Your calling for Lt. Gen. Ronnie Hawkins’ court martial

Published On: February 26, 2012|Categories: MRFF's Inbox|7 Comments|

Accessibility Notice

This post was created on the previous version of the MRFF website, and may not be fully accessible to users of assistive technology. If you need help accessing this content, please reach out via email.

Dear Mr. Weinstein,

I’ll begin by thanking you for your military service to our country. I believe that all who have served in uniform deserve my thanks.

I also believe that those who make trouble where there is none and file absurd lawsuits in our overburdened courts are morons. It is, however, unrealistic to believe a man who is an honor graduate of our nation’s third best military academy is a moron, so I’ll instead call you “misguided.”

General Hawkins is hardly the first senior officer in our nation’s history to refer to God. Have you ever heard of a chap named George Washington? He was the senior commander of the forces who made our country free, and later he became our first commander in chief. And you know what? He openly prayed to and referred to God often. I know that a whole movement has arisen in recent year to prove otherwise, but you and I both know that is bunk.

The gentlemen who founded our nation, Washington’s colleagues, acknowledged God in this paper they signed. Perhaps you’ve heard of it. It is called the Declaration of Independence.

General Douglas MacArthur invoked the name of God often. In his message to the troops before D-Day, General Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote, “Let us beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking.” It’s too bad you weren’t around to stir up support for Ike’s court martial.

In the Preface to the Constitution, which both you and I have sworn to protect and defend, it is stated that one of the purposes of the Constitution is to “insure domestic tranquility.” I urge you to reflect upon how you are wasting your life disrupting that tranquility. It’s time to change your ways.

Respectfully,

(name withheld)
U.S. Naval Academy Class of 1964
(alas, not an honor graduate, but nevertheless wiser than you)


Hi (name withheld),

Thank you for your letter to MRFF.

Mr. Weinstein is tied down with some rather time consuming duties right now. My name is Rick Baker and I volunteer for MRFF in times of heavy mail traffic to ensure everyone who writes gets a prompt and pertinent reply. I hope you don’t mind me sitting in for him.

Let us also thank you for your service, assuming you continued on in uniform following your graduation, “Honor Graduate” or not. LOL

MRFF’s primary mission is to ensure religious freedom for all armed forces personnel. Religious freedom in the armed forces requires that they must remain religion neutral. Wherein an officer or other ranking official violates religious neutrality by advancing his particular belief system to subordinates, he violates constitutional provision.

In Lemon Vs. Kurzman (1971) the Supreme Court held that government, including the armed forces and public education may not advance, recommend, elevate prefer or proselytize one religion over another or religion over non-religion. This interpretation affects the First Amendment and has been made a part thereof. It is fairly recent interpretation so it would not have affected George Washington or even Eisenhower and MacArthur’s religious expressions, irrespective of their impropriety.

Gen. Hawkins, like many other officers is staunchly religious. But given the provisions of Lemon Vs. Kurzman, with which he should have been familiar, he advanced his own particular religious beliefs to a diverse unit with the instruction that they should be favorably considered.

The General said: ” “Always put God first, and stay within His will” and “Always remember God is good — all the time!” For Atheists, Wiccans, Pagans, Hindu’s Taoists, Agnostics and even some Christians this is insensitive at least and overbearing at most. But worst of all violates the appended First Amendment. It must be remembered that the Declaration of Independence is not a founding document. The US Constitution, as written, contains no references to God, Jesus, religious foundation, Christianity or religious association except for the Article which bans religious tests for political office.

MRFF has been fighting a growing militant sect of Christianity known as Dominion Christianity. First started in the 70’s as Christian Reconstructionism,” it has become a problem in the military with many instances of command centered and coercive Christian-based proselytizing. MRFF is currently addressing around 27,000 client case complaints from our young servicemen and women who have been in the clutches of such proselytizing. That has made us hyper-sensitive to events such as Gen. Hawkins ‘ power point presentation.

Although this may not be the most egregious violation in the long list of such incidents; all instances of such a religious nature must be addressed quickly and firmly. Domestic tranquility depends firmly on religious neutrality. Otherwise a religious war could, and has erupted between competing factions.

Again, thank you for your note and I hope I have explained our motivation in maintaining religious freedom in the armed forces to your satisfaction.

