevant courses of action, in accordance with the Rational Decision Model. The nature of in-groups and their influence on the decision process can have a deleterious effect on sound decision making, even if only inadvertently. Today's conservative voice has a strong influence on national policy decisions. This makes it imperative that strategic leaders understand the culture shift in today's military, as well as how group dynamics can limit creativity and proper analysis of alternatives. The failure to do so can cause a divergence of opinion between military and civilian leaders and thereby widen the gap in civil military relations.

What gives your culturally homogeneous group the priviledge of exemption from the same demand? As far as I understand, you do not advocate diversity, as the author of this piece does, Christian and even Muslim groups included, as long as no group is hegemonic, but an homogeneously atheist Army, as that would be a better army in your opinion. To back my claim, I quote the author praising diversity, not homogeneity of atheism:


The military is a large and exceptionally diverse (regionally and ethnically) organization and cannot
help but have a wide range of imagined possibilities.
(...)
This paper assumes complex decisions have more varied the consequences and
possibilities and therefore require a greater diversity of thought, whether by an individual or by
the organization, to ensure all relevant possibilities are considered.
(...)
Diverse personal views ensure step two of the
rational decision model remains functional, but compatible social views provide the mechanism
for
groupthink to take hold in step three, and increase the likelihood that relevant possibilities
will be missed.



So you pretend to be on the same boat as the author, but in fact the two of you have different positions.

Secondly:


In the decades following the Viet Nam war, the U.S. military officer corps has made a
steady shift toward a conservative Protestant and Republican affiliation. The purpose of this
paper is not to analyze the validity of any individual beliefs, but to show how the rise of conservative Christian and Republican values have affected the military’s decision making, and policy recommendations. Whether right, wrong, or indifferent -- the conservative, Christian voice has impacted our military. America’s strategic thinkers, both military and civilian must be aware of this trend and its potential implications to policy formulation.

Once again the two of you diverge. You question every single one of these individual beliefs and not only is concerned but already judged them wrong, steps the author did not take.

So it seems to me that you are using this piece to suit your own agenda and preaching, putting words into the Lt.Col's mouth and using him as a shield, pretending that he backs your position and opinions while in fact he argues only against the reduced creativity existent in group dynamics in that it affects the range and filtering of imagined possibilities in the decision making process, which could be hypothetically affected by the predominance of any group, Christian or atheist. The rest is, alledgely, history.

Embrace diversity or stop hijacking the guy.

[Skybird]

Two problems Skybird:

Starting from the last quote:

What gives your culturally homogeneous group the priviledge of exemption from the same demand? As far as I understand, you do not advocate diversity, as the author of this piece does, Christian and even Muslim groups included, as long as no group is hegemonic, but an homogeneously atheist Army, as that would be a better army in your opinion. To back my claim, I quote the author praising diversity, not homogeneity of atheism:


The military is a large and exceptionally diverse (regionally and ethnically) organization and cannot
help but have a wide range of imagined possibilities.
(...)
This paper assumes complex decisions have more varied the consequences and
possibilities and therefore require a greater diversity of thought, whether by an individual or by
the organization, to ensure all relevant possibilities are considered.
(...)
Diverse personal views ensure step two of the
rational decision model remains functional, but compatible social views provide the mechanism
for
groupthink to take hold in step three, and increase the likelihood that relevant possibilities
will be missed.



So you pretend to be on the same boat as the author, but in fact the two of you have different positions.

Negative. The author has the same problem with this "homogenous group" claiming more shares than are it'S own, like i have. His thoughts in this paper are concenring the so-called christian right, or evangelical fundamentalists, and that this special, clearly defined subgroup of Christianity is winning more and more influence, as is to be concluded from this study as well as from the courtcase Tchocky referred to in his articles. It is not about this belief system "Christianity" in general, which is quite different in it'S different forms of christian schools, sects or however you may call them, it is about the diversity of these not being represented in the military. It is about this group "evangelical fundamentalists" being massively overrepresented, and even more: bullying people and put pressure on them to join this one groups' faith (evangelical fundamentalism), and that it also has marked great success in winning positions of power and influence where decision making and anylyse procedures get influenced by this group's dogmatic perception filters.

