AFI 1-1

Published On: May 24, 2015|Categories: MRFF's Inbox|Comments Off on AFI 1-1|

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.
RE:1. “He did not make any statement to suggest that he was speaking strictly as an individual and not as a USAF leader”
Yes he did he ” I am a born again Christian”
2. “Most seriously, at the end of his speech he expressed a belief that the Defense Department, and all US troops, all should “depend on Christ”     (as an aside… how do you think that went over with the many non-Christians in Maj Gen Olson’s chain of command?)”
He was expressing a “Belief'” and “should” well within his rights.

     3. It is also well within his rights to refuse an unlawful order. If he is forced to reject his “Beliefs” whether in uniform or not that would be an unlawful order.

     4. “AFI1-1 7 AUGUST 2012,19 ,2.11.” Please note the use of the word “Subordinates”  He was not addressing Subordinates.

Government Neutrality Regarding Religion.
Leaders at all levels must balance
constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs
and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. For example, they must avoid the actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious
beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion. Commanders or
supervisors who engage in such behavior may cause members to doubt their impartiality and
objectivity. The potential result is a degradation of the unit’s morale, good order, and discipline.
Airmen, especially commanders and supervisors, must ensure that in exercising their right of
religious free expression, they do not degrade morale, good order, and discipline in the Air Force
or degrade the trust and confidence that the public has in the United States Air Force.
(name withheld)
Hi (name withheld) –
Thanks for your additional comments.  If I may take a moment to respond to them, point by point —
You say that he did clarify that he was speaking as a individual by saying, “I am a born again Christian.”  I disagree completely — what he needed to say was something like, “While I certainly serve our Air Force and our country with great pride, this morning I am speaking to you as a citizen, not as a general.”…. and he should not have been in uniform.
You say that his comments about wanting the DOD and all troops was “expressing a belief”.  Again, I disagree, it was much more than that. You and others are quick to insist that the general was only talking about his personal experience — but when he starts talking about what others, including other within his own command, should do, then he is promoting a personal religious belief… and that is inappropriate.
Third, you assert that AFI 1-1 is an “unlawful order” so he has a right to refuse to follow it.  Interesting argument.  If you think it is a valid argument then you must support MRFF’s call for the general’s court martial, because it is in that forum that the general would have the opportunity to challenge the “lawfulness” of the order.  That is how these things work – no one gets to assert that an order is unlawful and then go on about their business.
Lastly, you quote the wrong section of AFI 1-1 with your assertion that the general did not violate that Instruction.  I thought I already gave you the pertinent section, but here it is again–
“2.12. Balance of Free Exercise of Religion and Establishment Clause – Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for their own free exercise of religion, including individual expressions of religious beliefs, and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief.”
As you can see, nothing there about this balance only being required in certain circumstances, or only when addressing certain audiences.  It’s the general’s obligation all the time, and especially so when he is wearing his uniform and speaking in a public forum.
Hope these clarifications are helpful.
Peace,
Mike

OK then what are you going to do about this?  http://buzzpo.com/us-military-sets-new-standard-by-allowing-these-unprecedented-changes-to-the-uniform/?utm_content=buffer200d9&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=positivelyrepublican

(name withheld)
I’m confused, what do you think should be done about it?  The rules for accommodation of sincerely held religious beliefs within the uniform regulations apply to any religious group that may have a need for such protection.  So if there is a Christian sect that has specific religious attire which would require a uniform exception, those individuals would be equally covered by the rule.

As you’ll note if you read the rules, there is no absolute right even to religious attire – it must be approved, and it cannot be something that would compromise military readiness, mission accomplishment, unit cohesion and good order & discipline.

Do you object to it because it provides a benefit non-Christian religious groups?
Or if you are trying to draw a parallel between religious attire and Maj Gen Olson’s appearance at the NDP Task Force event, in my opinion it’s not a valid comparison but I’d be interested to hear you make a case for that argument.
Peace,
Mike

At least you admit you are confused.

(name withheld)

Correct.  I’m confused by your seeming desire to remove rules that might benefit freedom of religion for all religions.  But it appears you don’t wish to discuss further.  If you change your mind, you know where to find me. However, if your only desire at this point is to send silly one-liners, I’ll pass.

Peace,
Mike

Recent Posts

Share This Story