Rep. Doug Collins: Atheists ‘subversively’ trying to undermine military chaplains

0

A Republican congressman and chaplain in the United States Air Force Reserves told Fox News on Tuesday that atheists were trying to subvert military chaplains.


Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA) said he objected to the push for atheist chaplains in the U.S. Armed Forces.

“This is pushing an agenda that is really trying, although not overtly, but I think subversively, is trying to undermine the chaplains role in the military,” he explained.

Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) and Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ) offered amendments to an annual defense spending bill that would have allowed humanists and other nonbelievers to join the Chaplain Corps. The two Democrats argued it was wrong that atheists were forced to seek advice from psychiatrists or psychologists, while believers could seek out a chaplain who represented their faith.

Written By: Eric W. Dolan
continue to source article at rawstory.com

NO COMMENTS

  1. Man, I think I’ve probably lived too long. I’m kinda agreeing with a conservative republican??? As an atheist, I would much prefer seeking advise from a psychiatrist or psychologist compared to a religious chaplain, who obviously have an agenda. I assume that that would be the case, anyway. But if you’re wanting to talk equal rights, then you bet, hire “humanists and other nonbelievers”. I think they should all be required to carry a gun and kill as any other soldier is, though. Put up or shut up, as it were.

    • In reply to #1 by fishhead:

      Man, I think I’ve probably lived too long. I’m kinda agreeing with a conservative republican??? As an atheist, I would much prefer seeking advise from a psychiatrist or psychologist compared to a religious chaplain, who obviously have an agenda.

      Sometimes you just need to have somebody listen while you talk. If they talk to a chaplain, it’s kept confidential. If they talk to a psychiatrist, it goes on their record. I can see wanting to go to a chaplain (or whatever you want to call it), just to vent and get something off one’s mind, rather than have it analyzed.

      • In reply to #2 by Kim Probable:

        In reply to #1 by fishhead:

        Man, I think I’ve probably lived too long. I’m kinda agreeing with a conservative republican??? As an atheist, I would much prefer seeking advise from a psychiatrist or psychologist compared to a religious chaplain, who obviously have an agenda.

        Sometimes you just need…

        Touche !!! I can see that aspect being a huge issue. I never even considered that point. Thanks.

    • In reply to #1 by fishhead:

      Man, I think I’ve probably lived too long. I’m kinda agreeing with a conservative republican??? As an atheist, I would much prefer seeking advise from a psychiatrist or psychologist compared to a religious chaplain, who obviously have an agenda. I assume that that would be the case, anyway. But if…

      Actually, this would only legitimize their violation-I don’t understand atheists who reinforce christianity replacing liberty-that’s not America, that’s the antithesis, and those who do it are blind copouts. LIke this “victory” of getting some secular statue next to the 10 commandments???????????????????????????????????????????? they should be removed, they are illegal in such a setting. It says don’t respect them, and the govt is PIMPING ONE of them. Atheists may as well be christian if they’re going to fix the liberty replaced by god problem by pretending it’s an issue of atheists trying to fit into a christian nation. It’s atheists like that that are the real problem as they supposedly have open eyes, yet still respect jesus way more than the constitution which has ZERO respect for him, thus the phrase “No law respecting an establishment of religion”. hmm putting their 10 rules in town square, I wonder if that’s respecting christianity, gee, it’s tough, I’ll have to apply the lemon test and other complexities as I just cant fathom this whole “Dont respect, dont prohibit, stay the f out of it” concept-they were so vague, gee they must have meant jesus was an exception, and honestly accidentally forgot to mention him or the bible and also forgot to have any biblical, ie influence of EITHER god on our founding documents. We see Deism (a noninteractive god, ie not really even a religion, at best a quiet philosophy, and exclusion of interactive religion, and really all religion. I think 7 states right now violate the “no religious test for office” clause in Article 6 section 2 I think….

      When will the atheists stop working FOR chrsitianity??? I cant believe it. But it shows my theory is correct: Dropping god aint shit, you gotta work a lot harder than that to stop being christian….. which explains why atheists are working so hard to legitimize the “Christian Nation ” thing. “We want a secular monument in the shadow of the one that violates the Constitution? Many atheists are cowards, hiding, some pretending to be christian. Be proud, AMERICA is atheist-there is no god faith in the constitution, it is secular-atheists have the potential to be the most naturally American (along with babies, they too have no god faith, until exposed to the bloody dead god and told to quit feeling self esteem and instead feel bad, take jesus, now youre saved, now youre done, now sit down , now condemn until the rapture.

      Final thought…. so these are Death Religions-that is, they offer their reward in Death, like some crooked drug dealer who says “Thanks baby, you’ll get your dope next week” and runs off with your money. So….. why are they the MOST AFRAID at death? Further, suicide is a forgivable sin, for only one is unforgivable…. thus if they really had faith, they would commit suicide, yet they don’t. Faith by fear is always a shallow, thin faith as it cannot be tested (until death) and therefore cannot possibly deepen. This is why they are so insecure, and so emotional and easily disrupted on the issue of life and death. Boggling-so they wait for death in life, so that they may live in death….. ummm okay christians, yea anyone who doesn’t buy all that jazz is clearly a moron. Myself included.