I did not complain about Christian faith being the dominant faith in the military, but a certain fundamental sub-group being overrepresented, stillg rowing in influence, and abusing it's position to define goals of military politics. Whatever I think on believing and relgio9n in general, I kept it out of this threat, and di not speak about religion nin general, but just this one school of "evangelical fundamentalism". Yes, I have criticism on relgion going beyond just these guys. but that did not play a role here. The courtcase in Tchocky's links features this rich evangelical preacher abusing the Air Force Academy to aggressively recruit new believers for his sect. thatz is again not about christian chaplains in general, but evangelical fundamentalism and proselytizing special.

Depending on the source you use, you will read varying numbers saying that around 60-80% of the American population are confessing to some of the many different Christzian sects and churches in the US. that Chrstian belief is thus the dominant relgion in the armed forces is nothing to be surpsied off. The problem is about the armed forces no longer being truly secular, not interfering with issues of religion (as it should be nby their own rules), but instead having become playground and hunting ground for not all Christian churches, but some fanatical ones amongst them.

the problem is the growing violation of this dictum: “Military professionals must remember that religious choice is a matter of individual conscience. Professionals, and especially commanders, must not take it upon themselves to change or coercively influence the religious views of subordinates.” Religious Toleration (Air Force Code of Ethics, 1997)

Earlier in this thread, Antikrusek wrote: "Most christians who have been in power have not been backwards bible literalists, its those people who are the threat not the christians who put common sense before scripture." I totally agree. I just hint at this study saying that it is no more like that. The situation has chnaged, and that chnage is dangerous.


Secondly:


In the decades following the Viet Nam war, the U.S. military officer corps has made a
steady shift toward a conservative Protestant and Republican affiliation. The purpose of this
paper is not to analyze the validity of any individual beliefs, but to show how the rise of conservative Christian and Republican values have affected the military’s decision making, and policy recommendations. Whether right, wrong, or indifferent -- the conservative, Christian voice has impacted our military. America’s strategic thinkers, both military and civilian must be aware of this trend and its potential implications to policy formulation.

Once again the two of you diverge. You question every single one of these individual beliefs and not only is concerned but already judged them wrong, steps the author did not take.

Again, negative. I have not started this thread as a general criticism of beliefs and relgion in general, but with regard to the problem I just has outlined above. I repatedly have tried to lead it back to that after it was ignored and hijacked by others to turn it into a general discussion on religion that the paper - and me - orginally were not about. So I do not question every signle individual's beliefs, as you put it, not in this thread. I was talking about the growing influence of just one powerful, clearly defined subgroup of chrstian belief: envangelical fundamentalism. And that means there are a lot of christian churches and sects that are NOT that. these many churches are not what is the target of the criticism. It is just ione fundamentalist subgroup, that has successfully combined it's power with the conservative values of the political right, and the neocons, and nthat now try together to get the Us under their domination and control.

[Skybird]

Embrace diversity or stop hijacking the guy.
Exactly this diversity - gets intentionally prevented by fundamental Christians. they do not wish it. Like all fundamentlaists, they claim that it all has to be around THEIR views, and their views exclusively.

How can one turn things by a 180° and make them appear as exactly the opposite as what this study, the general, an my little efforts, are about?

the study fits nicely with the sueing of the Air Force Academy as linked by Tchocky. That story illustrates perfectly what the general is about.

And some quotes from the first report:
My son and I then made our way to the modernist aluminum chapel, where I expected to hear a welcome from one or two Air Force chaplains offering counsel, support and an open-door policy for any spiritual or pastoral needs of these future cadets. In 1966, the academy had six gray-haired chaplains: three mainline Protestants, two priests and one rabbi. Any cadet, regardless of religious affiliation, was welcome to see any one of these chaplains, who were reminiscent of Father Francis Mulcahy of “MASH” fame.
Instead, my son’s orientation became an opportunity for the academy to aggressively proselytize this next crop of cadets. Maj. Warren Watties (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4191/is_20050427/ai_n14605130)led a group of 10 young, exclusively evangelical chaplains who stood shoulder to shoulder. He proudly stated that half of the cadets attended Bible studies on Monday nights in the dormitories and he hoped to increase this number from those in his audience who were about to join their ranks. This “invitation” was followed with hallelujahs and amens by the evangelical clergy. I later learned from Air Force Academy chaplain MeLinda Morton, a Lutheran who was forced to observe from the choir loft, that no priest, rabbi or mainline Protestant had been permitted to participate.