For more information on MRFF and it’s goals please join us at:
militaryreligiousfreedom.org

Rick Baker
Former USAF


Dear Mr. Baker,

I just reviewed the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Lemon v. Kurtzman case you cited as the basis for your organization’s mission. Please be advised that nowhere in Chief Justice Burger’s opinion in that case, does he even mention the armed forces. If your “tied down” Mr. Weinstein believes General Hawkins’ mention of God as a guiding factor in his life is a court-martial offense, and bases his opinion on Lemon v. Kurtzman, then I’ll reconsider my earlier decision to withhold the word, moron, as it applies to him.

Get a life, people.

With best regards to fellow veterans, but with no respect for your current endeavors,

(name withheld)


Hi (name withheld),

First, thank you for not calling me a Moron…yet.

Some reading must be done under Supreme Court Rulings on the separation of Church and State to get to what is called the Lemon Test.

The Court’s decision in this case established the “Lemon test”, which details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It consists of three prongs:

The government’s action must have a secular legislative purpose;
The government’s action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
The government’s action must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion.

If any of these 3 prongs are violated, the government’s action is deemed unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The “government” is defined as federal, state and local governments and all government subsidiaries. This includes the military and public education. The government in this case is General Hawkins, representing the United States Air Force.

Violation #1. General Hawkins’ presentation did not have a secular purpose.

Violation #2. The religion portion of General Hawkins’ power point presentation had the
primary effect of advancing religion.
Prong #3. The presentatation was endorsed by the General but not an “excessive
government entanglement.”

There you have two out of three violations of the Lemon Test.

Now you may deny these points but further reading will disclose the “Endorsement Test.”

The endorsement test proposed by United States Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in the 1984 case of Lynch v. Donnelly asks whether a particular government action amounts to an endorsement of religion, thus violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. According to the test, a government action is invalid if it creates a perception in the mind of a reasonable observer that the government is either endorsing or disapproving of religion.

O’Connor wrote:

The Establishment Clause prohibits government or its representatives from making adherence to a religion relevant in any way to a person’s standing in the political community. Government can run afoul of that prohibition…[by] endorsement or disapproval of religion. Endorsement sends a message to non adherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored members of the political community. The proper inquiry under the purpose prong of Lemon, I submit, is whether the government intends to convey a message of endorsement or disapproval of religion.

I’m sure, (name withheld) that you can now grasp the importance of ranking officers in the military not endorsing , advancing or proselytizing a particular religion over another or religion over non-religion. If not, I must employ that age old phrase: “There are none so blind as they who will not see.”

As for us getting a life, let me just say that we only have one life and it is not to be spent in abject servitude to unreasonable or hegemonic religious belief foisted on us by our supervisors or government agents. The General was wrong. And there can be no special rights or favors for those who violate the principles of the First Amendment to accommodate their religious beliefs.

Rick


Dear Mr. Baker,

So you’re saying that the Court has not dealt with facts similar to those in your Mr. Weinstein’s “case” against General Hawkins. Rather, you’re merely guessing that they would apply the Lemon test against him, and based upon that guess, you go about trying to destroy his life and career.

This time I won’t tell you to get a life. This time I’m saying shame on you and all who work for your despicable organization. After interacting with you, I feel the need for a shower.

(name withheld)


Hi (name withheld),

Seems like you’ve let your temper and your religion get the best of you. Your anger is indicative of the Dominionist who can’t seem to put anything together that isn’t tied up neatly in a religious bow.

It is not my guess that Lemon Vs. Kurtzman will prevail, it is a certainty. The days of overbearing Christian Dominionism are coming to a close. No longer will senior officers be able to brow beat subordinates and control their lives. Those weasels will go out with short pants.

Now that you’ve shown your true colors as a committed Christian sycophant and treasonous Dominionist, I relegate you to the pile of balled up E-Mail print outs in my waste basket.

You deserve no further courtesy and will receive none from me. It’s tough being beaten by logic and common sense, isn’t it?

If you think I’m despicable remember that I never pulled the fingernails out of the trembling hands of children during the Catholic Inquisitions. I never burnt any witches at the stake like the Puritans. I never slaughtered thousands of indigenous North and South American natives like the Spanish Conquistadors,I never raped and killed thousands of Caribbean natives like Christopher Columbus and his Christian Crews, I never decimated the Hawaiian population as did the Presbyterian Missionaries in the 1700’s with their syphilis ridden crews and I never burned six million Jews like the Christian Nazis did. I never killed innocent Russian Jews and their Children like the Russian Orthodox Christians did in the Russian Pogroms . So please don’t talk to me about needing a shower after talking to me, as the filth of centuries of Dominionist Christian misdeeds is smeared all over your body.

