Responding to your message

Published On: June 6, 2013|Categories: MRFF's Inbox|0 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 Blake:

Thank you for sharing your concerns about religious freedom in our Armed Forces and the leadership of Air Force Secretary Michael Donley and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

As you may know, there have been reports of religious intolerance in the military, including the removal of bibles from airmen’s rooms and the Air Force Academy dropping “Operation Christmas Child” from its officially sponsored charity drives. In response to these concerns, my office has made an inquiry with the Air Force Liaison’s office.

According to the Air Force, while Bibles are no longer included on the standard checklist provided for each Air Force-approved lodging facility, no one has ordered the removal of Bibles and the majority of the rooms at these facilities still contain copies of the Bible. In addition, the Air Force Academy no longer includes “Operation Christmas Child” as an officially sponsored charity drive, but the Air Force insists that students are not only still allowed to donate, but are actively encouraged to participate in drives like “Operation Christmas Child.”

I will continue to support the protection of religious freedom for our service members and will oppose any legislation that infringes on those rights.

Thanks again for sharing your concerns, as I appreciate hearing from you. Please let me know whenever I can be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Erik Paulsen
Member of Congress


Congressman Paulsen,

Thank you for your response. It does appear to be an out of date pre-fabricated response e-mail though. Leon Panetta is no longer the Secretary of Defense. Aside from that, your position as described is something of great concern to me and I hope that you take the time to read and genuinely consider what I have to say.

I have worked closely with several of the organizations (most closely with the Military Religious Freedom Foundation) which have been the drivers of these changes that you claim to be examples of religious intolerance and am a veteran myself. Your characterization of the distancing of command from endorsement of Christianity as “intolerance” is misguided. While I am sure that you identify as a Christian yourself, I do not. I am a Humanist. Imagine if the United States had as its majority Humanists instead of Christians. In this world, would you consider it “religious freedom” for Humanist leaders in the military to use their authority to encourage people to join Humanist groups, celebrate Humanistic values or donate to Humanist charities? Would you respect the decision of leaders who share my beliefs filling government buildings or lodging with Humanist literature to spread the word of the happiness that comes from a naturalistic understanding of the world? Would you call it an infringement on the freedom of the majority in this theoretical world if Christians demanded that their leaders stop endorsing Humanism above all other religions? I have my doubts.

Many people, like yourself, erroneously believe that a secular government is an atheist government. This is simply not true. The opposite of “In God We Trust” is “There is no God” not the neutral stance which is demanded by our constitution. For our military to truly defend the founding document of this country its leaders can neither profess or deny any religion through the use of authority. A pluralistic society cannot operate effectively under the tyranny of the majority. How can you truly believe that it is “intolerance” that prevents our military from fighting our wars under the Christian flag instead of the American flag?

Imagine if the military refused to have Christian chaplains or did not allow Christians to self-identify as such. Would you find that just? Yesterday the House Armed Services Committee vehemently opposed allowing Humanists equal access to the myriad services offered by chaplains, and we are still not allowed to acknowledge our beliefs on our service records. That, Mr. Paulsen, is intolerance. That is the active denial of freedom, that is bigotry, and sadly, that is our present reality.

I have no interest or desire to live in a country where people of any religion are told that they are not good enough because of their personal philosophical beliefs (so long as those beliefs do not include the infringement of liberty of others). I will continue to actively defend the rights of all service members to practice the religion of their choosing free of interdiction from their superiors. I hope that you can one day find the courage to do the same. If you have any interest in learning about the Military Religious Freedom Foundation and what our real mission is, free of the veneer of media bias, I would be more than happy to talk with you over the phone or in person.

Sincerely,

Blake A. Page
Military Religious Freedom Foundation
Special Assistant to the President
Director of West Point Affairs

Share This Story

Leave A Comment