What was it with diversity, TteFaBob?

In order to better understand this shift to a religious ideology at this once secular institution, I called the Academy Association of Graduates (http://www.usafa.org/)(AOG). Its response: “We don’t get involved in policy.” What I didn’t know was that the AOG, like the academy, had affiliations with James Dobson’s (http://www.focusonthefamily.com/)and Ted Haggard’s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard)powerful mega-churches. When Dobson’s Focus on the Family “campus” was completed, the academy skydiving team, with great ceremony, delivered the “keys from heaven” to Dobson. During some alumni reunions, the AOG arranged bus tours of Focus on the Family facilities in nearby Colorado Springs, Colo. I also learned that the same Monday night Bible studies discussed at orientation were taught by bused-in members of these evangelical mega-churches and that some spouses of senior academy staff members were employed by these same religious institutions. It seemed that my beloved United States Air Force Academy had morphed into the Rocky Mountain Bible College.
The academy chaplain staff had grown 300 percent while the cadet population had decreased by 25 percent: from six mainline chaplains to 18 chaplains, the additional 12 all evangelical. The academy even gained 25 reserve chaplains, also nonexistent in earlier times, for a total of 43 chaplains for about 4,000 cadets, or one chaplain for every 100 cadets.

Diversity, anyone?

Under the leadership of professor Kristen Leslie, the Yale team issued a stunning report on the divisive and strident evangelical pressures by leadership and staff at the academy.
The response from academy leaders was telling. They at first denied the reports of Watties’ “hell-fire” threats. Under media pressure, they later claimed the violations were committed by a visiting reserve chaplain, when in fact they were by the recent Air Force Chaplain of the Year himself: Watties. In an interview after receiving his Chaplain of the Year award, Watties boasted of baptizing young soldiers in Saddam Hussein’s swimming pool.

...?

Following the release of the “Brady Report,” West Point graduate and Secretary of the Air Force Mike Wynne, ignoring the existing code of ethics, issued another “code of ethics” that allowed evangelical proselytizing. A month later, in an effort to appease the religious right, Wynne issued an even softer “code of ethics.” Amazingly, Wynne’s document is in complete violation of the code of ethics issued in 1997 by Secretary of the Air Force Sheila Widnall prohibiting proselytizing by commanders and other officers.
The pre-existing Air Force code of ethics in The Little Blue Book states:
“Military professionals must remember that religious choice is a matter of individual conscience. Professionals, and especially commanders, must not take it upon themselves to change or coercively influence the religious views of subordinates.”
...
In the following weeks, a uniformed Army Maj. Gen. William Boykin (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/15/60II/main643650.shtml) began sharing his Christian supremacist views from church pulpits around the country, declaring that he was “God’s Warrior” and that “America is a Christian nation.” He demeaned the entire Muslim world by stating that his God was bigger than a Muslim warlord’s god and that the Muslim’s god “was an idol.”
Ha, with a plus in place of a minus, that sounds familiar, I have read it often - in books about Islam, it's fanatism and lacking tolerance, and such. When I attack Islam for what it is, I cannot leave Christian fundamentalism untouched without contradicting myself. Both are offsprings of the same egocentric mind, like twin brothers.

When I started this thread, I did not knew about these events, and Tchocky's articles. I just had read several other, German essays on the problem in general. Somebody in this thread has complained somewhere above that I named it as "The enemy within."
The first of Tchocky's articles is entitled "The cancer within". I wonder what I would have heared if using that instead.

[The WosMan]

These walls of text are really getting old.