  2. A bit depressing that “humanists” is looked at in a negative light. I would have thought religious groups, as well as athiests might all be considered humanists.

    I guess the worst case scenario for them in any light is that a philospher joined as a chaplain. Being that all in all, killing others is “existentially hipocritical” – hipocritical when it comes to your own existance. Of course your mind is going to have problems with that and have issues when you’re friends die.

  3. His objection makes no sense. If atheist chaplains are permitted, there will be more chaplains. That should increase the power of chaplains generally. No religious people lose their chaplains or are forced to put up with atheist chaplains.

    • In reply to #6 by Roedy:

      His objection makes no sense. If atheist chaplains are permitted, there will be more chaplains. That should increase the power of chaplains generally. No religious people lose their chaplains or are forced to put up with atheist chaplains.

      I think you’re confusing what he says with what he means. Let me translate:

      “By providing non-believers with an acceptable alternative to us, this policy decreases both the influence religious chaplains have over them as well as their discomfort that they rightfully experience for being atheists.”

  4. It seems culturally universal to abhor the act of killing other human beings, but as we know, that is war. It’s easy to approve a chaplain who comes from a faith with a tidy “Just War Dogma.” Allowing a chaplain without those predetermined answers could negate a soldier’s willingness to kill for their cause. Why would the military suffer the contradiction?

    In addition, I see no reason to respect a minister or priest as any kind of philosophical authority. In my opinion, their education is the equivalent of a bad book report. Should I be recognised as an atheist chaplain because I’ve read “The God Delusion” really carefully? I would suggest that a good atheist chaplain would simply be a trained counsellor that does not rely on superstition to help his patients; and that should be the definition of every military counsellor. Maybe the right decision is to simply try to remove the stigma associated with seeing a military therapist.

    • In reply to #8 by SoundGuyLuke:

      It seems culturally universal to abhor the act of killing other human beings, but as we know, that is war. It’s easy to approve a chaplain who comes from a faith with a tidy “Just War Dogma.” Allowing a chaplain without those predetermined answers could negate a soldier’s willingness to kill for the…

      No, they should pay back all our money-it’s stolen, same with the taxes I have to pay for their church. All powerful god and he can’t even wash some windows, fix some gutters or pay taxes on his own house??????????????? The christians by far have the crappiest god in history. Chaplains have no business in govt for any reason at any time, Madison was quite clear about it when they violated it, 13 years in. Long history of it just means long list of liars, including many confused atheists who don’t realize they still work for christianity, and just dont know it. To try to get atheist chaplains is the wrong, short,sighted route-the one that reinforces a “Christian nation (with founding documents that completely contradict christianity lol). So help them all you want-but once in a while, look in the mirror and find out what ELSE is christian in your mind and expel it. It’s like cockroaches, they won’t die, and there’s no time to ask questions, start smashing with the impunity of true justice, for these are the enemies of liberty-DON’T HELP THEM.

  5. Why would we want chaplains? How many of you have had to spend time convincing people that atheism is not a religion?

    If the issue is that conversations with chaplains are off the record while conversations with psychologists are on the record, address that directly. But don’t associate atheism with a theistic title! Gah!

    • In reply to #9 by downshifter:

      Why would we want chaplains? How many of you have had to spend time convincing people that atheism is not a religion?

      The problem is that the US military has a stupid thing it does – it presumes that counseling should be done VIA the chaplains. If you’re on duty you are much more likely to have a chaplain available to you than a psychologist. Unreligious counseling is not as readily available as religious counseling. This is an example of a common problem atheists face when trying to make society accept making things more secular. The entire infrastructure is built on a presumption of religion. This means that if you can’t do a major sea change of everything at once, and instead have to fight battles one small issue at a time, then everything you do will look like a slotted drop-in replacement for a religious thing. This makes it look like a religious thing itself. It extends to something as small as filling out a form that asks “religion” and demanding that there needs to be an answer for the atheist to pick – if you put down “atheist” there, it will look like you meant that it’s a religion. If you don’t, you have to lie and pretend to have a religion you don’t.

      The military chaplaincy is like a demographic survey that demands you write down a religion. You are left either lying by pretending to have a religion, or you are left lying by pretending atheism counts as a religion. Neither one is true but they’re the only two choices you have.

  6. Sorry I didn’t watch the video but IMO of course accepting the validity of secularism undermines religion. I don’t think that’s the intention but when religion isn’t the only game in town, it gets undermined a bit. For the people who love their religion and love to impose it on others, they have every right to feel undermined. But as Hitchens used to say, “get used to it”.

  7. This article hits close to home. I was deployed to Iraq. My wife and I were having marital issues. There were no psychologists, psychiatrists, or mental health providers on my small base. Only a Lutheran Air Force chaplain who preferred to steer the topic to theology rather than the relationship issues I was coming to him about. (I’m not in the Air Force, btw. It is common to have members of different services working together.)

