Posted on Aug 5, 2014
Atheists Want Guard to Stop Bible Handouts. What is your opinion?
67.8K
1.08K
565
44
44
0
If you do not believe in the BIBLE GOD JESUS etc do not take the BIBLE. Easy answer
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/08/05/atheists-want-guard-to-stop-bible-handouts.html?ESRC=eb.nl
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/08/05/atheists-want-guard-to-stop-bible-handouts.html?ESRC=eb.nl
Posted in these groups: 
Atheism
Atheism
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 186
The issue is, if you want to hand out the bible, why not the Torah, Quran, and every other holy book. All or nothing.
(0)
(0)
CPT Pedro Meza
People have the right to hand out what ever they want, but they need to buy themselves and give it freely, rum is my preference; it full of spirits too.
(1)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
They do have those available. I'm Christian but the Jewish Chaps was next door to us in Bagram and I picked up a mil copy of the Torah, I even attended a Passover service.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
I have never understood why 'ministry of presence' as odered in AR 165-1 somehow is not good enough for some Chaplains who suposedly believe in the Holy Spirit. Do they somehow think that they have power to 'save a soul?' Can't save our own souls , the way I believe. But also, there is nothing clearly stated in AR 165-1 that says "The Chaplain or Chaplain Assistant will distribute Bibles or other religious material to the Soldiers." If we do this we must have sensitivity and wisdom in our approach. If, as Chaplains, out intent is to evangelize 'lost' Soldiers in the formation - outside the chapel, then in my opinion we need to hang up the uniform. Become a missionary or
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No paid government service should be handing out religious material. And having civilians do it is really solicitation. Stack the bibles somewhere and allow soldiers to take them if they wish. Maybe include the Satanist bible, the Torah and a couple other books of faith. But no tax dollars should be spent doing this because they can't reasonably provide equal coverage to every possible religion. Just my 2 cents
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Perhaps a trolling question.....
Should Atheists, based on their separation of church and state argument (though I interpret it differently) actually be advocating for the removal of chaplains from service and simply targeting the hand out of bibles is nothing more than low hanging fruit?
If the State (federal) or states (actual states) are paying chaplains, would that not constitute the government paying for religion? Further, since you don't have "one of each" type of chaplain assigned to a singular unit, and chaplains usually have a faith specific affiliation (yes, they are supposed to be able to be a chaplain to all faiths or lack there of) is that not favoring a specific religion over another? Just looking for consistency.
Should Atheists, based on their separation of church and state argument (though I interpret it differently) actually be advocating for the removal of chaplains from service and simply targeting the hand out of bibles is nothing more than low hanging fruit?
If the State (federal) or states (actual states) are paying chaplains, would that not constitute the government paying for religion? Further, since you don't have "one of each" type of chaplain assigned to a singular unit, and chaplains usually have a faith specific affiliation (yes, they are supposed to be able to be a chaplain to all faiths or lack there of) is that not favoring a specific religion over another? Just looking for consistency.
(0)
(0)
SPC Nathan Freeman
There is no where in the constitution that says anything about separation of church and state. It certainly doesn't say anything about the separation of religion and state. Chaplains have been in the army for as long as we've had an army. If our founding fathers truly believed in separation of church and state, this would not have been the case.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
You are correct SPC, there is no mention of the separation of church and state in the constitution, and I don't believe I said as much either, however the idea was first coined by a founding father to the Danbury Baptists....and yes, the founding fathers then did believe in an actual separation of church and state, but my interpretation of their approach is completely different than how separation of church and staters are now and anti-religious types usually take the letter out of context and don't actually read it....religion and church are basically the same taken in context of the 18th century whereas it viewed differently today (either being connected or two mutually exclusive events).
The point of freedom of religion and then the explanation by Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists was that no government should establish a religion (such as the church of England) or compel people to convert to a specific religion through various means (taxes, coercion, etc).
The point of my trolling question was that those atheists are inconsistent in their argument and if they were truly following a separation of church and state argument based on their interpretation, they should be advocating for the removal of the chaplain corp since those are religious figures being paid for by the government.
The point of freedom of religion and then the explanation by Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists was that no government should establish a religion (such as the church of England) or compel people to convert to a specific religion through various means (taxes, coercion, etc).
The point of my trolling question was that those atheists are inconsistent in their argument and if they were truly following a separation of church and state argument based on their interpretation, they should be advocating for the removal of the chaplain corp since those are religious figures being paid for by the government.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I put it this way... When one right violates another then it is void... However in this case it is easy to just decline the bible if presented. But taking it away altogether violates the rights who would want the religious material or need it. It is alright to just say no.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I have to agree with the difference in handing out and making available. By handing out literature that is predominately of a single religion, then it gives the impression that the religion is backed by those handing it out. If literature for each different religion is made available and troops are able to choose that which is more appropriate to their beliefs, then I see no problem, however, handing out bibles, only, rather than also handing out Qurans, Torahs, etc, is unacceptable. If we wish religious tolerance in the military, then we can't choose one religion over another (or non-religion, for that matter, either). Religious literature should be made available at all times, but should only be handed out at appropriate services. By handing out bibles when not related to a specific chaplains service, it should fall under the category of proselytizing, which is prejudicial to good order and conduct. At least in my humble opinion.
(0)
(0)
SSG Philip Evans
Let's see...there are how many variants of the Christian Bible that have how many recognized denominations using one of them? That's only the recognized denominations! There are many more denominations that go unrecognized by the so-called "main-stream" denominations. How many many thousands of sanskrit and hindii writings make up the documents sacred to the Hindu religion? Same for all other religions? Enough to fill vast libraries all over the world! I'm sorry, but when it comes to down in the trenches, most Chaplains can't even deal very well with religious problems of multiple major world religions. They may have training in other religions, but without living in and with those other religions they have no real experience dealing with the daily problems!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Atheists in hell want ice water, but they're not going to get that either!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I'm tired of hearing about these organizations trampling on our rights. If they don't believe in the Bible, nobody is forcing them to take it. However, they are forcing their religion, or lack of it, on others. So who is right? Freedom of religion or freedom from religion. One word completely changes everything.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google