[antikristuseke]

These walls of text are really getting old.
You should try reading them, might liven them up a bit for you. Or there is a second options, if you do not wish to see long posts discussing something that isnt a simple back and white issue stay away from threads dealing with such instead of clutering them up with pointless posts like that, the exact thing im doing right now by replying to you.

[The WosMan]

I think there is an easier way to make a point than just bloviating all over the place. If you can't get to the point in 10 seconds then you have wasted my time.

[Skybird]

If you can't get to the point in 10 seconds then you have wasted my time.You do not need even that long to waste ours. Dismissed. Report back when you have something constructive to say with regard to this thread's focus - Ltn Col Millonig's study paper, and the events at the Air Force Academy, that is.

So everybody, if you have nothing on the orginal topic to say or do not wish to do so, and only want to go after me instead - stop waste your - and more important: my and other people's - time, and just stay away. I will no longer react to offtopic comments here.

[August]

Either A - you aren't reading the links. Or B - you're selectively reading them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by One of those links
The academy chaplain staff had grown 300 percent while the cadet population had decreased by 25 percent: from six mainline chaplains to 18 chaplains, the additional 12 all evangelical. The academy even gained 25 reserve chaplains, also nonexistent in earlier times, for a total of 43 chaplains for about 4,000 cadets, or one chaplain for every 100 cadets.

That article is twenty days old. Either read links or don't, but don't pretend to. It just looks silly.

Yeah and if you actually read the article like i did you'll note that he was talking about something that happened in 2004. Maybe you should follow your own advice dude.

[August]

The academy chaplain staff had grown 300 percent while the cadet population had decreased by 25 percent: from six mainline chaplains to 18 chaplains, the additional 12 all evangelical. The academy even gained 25 reserve chaplains, also nonexistent in earlier times, for a total of 43 chaplains for about 4,000 cadets, or one chaplain for every 100 cadets.
Diversity, anyone?

So if we can believe this obviously biased persons numbers, out of 48 new chaplains at the AF academy back in 2004 a whopping 12 of them are considered (by him) to be evangelical. Yeah i'd say that would be pretty diverse. Maybe not as diverse as it could be but far more diverse than you imply.

I wonder how many of the other 36 chaplains are Muslim? :D

[Skybird]

The academy chaplain staff had grown 300 percent while the cadet population had decreased by 25 percent: from six mainline chaplains to 18 chaplains, the additional 12 all evangelical. The academy even gained 25 reserve chaplains, also nonexistent in earlier times, for a total of 43 chaplains for about 4,000 cadets, or one chaplain for every 100 cadets.
Diversity, anyone?

So if we can believe this obviously biased persons numbers, out of 48 new chaplains at the AF academy back in 2004 a whopping 12 of them are considered (by him) to be evangelical. Yeah i'd say that would be pretty diverse. Maybe not as diverse as it could be but far more diverse than you imply.

I wonder how many of the other 36 chaplains are Muslim? :D
:dead:
6 chaplains multiplied by 300% = 18 chaplains, 12 plus former 3 (of former 6) = 15 of 18 chaplains being evangelicals, that makes for a quota of 83.3%. Clergymen raised by 300%, while cadet numbers fell by 25%.
15 fundamentalists, 2 other christians, 1 Jewish.

Math, 7th class.
Or read it in the article.

what was it with diversity?

[August]

The academy chaplain staff had grown 300 percent while the cadet population had decreased by 25 percent: from six mainline chaplains to 18 chaplains, the additional 12 all evangelical. The academy even gained 25 reserve chaplains, also nonexistent in earlier times, for a total of 43 chaplains for about 4,000 cadets, or one chaplain for every 100 cadets.
Diversity, anyone?
So if we can believe this obviously biased persons numbers, out of 48 new chaplains at the AF academy back in 2004 a whopping 12 of them are considered (by him) to be evangelical. Yeah i'd say that would be pretty diverse. Maybe not as diverse as it could be but far more diverse than you imply.

I wonder how many of the other 36 chaplains are Muslim? :D :dead:
6 chaplains multiplied by 300% = 18 chaplains, 12 plus former 3 (of former 6) = 15 of 18 chaplains being evangelicals, that makes for a quota of 83.3%. Clergymen raised by 300%, while cadet numbers fell by 25%.
15 fundamentalists, 2 other christians, 1 Jewish.