    At one point he said, “Well, part of the problem is you’ve got some bad theology that you’re dealing with.” This was exactly because, when he asked me, I told him I see things in a more Humanist / Pantheist perspective and he couldn’t get around that.

    Religious organizations have the right to exist and not be bothered with, and religious military members are entitled to spiritual support free from criticism of their particular faith. Some military chaplains have abused their positions, especially when they come from a faith that does not accept different points of views on important issues.

    Politicians and leaders of traditional religions should be ashamed for working to prevent certain military members from receiving the same kind of spiritual / moral guidance from chaplains that religious military members receive.

  8. well i agree that the purpose is quite possibly to undermine the chaplain corps. i would consider that a good thing. religion has been an important tool for the military, to convince troops that some god is on their side and their actions will be justified no matter what. no atheist can make such dishonest arguments or mislead young, impressionable, and dare i say gullible soldier minds so easily

  9. He’s wrong. See, to respect Amendment 1, there are only two possibilities, neither is practiced, we live in a partial theocracy and in reality, the majority hates liberty, for it is mutually exclusive with their religion. Think about gays and marriage, what would America say? It would say “It doesn’t matter what your religion says, inalienable rights, including the right to pursue happiness, and the liberty to choose as anyone, even the lofty christian does, are again, “INALIENABLE” that means even the christian god (or any “all powerful” god) couldn’t take them away-by definition, yet christians try to … they don’t even believe in liberty. All they do is attack it. Further, an all powerful god cannot be so if a man has inalienable rights-they won’t coexist by definition. Strange, I thought the “creator” gave them to him (including the GAY him). Indeed, but Jefferson’s creator wasn’t all powerful, he wasn’t even here, as he only creates, a non-interactive god (thus a SAFE god). If anyone wishes to try to make the disgusting claim that Jefferson, the man that christians of his day called “The Infidel from Virginia”, that Jefferson was a christian, nevermind all the ways American foundations contradict the bible, simply explain to me how a christian could write the “Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” also known as “The Jefferson Bible”, only a liar would not admit this man, as well as Madison who WROTE the establishment clause, were Deists, as were most of the main guys that put this thing together. Paine the most obvious-yet he quotes the bible in Common Sense. Yes, well I guess if I mention a passage from the bible, it must mean I’m christian, and let’s ignore all the explicit things I say that denounce it….

    Back to the point, only ONE religion violates the Establishment Clause, the dominionists, those who think it’s all for them, that they own it all, including people, the ones that said “Slavery is a Divine Institution” and “Women are too dumb to be educated” now say “gays are an abomination” and they wish to crawl in bed with them and do inspections I guess-very strange those christians. Anyway, their very first violation was about 13 years into the “Experiment”, it was appointed chaplains, paid out of the public purse. Ruled on in 1982 I think, and the entire opinion (Burger) rests on the fact that he assumes (lies more likely) that chaplains would be ok since they voted for them-no, Madison didn’t, neither did Jefferson. And Madison is on public record (govt records, addenda written by him on Constitution) as explicitly saying that chaplains violate the establishment clause–and doubly so when paid for by ALL our taxes. It’s all lies now, please, like it’s meaning was ambiguous-it was quite clear, NO RESPECT, NO PROHIBITION, ie STAY THE F out of religion govt. ALL and if anything, ESPECIALLY christianity-the very religion they were running from (including christians who ran from other chrsitians-how quickly they forget that christians dont stop oppressing when they run out of non-christians!!!), the very religion that caused our Constitution to LACK the word “God” for the first time in history-and surprise, suddenly man is not pure evil and this world not defiled and lots of rights flowed naturally from the crucial gateway right, which no longer exists.

    So, you either respect ALL religions, and have no time for whatever the activity is, or NONE of them, like it says, “no respect”, ie don’t even say hello, dont acknowledge (NOR DENY) them. A nation of frauds, most hate liberty, very few even understand it. What most miss is that yours is mine, and so on. So only those who get it, will realize, the attack on gays, is an attack on ALL OF US, even the death loving liberty hating bigmouths that represent the antithesis of what America was intended to be. The Experiment was never “would it work?” no, it was “Do they deserve Liberty yet? Or will they let the christians steal it from all of us?” Yes, it’s our fault-we have a choice. They don’t, they have to attack it, it’s their religion.

  10. My question is why is religion of any kind permitted in the military, does this not violate the separation of church and state, are we not all paying these chaplains salary? If someone needs counseling then they should see someone trained in the field, not a chaplain. If you have a problem that can only be solved by religion then go find a pastor, priest etc. and do not expect to have one supplied by the government!

  11. Having served in the US Army I can attest to the religious bias. I’m not sure I have an opinion on Humanist Chaplains but having a non-religious person to discuss issues without the stigma of seeing a psychologist or psychiatrist may be very helpful. Those who seek clinical help are considered weak(I do not share that view but it is common). Seeing a chaplain does not have the same connotation.

Leave a Reply