BREITBART – Pentagon May Court Martial Soldiers Who Share Christian Faith

Published On: May 2, 2013|Categories: News|4 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.

Selected Article Excerpt:

The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: “Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense…Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis…”.

The statement, released to Fox News, follows a Breitbart News report on Obama administration Pentagon appointees meeting with anti-Christian extremist Mikey Weinstein to develop court-martial procedures to punish Christians in the military who express or share their faith…

Click to read article

Make a Donation

Recent Posts

  • October 22, 2021 | No comments
  • October 21, 2021 | No comments
  • October 20, 2021 | 1 comment
  • October 20, 2021 | No comments
  • October 20, 2021 | 1 comment

Share This Story


  1. Mikey May 2, 2013 at 5:26 pm

    Umm, I don’t see any hateful coments, am I missing something?

    Are you guys imagining your own persecution as an activist group to get attention?

    Big Deal, you don’t like Christians…. No one seems to care but you!

    Crickets…….. More Crickets…… LMFAO.

  2. Bob Bronson May 2, 2013 at 6:54 pm

    It’s funny, because they think that they will be able to push their liberal, anti-american agendas using the constitution as a club. The first amendment was created to preserve FREEDOM OF SPEECH, and it’s ironic that this group uses the “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” quote, because it blatantly contradicts the idea of prohibiting the “proselytization” (that’s preaching, for all you non-lawyers), of any religion, Christian or otherwise, in the military.

  3. Kelli May 3, 2013 at 9:33 am

    It’s equally funny that lawyers, ‘non-lawyers’, civilians and service members seem to forget that when we take an oath and serve, we willfully give up certain freedoms. For instance, the 1st Amendment does give us free speech. However, does Article 88 not directly contradict that free speech?

    “Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

    Next, lets address your misleading interpretation of ‘proselytization’. According to Webster’s:
    Definition of PROSELYTIZE
    intransitive verb
    1: to induce someone to convert to one’s faith
    2: to recruit someone to join one’s party, institution, or cause
    transitive verb
    : to recruit or convert especially to a new faith, institution, or cause

    Also according to Websters:

    1: to deliver a sermon
    2: to urge acceptance or abandonment of an idea or course of action; specifically : to exhort in an officious or tiresome manner
    transitive verb
    1: to set forth in a sermon
    2: to advocate earnestly
    3: to deliver (as a sermon) publicly
    4: to bring, put, or affect by preaching

    The difference between the two is quite a bit. A pastor does not stand at the pulpit and proselytize to his (her) congregation. They are already converted and or introduced to the faith of the church they are in. A group of like minded individuals sharing, reaffirming and discussing their faith does not require nor generate the same fervor as recruiting potential followers. It would be a silly waste of energy for a pastor (preacher, priest, shaman, cleric, etc) to do so. However, when you are recruiting (witnessing) you are trying to sell your beliefs and convince whomever (whether willing or unwilling participants) that your belief is the ‘right’ way and they should join you. This takes an intenser passion, fervor and persistance, often to unwilling participants.
    Unlike unwilling participants in the civilian sector, subordinates cannot simply dismiss themselves from the presence of a higher ranking official, mandatory events or duties without a reprisal (and likely UCMJ action).

    Requests that Christian evangelicals respect the same boundaries they seem to expect other religions to is not persecution. It’s unit and community cohesion. You cannot demand every other belief system (or lack of) stay in a metaphorical closet whilst the ‘priviledged’ religion gets to utilize government time, money and resources to expand their business. Any other ‘company’ would be in jailed for doing such.

  4. Red Greene May 5, 2013 at 6:27 am

    Kellie sure put this webmaster/sponsor in the hot seat, I wonder what excuses will be used to try and cover up the use of a completely false story?

Leave A Comment