Math, 7th class.
Or read it in the article.

what was it with diversity?

Yeah I did accidently count the original 6 chaplains twice, but then again you left off the 25 reserve chaplains so i'll trade you 7th grade math (actually that's more like 2nd grade math here in the states) for 3rd grade reading comprehension.

As for the increase, maybe there were too few chaplains in 1966? Ever think of that? Also as anyone familiar with educational institutions knows student populations vary from year to year whereas hiring and firing of staff is rarely adjusted at the same pace. What is the chaplain population now?

[Iceman]

I read the entire original article and undrstand his pov.I actually find it somewhat comforting that there is so much noticable influence as pointed out.:)

Kind of funny in there where it was mentioned about the possibility of some Athesist being spoken to in an attempt to convert him to Christianity is like sin to him.The science of man is like the religion of the present day and I and other Christians consider it a stumbling block and at times an offence.

This is loaded with opinions and observations from the last 100yrs with a couple of quotes from Sun Tzu.

The fantasy that the military, and I assume Skybird is talking about the U.S. military, will ever be rid of God fearing Christians will never happen.The writer alludes to the effects of said Christians dramatically can effect the clear non-biased thought process and decision making..this is his opinion and as he himself points out does not have many examples.

In a mulitude of counslers there is wisdom...

Proverbs 1

[1] The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel;
[2] To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;
[3] To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity;
[4] To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.
[5] A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:
[6] To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.
[7] The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
[8] My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:
[9] For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck.
[10] My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.
[11] If they say, Come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause:
[12] Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit:
[13] We shall find all precious substance, we shall fill our houses with spoil:
[14] Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse:
[15] My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path:
[16] For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood.
[17] Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird.
[18] And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives.
[19] So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.
[20] Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:
[21] She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying,
[22] How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
[23] Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.
[24] Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
[25] But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
[26] I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
[27] When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
[28] Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
[29] For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:
[30] They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.
[31] Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.
[32] For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.
[33] But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.

[kiwi_2005]

I read the entire original article and undrstand his pov.I actually find it somewhat comforting that there is so much noticable influence as pointed out.:)

Kind of funny in there where it was mentioned about the possibility of some Athesist being spoken to in an attempt to convert him to Christianity is like sin to him.The science of man is like the religion of the present day and I and other Christians consider it a stumbling block and at times an offence.

This is loaded with opinions and observations from the last 100yrs with a couple of quotes from Sun Tzu.

The fantasy that the military, and I assume Skybird is talking about the U.S. military, will ever be rid of God fearing Christians will never happen.The writer alludes to the effects of said Christians dramatically can effect the clear non-biased thought process and decision making..this is his opinion and as he himself points out does not have many examples.

In a mulitude of counslers there is wisdom...

Proverbs 1

[1] The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel;
[2] To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;
[3] To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity;
[4] To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.
[5] A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:
[6] To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.
[7] The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
[8] My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:
[9] For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck.
[10] My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.
[11] If they say, Come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause:
[12] Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit:
[13] We shall find all precious substance, we shall fill our houses with spoil:
[14] Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse:
[15] My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path:
[16] For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood.
[17] Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird.
[18] And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives.
[19] So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.
[20] Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:
[21] She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying,
[22] How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
[23] Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.
[24] Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
[25] But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
[26] I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
[27] When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
[28] Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
[29] For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:
[30] They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.
[31] Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.
[32] For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.
[33] But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.

Best book in the Bible "Ecclesiastes" told by the son of David.

'Everything is meaningless'

[Skybird]

"In a mulitude of counslers there is wisdom..." (Iceman)

Especially when they all are yelling with the same voice, yelling the same stuff, keeping away other voices as best as they can, and tell you you have no future in a place if you do not join them. :-? Which effectively make the multitude of counselors de facto just one single counselor. And that is a bit thin between the ears.