See, (name withheld), this is America not 15th Century Spain. You can’t be killed for your beliefs even if they oppose the Dominion Christian agenda.

So good bye and bad luck.

Rick

Share This Story

7 Comments

  1. Maggie March 6, 2012 at 9:48 am

    Mr Baker,
    Once more a rational clear thinking person attempted to have an intelligent conversation with you and true to MRFF history, his opinion just blew you out of the park.
    You digressed into ancient Christian history and of course your favorite made up word Dominionionist.
    I especially like you comment “The days of overbearing Christian Dominionism are coming to a close.”
    Pretty much what many of us have said ever since we encounterd this pathetic group of misfits.YOU ARE ANTICHRISTIAN ,not the great protector of all religions and non religions you profess to be.
    I repeat myself,but once more , I come from three generations of Air Force and none of us ever ran into the problems you have whined about. We have encountered people who asked us to pray and prayed for us but we never thought that was evil and no one around us ever said they were distressed ,lost their life or obtained an injury.MRFF
    never utters a word about any other religion and some of their crazies, Ft Hood,which actually resulted in the deaths of military on a military base.No I am not against Muslims ,just the crazies,actually the crazies in all religions and non religions. Nope,nothing,nada ! You just keep banging that anti Christian drum,I just love sending all of these statements to my Congressman,etc.As a taxpayer I question your tax exempt status based on information provided regarding your purpose for such exemption,because as crazy as my government can be I question that you would have gotten any tax break for stating your reason for existence as the elimination of Christians in the military.
    I do hope no one calls you a moron sir,if you have served this country I thank you,but it would be nice if you stopped thinking that those who disagree with you are morons and if you believe the goals of this group are indeed good for a country you defended,you are at the least misguided. I would suggest you use your time more honestly and productively. One more thing my guess is Mikey will always be to busy to answer letters,he is indeed a lawyer. Think about that a bit!

  2. Charlie March 13, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    Rick,

    I will call you a moron. Whatever service you may have rendered is more than being offset by your current idiocy.

    In a military where Obama has just put gay superior officers in total control of thousands of 18 year old kids who use group showers, sleep in close quarters and are generally at the near total control of those same officers…which has already lead to numerous incidents of sexual misconduct; you think the problem is “militant” Christianity?

    This is also a problem where unscrupulous male officers have taken advantage of young female recruits and raped them…then merely said it was consensual. These young people could use some support from activists like yourself.

    But, instead, you use your time to push secularism on the rest of us?

    The US Naval Grad of ’64 already pointed out several examples of great Amercians who routinely invoked God in their officials duties.

    The fact that you would substitute your own twisted interpretaton of the law for Gen. Washington’s pretty much says it all.

    Add that to the fact that Lt. Gen. Hawkins is a Black American…you are obviously a militant racist and religous bigot to boot.

  3. Darrell March 26, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    Maggie and Charlie, your minds are so narrow that I’m sure your ears rub together and your eyes compete for space in one socket! What colossal ignorance and meanness! What part of “separation of church and state” do you not understand? As for me, I see no difference between you Dominionist Christian bullies and the Taliban!

    It’s clear that you and those of your ilk are just fine with the idea of a religious war which, by the way, is a clear possibility if you folks don’t smarten up. And it’s obvious that you understand that it’ll not be you on the front lines, but rather many more of our finest young people will pay the price once again! You call Rick a bigot and a moron, but the reverse is clearly the case here.

    I know you will disagree, but I firmly believe that Jesus would feel serious pain over seeing what you carry in your hearts and minds! That is not in the religion he founded! The Bible and the Constitution! When you push to combine them, you are commiting a form of treason, and it is the greatest threat to this country that we may ever see!

  4. Darrell March 26, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    By the way, Maggie, I work in the field of law and I know many lawyers. Many are fine people, but I do know all too many who are unscrupuous and unethical and some who are just plain dumb, so I don’t automatically give someone high marks just for completing law school!

