Atheist must swear to God -- or leave US Air Force

[CaseyJones]

http://news.yahoo.com/atheist-must-s...9UkzAA5rLQtDMD

The US Air Force has told a sergeant he will have to leave the military unless he agrees to take an oath with the phrase "so help me God," officials said Tuesday.

In the latest religious controversy to roil the air force, the atheist airman last month was denied his request to re-enlist because of his refusal to swear to God -- and he is now poised to take the military to court, his lawyer said.

"We have not received word from the Air Force regarding our letter. It has not indicated a willingness to settle out of court," said Monica Miller, an attorney for the American Humanist Association, which has taken up the service member's case.

With the deadline for re-enlisting expiring in November, the technical sergeant at Creech Air Force base in Nevada -- whose name has not been released -- will be forced to sue the government in a federal court, Miller told AFP.

In the past, an airman could opt for an alternative phrase and omit the words "so help me God," but the US Air Force changed its policy in October 2013.

The other branches of the American military do not require the reference to God and make the phrase optional.

"This is the only branch to my knowledge that's actually requiring everyone in all instances to use the religious language," Miller said.

The requirement violates the US Constitution, which bars religious tests to hold office or other positions, Miller said of the case, which was first reported by the Air Force Times.

"The government cannot compel a nonbeliever to take an oath that affirms the existence of a supreme being," she said.

The sergeant's service expires in November and he has until then to re-enlist and take the oath, said US Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek.

In the meantime, "a written legal opinion is being requested" from the Pentagon's top lawyer, she said.

The air force has been plagued by controversy for years over religion and the role of Christian evangelists.

The US Air Force Academy in Colorado faced accusations several years ago that evangelical Christians exerted a dominating influence over the institution.

But attempts to counter the perceived bias in the service have sparked criticism from Christian activist groups, who allege a new rule stifles the religious expression of troops.

The disputed rule bars commanders from promoting their religious convictions to their subordinates.

Advocates of the policy say it protects troops who worry their careers could be jeopardized if they do not take part in their superior's Christian activities.

[Christian Liberty]

Who cares?

[presence]

Who cares?

What if I told you that you had to dismiss Jesus and pledge allegiance to the Buddha before you could get your driver's license?

This is no different.

[acptulsa]

"The government cannot compel a nonbeliever to take an oath that affirms the existence of a supreme being," she said.

The government is chock full of people who think they are a supreme being. Including, no doubt, the officer in charge of this guy's Air Force base.

Of course the government requires obsequiousness before these self-styled gods. Who would expect anything else?

[fr33]

And the swear starts with F.

[Miss Annie]

If they are athiests it should mean nothing to them. People who are offended by crosses and words are not athiests, they are anti Christian. Big difference.
My step father is an athiest. He can admire the architecture of a church. He can sit in the church with my mother and not be offended.
THAT is an athiest. Christian stuff means no more to them than the golden arches of McDonalds.

[acptulsa]

If they are athiests it should mean nothing to them. People who are offended by crosses and words are not athiests, they are anti Christian. Big difference.
My step father is an athiest. He can admire the architecture of a church. He can sit in the church with my mother and not be offended.
THAT is an athiest. Christian stuff means no more to them than the golden arches of McDonalds.

Absolutely.

But being offended is mighty big business these days.

[Working Poor]

God who? I want to know exactly who is the military calling God these days.

[TheTexan]

They should change it so that you swear allegiance to the Flag, like in public school.

/salute flag

[Crashland]

If they are athiests it should mean nothing to them. People who are offended by crosses and words are not athiests, they are anti Christian. Big difference.
My step father is an athiest. He can admire the architecture of a church. He can sit in the church with my mother and not be offended.
THAT is an athiest. Christian stuff means no more to them than the golden arches of McDonalds.

There is a BIG difference between being offended when *other people* use crosses and certain words, vs. being forced to use crosses and certain words yourself.

[specsaregood]

If they are athiests it should mean nothing to them.

Dunno, one could very well argue that swearing an oath to something you don't believe in invalidates your oath. which would make them unhonorable. why not just let them swear an oath to something that is precious to them?

[staerker]

What if I told you that you had to dismiss Jesus and pledge allegiance to the Buddha before you could get your driver's license?

This is no different.

You are comparing exercising an unalienable right, and joining a drone-flying, civilian-killing organization.

[Christian Liberty]

What if I told you that you had to dismiss Jesus and pledge allegiance to the Buddha before you could get your driver's license?

This is no different.

You are comparing exercising an unalienable right, and joining a drone-flying, civilian-killing organization.

THIS! +rep.

When I hear Christians saying that DADT being repealed will harm the effectiveness of the military I say "good, its not like they are doing good things anyway."

When I hear Christians complain about religious freedom violations in the US military, I wonder why they expect a murdering gang to respect their rights. I suggest that they find a new form of employment.

And when I hear atheists complaining about loss of religious rights, I tell them the same thing.