You love that uniformity of opinion only because it matches your opinion, Iceman. If it would be something different, in opposition to your opinion, you would demand for a more proper representation of cultural diversity, to have your views included. Diversity for you is ideological uniformity - YOUR uniformity. It's that kind of "diversity" they have in the Chinese parliament, and that they had in the GDR, and the Eastern block. It represents "reason", and the "demand of the majority of the people" - in the understanding of this being true in the Third Reich as well. - The Nazis never were supported by a majority of Nazi activists in Germany, they lived by intimidation, securing key psoitons and security, bullying, a climate of anonymous fear. and evangelical fundamentalism is not any representative for all Christianity. It is one sect only, demanding more shares than are it's own, and ruthlessly pushing for dominance over the others.

You guys mix up your private religions, with "diversity", and "proper representation of factions". You see yourself at the centre of the world, and do not care for diversity and freedom at all - if it means that your own conviction is dominant and at the centre of all. Then the abandoning of freedom, diversity, even democracy is very well okay for you. As long as it is in the name of making others believe what you believe, all that uniformity and tyranny is very much okay. and if these others challenge your selfish views, defend themselves against your intended dominance, quesation your motives - you accuse them to be immoral and accuse them of all the things that you are practcing yourself exessively to secure your grab for power.

And you want to live the ideals of the founding fathers, and the ideals of the constitution? You are it's worst enemies, enemies from within. And the changes you accept, would lead into an American fundamentalist theocracy indead.

And that is not what America, it's ideals, values and constitution, the intention of the founding fathers were about. No matter in what sect's name such changes come along. It is not freedom of relgion, it is the abuse of that freedom, to lock away all religions in favour of just one single sectarian view.

The uncritical, selfish acceptance of these serious distortions of basic American ideals is what confirms me in my assessement that institutionalised theistic religions only lead to intolerance and turn out the worst in man. And when a military gets dominated by such men, and peace and war gets decided by their views, then this is an extremely dangerous thing, and everybody has all reason there is to be worried.

And believe it or not - this lack of tolerance is only somehow logical, for the Bible is not in explicit fdefense of tolerance. That is a conception from the enlightenment, the tradition of the French revolution. The Bible has not much positive to say on tolerance, nor have the gospels. Jesus did not say that others should be tolerated. He just said that if you wish to free yourself, you have to accept to walk your way, pick up your burden, and accept your responsibility. He said you should leave others behind, if they do not see the need of doing like he does. Tolerance in the meaning of valuing other's different view did not play a role in his teachings. "Leavbe the others behind and let the dead bury their dead". Keep their religion to them, and keep your religion to yourself, that's how it could be said in modern words.

If this is a healthy, peace-preserving attitude in today's close nearness of armed selfish cultures, is something different. One more of many reasons not to take old scriptures literally.

[Tchocky]

The fantasy that the military, and I assume Skybird is talking about the U.S. military, will ever be rid of God fearing Christians will never happen. i think the ideal place is where a secular military should not officially favour one religion over another, which is the direction in which some places seem to be heading.
This has nothing to do with individual soldier's beliefs, it's a staff attitude.

[Skybird]

The fantasy that the military, and I assume Skybird is talking about the U.S. military, will ever be rid of God fearing Christians will never happen. i think the ideal place is where a secular military should not officially favour one religion over another, which is the direction in which some places seem to be heading.
This has nothing to do with individual soldier's beliefs, it's a staff attitude.
The creativity to totally distort what I said amazes me time and again (meaning Iceman here).

Well, this is what the Air Force once had to say on it before turning into a religious recruiting camp.

“Military professionals must remember that religious choice is a matter of individual conscience. Professionals, and especially commanders, must not take it upon themselves to change or coercively influence the religious views of subordinates.”
—Religious Toleration (Air Force Code of Ethics, 1997)


A careful reader would already have read it three times before reaching this posting where it is said a fourth time.