  5. janamg September 6, 2012 at 9:35 am

    I listened to Gen Hawkins’ presentation second hand. it was re-presented by my local DISA commander.
    The problem with the General’s references to his faith, was that it was not clear that these were Ronnie’s rules for Ronnie. It may have been clear in his original presentation, but it was not clear in the presentation I attended. I don’t think it was intentional prosletyzing, but it sure made me uncomfortable, and I’m a “whatever works for you is fine” kind of person.
    I don’t think General Hawkins should be courtmartialed, and he did make it clear later that these were rules that worked for him and were not meant to be anything other than an introduction to him as a human being.
    I also doubt that General Hawkins would be a trusted member of the Dominionist group. He’s the wrong color.

  6. Carl June 2, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    Fellow Americans,

    Id like to add my voice to what is now a very old story. However, its very important for you all to know as you form your positions. Of course, every position you each hold is valid to you and valid to some. I only ask that you consider a few additional facts from someone that has served directly with Lt Col, Col, BG, and the former MGen Hawkins along the way.

    Ronnie is a fantastic individual, family man, and officer. Ive known him many many years. He has served his nation and the people of the United States brilliantly over more than a lifetime. I wont share here, but Ronnie has given of himself to so many people on an individual level that surely each could fill this comment file easily.

    Ronnie Hawkins doesnt deserve this type of scrutiny and recrimination at the hands of many that dont know him by any “stretch of the imagination”.
    Now, Ronnie would tell you that he deserves the same scrutiny as any other Commander or senior leader — and then he would breathe in quickly as if putting a period at the end of a sentence.

    In previous Commanders Calls with the General, I have heard Ronnie’s Rules for years and years. It was always in the context of what was good for Ronnie vs what was good for everyone. And, Ronnie was not alone in having his personal rules of the road i.e., some of our senior most retired USAF leaders have even designed their personal “rules” into an equation! These type efforts to synthesize years of experience as a way to pass on personal experiences is not uncommon in the USAF; as our Service mentors reach out to leave behind a little something for our younger folks to “consider” along the way.

    Just food for thought.

    My personal thanks to Ronnie and his family for their collective years of Service to our nation.

  7. Anthony Dorne April 1, 2015 at 10:41 am

    Wow. This site is amazing. I stumbled on it while researching Gen Hawkins. It’s basically the exact opposite of Fox News.

    First: touting absolute equality through ridiculously skewed viewpoints. I appreciate the point: no one military person (esp commander) should EVER impose their religious beliefs on another military person. I disagree with the fact that civilians are included in this. Keep in mind i’ve done no research on this, it’s only my unbiased opinion, but civilians have no power over one another and, likewise, ultimately military (even commanders) have no power over civilians. They are next-to-impossible to fire, so there is clearly no backlash over not accepting any military person’s proselytizing.

    Second: all money flows to the top. The Weinsteins are clearly motivated by one thing: money. Their cause does not help anyone. It does not improve job satisfaction for but a few personnel who are so incredibly full of themselves that they feel they must go to the internet to troll for like-minded people to help them feel better about themselves. That’s what the internet is good for: originally it was pornography. Self-satisfaction is still rampant on the internet, as observed by this site.

    Third: factual misrepresentation. Back to my original topic — when taken into context, Gen Hawkins was not giving an order. He clearly took a step back to talk about his personal aspirations, goals, and rules, hence the title of the slide, “Ronnie’s Rules”. If they were expectations then the title of the slide would have been “CC Expectations” or “My Expectations”. By saying ‘Ronnie’ (which no subordinate would EVER do!), he was obviously referring to himself. Any Academy should know this: Words matter. Generals know this, and each word is chosen carefully. The fact you (and the ‘anonymous’ DISA coward) are too ignorant to understand this is pretty much your problem. You are looking for an excuse to cry foul. Just like the overzealous police officer looking to write tickets at the end of every month: minor infractions can be found pretty much everywhere. You’re just choosing to focus your efforts in the areas where you can get the most bang for your buck.

    And Finally . . . 6 time Nobel Peace Price nominee? I doubt the Denver Broncos have plastered all over their stadium “5-time super bowl loser”. That’s like me putting on my resume “nominated by state to attend the USAF academy”, without having actually attended. Furthermore, the fact that I tried six times without succeeding would look pretty bad on me, IMO — it just shows that I know someone in the state gov’t that has the ability to put my application under the current representative’s pen.

Leave A Comment