If they are athiests it should mean nothing to them. People who are offended by crosses and words are not athiests, they are anti Christian. Big difference.
My step father is an athiest. He can admire the architecture of a church. He can sit in the church with my mother and not be offended.
THAT is an athiest. Christian stuff means no more to them than the golden arches of McDonalds.

There is a BIG difference between being offended when *other people* use crosses and certain words, vs. being forced to use crosses and certain words yourself.

This. I don't think the atheist in question was offended by the idea of a Christian saying "so help me God", he just didn't want to say it himself. The real problem is that he DID want to join the air force....

[pcosmar]

God who? I want to know exactly who is the military calling God these days.

This^^^
Was my first thought.

Which god? It is the Air Force after all.

Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

[erowe1]

He might as well swear to God. It's not like doing that would be immoral according to some religious belief of his.

[Deborah K]

If he's re-enlisting, then he must have had to do it before. Why wasn't it an issue then?

[specsaregood]

If he's re-enlisting, then he must have had to do it before. Why wasn't it an issue then?

It explains it in the article:

In the past, an airman could opt for an alternative phrase and omit the words "so help me God," but the US Air Force changed its policy in October 2013.

[erowe1]

It explains it in the article:

the US Air Force changed its policy in October 2013.

So Bush allowed them to omit the God reference. But now Obama doesn't.

Interesting.

[Deborah K]

It explains it in the article:

duh....thanks.

[Deborah K]

dupe

[Deborah K]

So Bush allowed them to omit the God reference. But now Obama doesn't.

Interesting.

I have my doubts that they even knew about it.

[otherone]

He might as well swear to God. It's not like doing that would be immoral according to some religious belief of his.

Ah. So one must be religious to have integrity.

[presence]

He might as well swear to God. It's not like doing that would be immoral according to some religious belief of his.

Just because someone does not believe in "God" does not mean they do not have profound religious beliefs lumped together into what "God" believing Christians call "Athiest".

Perhaps he has strong religious conviction and faith in "Evolution" independent of almighty diety. Perhapsh he has faith in fairies, elfs, and leprachauns. He shouldn't be compelled to profess faith in "God" anymore so than any Christian should be compelled to profess faith in Allah.

[presence]

If he's re-enlisting, then he must have had to do it before. Why wasn't it an issue then?

Perhaps it was... and he only chose to do something about it now.
Perhaps he only came to feel so strongly about it last week.
Perhaps he recently renounced his belief in God.

The issue does not pertaining to this specific individual.

It is a fundamental principle that the government of a free people
should NEVER coerce someone to profess faith in a diety
as a prerequisite for participation.




What I find MOST disturbing about this subject is many people have come to believe that you're either "God" fearing Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and possibly Zoastrian or Rastafarian... otherwise you have no religious beliefs. This is the antithesis of what FREEDOM of religion is all about. We've been conditioned into a multiple choice society; ABC or D, else None. Spirituality and religion are much more sublime and personal, in practice defying taxonomy.

[otherone]

J He shouldn't be compelled to profess faith in "God" anymore so than any Christian should be compelled to profess faith in Allah.

Swearing on one's mother's grave is disingenuous if one's mother is still alive. Sometimes I wonder how moral some Christians would be if they lost their faith.

[erowe1]

Ah. So one must be religious to have integrity.

First of all, this person is very religious. He's an atheist after all.

Second of all, atheists can have integrity. They are created in God's image after all.

Third of all, my quote said nothing about integrity. I merely made a factual claim about this person's religious beliefs.

If there does not exist any God, then there also does not exist any transcendent moral law that would make it morally wrong to swear falsely in God's name.

On the other hand, if there does exist a transcendent moral law that makes it morally wrong to swear falsely in God's name, then God must also exist.

So if this guy is affirming the existence of such a law, then he is also denying atheism. But since he is denying atheism in making his charge against the military, he can't also make the essence of that charge be that the military is demanding that he deny atheism and maintain his integrity. And now we're back to the integrity thing.

[otherone]

If there does not exist any God, then there also does not exist any transcendent moral law

Obviously.
God exists if God exists.

[erowe1]

Obviously.
God exists if God exists.

OK. Then you don't disagree with what I said in the quote you replied to.

If this guy's really an atheist, then he should back that up by swearing on God's name, and moving on with the full assurance that he's done nothing wrong.

[presence]

He might as well swear to God. It's not like doing that would be immoral according to some religious belief of his.

It would be immoral to a Buddhist. Faith in God is a manifestation of fear in Buddhism; its frowned upon.

Primitive man found himself in a dangerous and hostile world, the fear of wild animals, of not being able to find enough food, of injury or disease, and of natural phenomena like thunder, lightning and volcanoes was constantly with him. Finding no security, he created the idea of gods

http://www.buddhanet.net/ans73.htm

In the religion of Buddhism we don’t have a first cause, instead we have a never ending circle of birth and death.

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma3/budgod.html

[Demigod]

And what if someone believes in Gods ,can he swear in them ? the same question applies for Satan as well.It would be cool if you could swear in Satan.