[CB..]

here we have your basic problem

tho shalt not kill....note it doesn't say thou shalt not kill except when it's a matter of national security it just says thou shalt not kill..oh well lets ignore that one for the time being...as it complicates everything enourmously..

then there's he who lives by the sword will die by it..

both stock roll out the barrel doctrinal bed rock

the problem is that it is impossible to reconcile the issues...

hence the BS

there ARE ways round the contradictions..and there-by hangs the tale...by the time you have finshed reshaping your beliefs to fit the need for military force...you may as well just admit that God is great (ahem) but pass the ammunition..because somehow you just don't quite think God is going to fight your battles for you...or protect you from harm...(that difficult FAITH thing again)...or perhaps that God helps those who help themselves..and it all starts to get very ambigious...very inconvient...so "best" fit God to the political situation and needs... not fit the political situation needs to God...which is where we came in....completely arse about tip...did God do this ..did God do that..or did God do the other...?? or did we do it?? God as scape-goat or excuse? getting sordid...turn the other cheek? walk the extra mile??? eyes of needles?? where on earth do you store all these things whilst pulling the trigger? one wonders
and isn't the point that your not supposed to store these things anywhere in order to pull the trigger..but rather simply NOT pull the trigger in spite of all the consequences of doing such a heinous act? or cowardice?? of faith??? of what and in whose name...ah it goes ever on..don't you know...and it bears thinking about especailly when it does not bear thinking about...because that's the time your meant to be thinking about it...etc....no answers there at all.. none what so ever..out side of faith courage conviction and truth...and life gets complex when it takes courage to be viewed as a coward..traitor..now then ...

[Fish]

I think this adds to te thread.

He adds that many of those soldiers—hardcore end-timers and Dominionists—desperately want America to invade Iran, thereby triggering the biblical prophecy of the Rapture.


http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2007/11/anti-crusader-mikey-weinstein.html


Mikey Weinstein is an attorney and businessman who served 10 years' active duty as an Air Force Judge Advocate (JAG)

[waste gate]

here we have your basic problem

tho shalt not kill....note it doesn't say thou shalt not kill except when it's a matter of national security it just says thou shalt not kill..oh well lets ignore that one for the time being...as it complicates everything enourmously..



Actually witout the many translations it says 'tho shalt not murder'.

There is a difference.

[Iceman]

The creativity to totally distort what I said amazes me time and again (meaning Iceman here).



Lol..I love ya Skybird :)

Red is gray and yellow white
And we decide which is right
And which is an illusion?

[waste gate]

Unfortunately some people cannot take criticism of their position well. If you don't agree with them and their stance you are either a bigot, spammer, or a fool. When it gets really hot for these individuals you will be placed on the ignore list or told that your disagreement will no longer be tolerated on the thread. A better response is no response as far as they are concerned.

[Konovalov]

told that your disagreement will no longer be tolerated on the thread.

:lol: :lol: Thats sounds like a teacher about to dish out detention to high school class pupils.

Seriously in every thread there comes a time when people should just draw the line and agree to disagree. An argument can only be advanced so far and you know this point has been reached or indeed crossed when it becomes deeply personal or nasty.

Lets all chill subsimmers. :ping: :ping:

[waste gate]

told that your disagreement will no longer be tolerated on the thread.

:lol: :lol: Thats sounds like a teacher about to dish out detention to high school class pupils.

Seriously in every thread there comes a time when people should just draw the line and agree to disagree. An argument can only be advanced so far and you know this point has been reached or indeed crossed when it becomes deeply personal or nasty.

Lets all chill subsimmers. :ping: :ping:

I think your point would have been better served if you quoted my entire post.

[Takeda Shingen]

We've been going on in a circle for nearly three pages. I think it may be time to heed Konovalov's advice.

The Management

[waste gate]

We've been going on in a circle for nearly three pages. I think it may be time to heed Konovalov's advice.

The Management

Thanks for proving my point TAK.


Unfortunately some people cannot take criticism of their position well. If you don't agree with them and their stance you are either a bigot, spammer, or a fool. When it gets really hot for these individuals you will be placed on the ignore list or told that your disagreement will no longer be tolerated on the thread. A better response is no response as far as they are concerned.

[Sailor Steve]

Unfortunately some people cannot take criticism of their position well. If you don't agree with them and their stance you are either a bigot, spammer, or a fool. When it gets really hot for these individuals you will be placed on the ignore list or told that your disagreement will no longer be tolerated on the thread. A better response is no response as far as they are concerned.

