New Attacks Reyes the Stakes on Censorship
If President Eisenhower were
alive today, the five-star general may be shocked to know that his own
speeches are too offensive to be quoted in the military he used to
command! Just when Americans thought they'd heard it all, an Alaskan
military chaplain was taken to task
for fulfilling the job description that most spiritual leaders (until
recently) were hired to do: talk about faith. In a harmless post for his
online website, "Chaplain's Corner," Lt. Col. Kenneth Reyes (USAF) of
the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska wrote an inspirational
piece called, "No Atheists in Foxholes: Chaplains Gave All in World War
II."
The phrase, which President
Eisenhower made famous in 1954, dates way back to the Japanese attack at
Corregidor. Reyes had hoped to encourage his troops -- believers and
non-believers -- with the brave story of the man who first coined the
quote.
Turns out, the story only
encouraged the attack of anti-faith zealots. Mikey Weinstein, whose own
statements are fairly well-known ("Christian monsters of human degradation, marginalization, humiliation and tyranny"),
organized a letter to Reyes's commanding officer, Col. Brian Duffy,
demanding the chaplain be censored. Weinstein and Military Religious
Freedom Foundation rep Blake Page blasted Reyes for his "redundant use
of the bigoted, religious supremacist phrase, 'no atheists in
foxholes,'" and accused the chaplain of "defil[ing] the dignity of
service members." Of course, anyone who has actually read Reyes's column
would understand how preposterous those charges are. Reyes never
suggested that "there are no atheists in foxholes," he was merely
tracing, in a very neutral way, the history of the well-known phrase -- a
far cry from the "anti-secular diatribe" MRFF calls it. Reyes goes out
of his way to include unbelievers in his piece, even suggesting that
"faith" can mean different things to different people.
Nonetheless, his superior, Col. Duffy, snapped to attention and within five hours
of Mikey's complaint ordered the article scrubbed from the chaplain's
website. In his profuse apology to MRFF, he promises to keep a vigilant
watch over his troops' speech. "We remain mindful of the governing
instructions on this matter and will work to avoid reoccurrence." Not
surprisingly, that didn't satisfy Weinstein, who are demanding a formal
punishment for Reyes. "Faith-based hate is hate all the same," Page
wrote. "Lt. Col. Reyes must be appropriately reprimanded."
For what -- doing his job? Engaging in constitutionally-protected
speech? Like it or not, a chaplain's duties, by definition, are to offer
prayer, spiritual guidance, and religious instruction. Whether Duffy
punishes Reyes or not, the damage has already been done. As FRC's Lt.
Gen. Jerry Boykin told Fox News's Todd Starnes,
chaplains across the military are already afraid of carrying out the
most basic duties of their job. "In this case, a chaplain has been
censored for expressing his beliefs about the role of faith in the lives
of service members. ...Why do we have chaplains if they aren't allowed
to fulfill that purpose?"
FRC's Ken Klukowski, whose piece on the controversy was picked up by Drudge Report,
is confident that Weinstein's intolerance will backfire. Now that the
House is on the verge of passing the Defense Department budget, the
language inserted to protect troops' conscience and religious rights are
one step closer to becoming law. "Reyes's story makes it more likely,"
Ken writes, "that Congress will stand its ground and fight to protect
the religious liberty of [this chaplain] and countless others in the
military."
Take action with over 160,000 other Americans by signing our petition to Defense Secretary Hagel, urging him to issue clear policies to protect the religious freedom of our troops.
Planned Parenthood Tees off the Gulf
Texas
was right to secede -- from Planned Parenthood. The billion dollar
operation finally admitted that its Gulf Coast affiliates have been
defrauding the government for years in an elaborate scheme that
overbilled Medicaid for services. Abby Johnson, a former Planned
Parenthood clinic manager who is now a pro-life convert, blew the
whistle on her former employer with the help of our friends at Alliance
Defending Freedom (ADF).
In a legal settlement announced yesterday, Planned Parenthood has agreed to repay the $1.4 million it stole from taxpayers. ADF attorney Michael Norton talked about
the great lengths Planned Parenthood went to falsify patient records,
fudge accounting numbers, and submit bogus claims. "Americans deserve to
know if their hard-earned tax money is being funneled to groups that
are misusing it... These programs are designed to help the poor, but
Planned Parenthood instead uses taxpayer dollars to pad its bottom line
with little regard for the health of women."
Unfortunately, as we've reported
over the past several months, the Texas scam is only part of Planned
Parenthood's nationwide con game. Similar lawsuits have already been
filed in Iowa and Washington State, where the organization has also
swindled the government out of millions of dollars. So far, the
revelations have done little to dent the President's relationship with
the abortion giant. The federal government, meanwhile, has ample reason
to defund the organization -- especially one so intent on extorting it!
Congratulations to ADF and the courageous Abby Johnson for shining yet
another spotlight on the dark and crooked world of Planned Parenthood.
San Antonio Spurs Anti-Christian Abuse
A
controversial proposal in San Antonio may be the first step to banning
Christians from public office! In a move that took locals completely by
surprise, the city council is proposing a sweeping ordinance
that would disqualify anyone who has ever "demonstrated a bias" from
serving on local boards or commissions. The measure, which some have
couched as an "updated non-discrimination" policy, suggests that "No
person shall be appointed to a position if the city council finds that
such person has, prior to such proposed appointment, engaged in
discrimination or demonstrated a bias, by word or deed, against any
person, group or organization on the basis of race, color, religion,
national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran
status, age, or disability."
Several Texas pastors are
outraged by the measure, which seems to prohibit any religious or even
nonbelieving conservatives from serving the city simply for holding a
natural view of marriage and sexuality. At no point does the proposal
define what a "bias" is, instead leaving it open to the subjective
interpretation of the council. On top of barring those people from
public service, the ordinance also outlaws city contracts with those
deemed "intolerant" to the classes listed.
As FRC's Peter Sprigg points
out, it seems to fly in the face of the Constitution that San Antonio
could oppose a person on the grounds of "prior discriminatory acts."
What if a person shows remorse for inappropriate statements (which,
regardless of whether they're politically correct, are still protected
by the First Amendment's freedom of speech) or disavowed past actions?
This ordinance seems to leave no room for changing attitudes or
opinions. What's more, it's ironic that the council would discourage
discrimination on the basis of "religion" -- only to actively discriminate against those who let that same religion inform their beliefs on sexuality!
Though it's the next logical
step after labeling moral beliefs "hate," this is certainly new
territory in the war on Christianity in America. Fortunately, pastors in
the area aren't about to let San Antonio become the place where we
remember religious freedom alongside the Alamo!
**
CORRECTION: In Monday's Update, we mistakenly attributed a Justice
William H. Rehnquist quote to the President Obama's outrageous judicial
nominee, Cornelia Pillard. She did not say that "mutually reinforcing
stereotypes" of mothers "create a self-fulfilling cycle of
discrimination." Rehnquist said that in a case that Pillard litigated.
But don't worry. The President's nominee made plenty of other statements backing up her pro-abortion and feminist extremism.
*** How controversial is the new fetal pain bill in Texas? Not very, FRC's Cathy Ruse explains. Check out her new column in the Daily Caller, "Most Europeans -- and Americans -- Agree with Texas Abortion Law."
No comments:
Post a Comment