Michael L Weinstein

Sir

Having read first the article from Air Force Col. Floencio Marquinez and then read your dialogue with the 180th Fighter Wing Commander Col. Craig Baker, you are a disgrace to this nation and your position.

How dare you condemn a man’s comments about faith in God as “odious and offending”.   Jesus Christ said “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.” Matthew’s Gospel 10:32-33  It seems evident you have never read that.  There is also a first amendment in this country. You would do well to live by it.  It is YOUR comments, Mr Weinstein, which are odious and offending.  Do the Nation and the Armed Forces a favor: resign. Resign and repent. You do more harm than good.

Respectfully and unapologetically

(Name Withheld)

Dear (name withheld),

This nation is certainly being disgraced, too often by people who lash out without truly understanding the issue in question. In your rush to condemn Mr. Weinstein for his response to Col. Marquinez’ article, you have failed to either note or understand both the context of the disagreement and Mr. Weinstein’s position. This, sadly, is a common failing among the most vociferous of those anxious to criticize Mr. Weinstein and the MRFF.

Mr. Weinstein has made clear, time and time again, that people in the military are free to believe as they choose. That, actually, is the fundamental premise of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation. What is not allowed, and this has been made clear ad nauseam by the military leadership as well as the MRFF, is the promotion of one’s personal faith by one in a position of authority in a manner that imposes it on those beneath him or her in rank or authority. In other words, if you’re having difficulty following me, Col. Marquinez is welcome to his beliefs, but because of the separation of church and state as delineated by law, he is not welcome to “share them,” as he chose to, in an official document sent to others who might have a different view and feel they were being made subject to proselytizing by a superior officer.

Just as you, if you were in the military, might find a commanding officer’s message expressing enthusiasm about the value he derives from his or her atheism or Mormonism or hedonism discomfiting or offensive, some in receipt of Col. Marquinez’s article did. Mr. Weinstein, in seeking to have the article stricken and its author corrected in his manner of communication, told Col. Baker not that Col. Marquinez’s faith was odious and offending, but that his inclusion of words extolling it in an official communication was.

I hope this helps you better understand the specific circumstances of this situation. So Col. Marquinez is certainly welcome to enjoy and practice his faith beliefs, but because of his position and military law, must be careful to do so appropriately.

I trust you understand the difference. Personally, I think Mr. Weinstein, who is working very hard to protect the freedom of belief for all the women and men in the military, would be happy to receive an explanation, and perhaps an apology, for your intemperate message.

Best,

Mike Farrell
(MRFF Board of Advisors)