The problem I have with statements like that is that all to often the "criticism" is a direct putdown; i.e. if anyone takes exception you label them as well.

Here is a different tack: It has been my observation that most people don't really want prayer in public schools, they want their prayer in public schools, and nobody else's. They think it's a travesty for someone to complain about The Ten Commandments posted in a public place, but they also claim to welcome freedom of religion. Then they say that it doesn't mean "freedom from religion", when that is exactly what it does mean for the individual, if not for the society.

I've even heard Christians claim that Christianity is responsible for freedom of religion in America, when the greatest proponent of religious freedom, Thomas Jefferson, denied the divinity of Christ.

The Pilgrims (who were Puritans by faith) came to the new land and founded the Massachussetts Bay Colony to escape persecution by the "established" Anglican Church; but when Roger Williams preached freedom of religion those same Pilgrims forcefully kicked him out of Massachussetts.

In 1779, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Virginia Statute For Religious Freedom. At that time it was against the law to deny the Holy Trinity, and "blasphemy" was punishable by death. True, those laws had not been enforced for some time, but there was always the possibility of revival, and Jefferson did everything he could to eliminate them.
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/jefferson_vsrf.html


The law was finally pushed through the legislature by James Madison in 1786. When Jefferson was informed that the preamble was almost altered to use the words "Jesus Christ", Jefferson expressed relief that the addition failed:
The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.

"Infidel" is taken by most scholars to refer to non-believers.
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions45.html

True, the Constitution never uses the term "Separation of Church and State", but it also never uses the terms "God", "Christian", or "Christianity".

One of the arguments used for prayer in schools is that there are prayers in Congress; and yet James Madison vehemently opposed those. He mainly opposed the use of chaplains being paid from taxpayers' moneys, and felt that if Congress wanted prayers they should pay the chaplains out of their own pockets. He also opposed chaplains for the military. He lost that battle, and it is indeed the right of the Congress to make laws as they see fit; and the majority were indeed Christians. They have since come to realize that chaplains must represent all faiths (at least all of those represented in Congress itself).

Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history. (See the cases in which negatives were put by J. M. on two bills passd by Congs and his signature withheld from another. See also attempt in Kentucky for example, where it was proposed to exempt Houses of Worship from taxes.
Note that Madison also opposed tax exemptions for churches.
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions64.html

Further, Madison opposed establishing Christianity as the basis of American society. He believed that any religion governing what we were to believe could easily lead to that religion making it the law that we follow their doctrines.

In the Memorial and Remonstrance, he makes clear his opinions on Christian influence on the government:

3. Because it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much soon to forget it. Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?

And

4. ...Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess and to observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us...

Of all the founding fathers, James Madison is the one most easily identified as an actual bible-believing Christian; yet he promotes the freedom not to believe as equally important.

I pick on Madison simply because he is universally regarded as the "Father of the Constitution", and his thoughts speak more to the original intent than any modern interpretation.

[Skybird]

:up:, Sailor Steve! Well put together.

[Heibges]

Some very scary reports have come out of the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs. Apparently the religious environment there is rather oppressive.
Really? Link to those reports? Or is it just you projecting your own feelings as to what AFF would be like for you?
Interesting response.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071107_the_cancer_from_within/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/06/national/main919947.shtml
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E6D61138F932A25755C0A9639C8B 63
http://www.americanhumanist.org/press/HumanistSeptOct07.php

Thanks for the links Tchocky.

Remember that the US military academies are strickly voluntary. The cadets can withdraw at any time. And once again congress has made no law establishing any religion.

Folks in the military tend to be more religious and more traditional than other folks. If you've lived on a military base you know it is old school. Stopping and getting out of your car at 4:30 when they play "To the Colors". Brunch at the Officers Club on Sunday mornings. Things haven't changed that much there in 50 years.

But the tradition of the military being subservient to the civilian government is too strong to worry about a conspiracy. I just don't think this would every happen in America.

The scarierst stories I have heard out of the Air Force Academy have been in regards to all the rapes of female students.