Hey just wanted to send you atheist supremacists a congratulatory note on your minor victory over decent people in Kansas due to one weak willed leader.  Yes, I even heard how you laughed mockingly at him for his poor excuse.  Maybe he deserved that for not having the courage to stand up to you in the first place and then not being able to admit he buckled to a pathetic group like yours.  Well, enjoy your little victory for now.  No matter how many decent people you harm today your actions will ultimately be dealt with on the Day of Judgement.  Unless you repent of course but the hate in your hearts may be so deep that you would rather cast you lot with the beast of the pit of darkness than ever accept God’s merciful grace and stop persecuting Christians for simply living out their faith.  It is all too obvious that your atheist group is not about fair mindedness.  Since your attacks seem to be primarily limited to Christians though I suspect anyone who truly believes in Yahwey would be fair game.  Your group is definitely about driving believing Christians out of this nation by all means you can find eventually devolving, as such deep seated hate always does, into physical violence when the opportunity presents itself.  First you stop Christians from simply being able to speak, then drive them out of work to starve out them and their families and then move in for the physical kill.  You have heard it before I am sure, Either accept the Mark of the Beast or you shall not buy or sell.  I have to admit it is somewhat fascinating to see Bible prophecy being fulfilled even if only a small part at your hands in my time.  Rest assured you along with the army of darkness you have aligned yourself with will get it’s day in court so to speak.  Just so you know, you already lost over 2000 years ago. But for now, congrats on your minor victory in expanding your immorality and darkness over America just a little bit more. (name withheld)

Stop,   Why don’t you go after the people that lie about us? Why don’t you go after those that deliberately leave out the fact that they are the ONLY religious group in the military that violates the Constitution and Supreme Court laws and then screams persecution when they are called out on it?   Where did Jesus’ teaching on “Love thy neighbor as thyself” go? Why do they ignore the Sermon on the Mount where He said “blessed are the peacemakers?” When did Christians become so bigoted and hateful instead of peacemakers?   We are neither an atheist organization nor are we anti-Christian. Mikey is Jewish (and prays to the same Father we do 3 times a day) and 80% of the Board, Advisory Board, volunteers and supporters of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) are Christians. In fact, 96% of our 45,500+ soldier clients are Christians – Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodist, Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, etc. We fight for the rights of these Christians more than any other religion but it never makes the news.   They are so busy talking about First Amendment rights but are willfully neglecting Separation of Church and State where the military is concerned.   “Jefferson’s concept of “separation of church and state” first became a part of Establishment Clause jurisprudence in Reynolds v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1878). In that case, the court examined the history of religious liberty in the US, determining that while the constitution guarantees religious freedom, “The word ‘religion’ is not defined in the Constitution. We must go elsewhere, therefore, to ascertain its meaning and nowhere more appropriately, we think, than to the history of the times in the midst of which the provision was adopted.” The court found that the leaders in advocating and formulating the constitutional guarantee of religious liberty were James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. Quoting the “separation” paragraph from Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists, the court concluded that, “coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured.   In 1878 “separation of church and state” became part of the Establishment Clause BY LAW . The Supreme Court heard the Lemon v. Kurtzman case in 1971 and ruled in favor of the Establishment Clause.   Subsequent to this decision, the Supreme Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether government action comports with the Establishment Clause, known as the Lemon Test:   Government action violates the Establishment Clause unless it: 1. has a significant secular (i.e., non-religious) purpose 2. does not have the primary effect of advancing or inhibiting religion 3. does not foster excessive entanglement between government and religion   Parker v. Levy: “This Court has long recognized that the military is, by necessity, a specialized society separate from civilian society… While the members of the military are not excluded from the protection granted by the First Amendment, the different character of the military community and of the military mission requires a different application of those protections. … The fundamental necessity for obedience, and the consequent necessity for imposition of discipline, may render permissible within the military that which would be constitutionally impermissible outside it… Speech [in any form] that is protected in the civil population may nonetheless undermine the effectiveness of response to command.  If it does, it is constitutionally unprotected.” (Emphasis added) Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733, 1974   To place the Christian God above all others is in violation of Reynolds v. U.S., Lemon v. Kurtzman, the Lemon Test and Parker v. Levy.   Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said “We don’t count heads before enforcing the First Amendment.”   This means that though the military is made up of mostly Christians, that don’t mean they have the right to trample the First Amendment and Civil rights of the other soldiers.   Lt. Gen. Boykin is an Islamophobe, anti-Semitic, anti-LGBT, Commander-in-Chief basher, hateful, Dominionist Christian and believes that our military is Christian and all of our wars are holy wars.   The very people he hates are some of the soldiers at Ft. Riley and for him to speak at a Christian prayer breakfast will cause division and hatred on base.   Army Secretary Eric Fanning is the first openly gay leader of any U.S. military branch. While serving in the Obama administration, Fanning has been the acting secretary of the Air Force and deputy undersecretary of the Navy. He also served as special assistant to Secretary of Defense Ash Carter.   Though Boykin is retired, he espouses his military record to get speaking engagements. To invite him to speak on an Army base against the Secretary of the Army concerning his gay lifestyle is egregious, against military protocol and against Eric Fanning’s Civil Rights.   On September 12, 2011 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed and Boykin should not be allowed to drag this back up. It is settled.   Our military is secular under the Establishment Clause of the Constitution and Supreme Court laws.   Boykin’s anti-Muslim statements go back to 2003 when, as deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence, he spoke in uniform (against military law) at a number of churches making statements that we were in a holy war with Islam.   The most infamous of these anti-Muslim statements was when he said, referring to battling a Muslim warlord in Somalia: “I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.”   At another one of these church appearances, he compared the war on terror to a Christian war against Satan.   Boykin’s making these statements in uniform led to a Pentagon investigation, which found that he had violated military regulations by failing to make clear he was not speaking in an official capacity when speaking at these churches.   Boykin was also publicly rebuked by President Bush for his anti-Muslim statements:   Boykin publicly stated in 2010 that Islam “should not be protected under the First Amendment” because “those following the dictates of the Quran are under an obligation to destroy our Constitution and replace it with sharia law.”   Every American citizen – regardless of their faith – is protected under the First Amendment whether he likes it or not.   In 2012, Boykin was forced to withdraw from speaking at a prayer breakfast at West Point because of his Islamophobic statements:   In 2014, he was caught on a hot mic accusing President Obama of using “subliminal messages” to promote the agenda of al-Qaeda. He has also, on many occasions, spread conspiracy theories about President Obama, such as claiming that Obama, through health care legislation, intended to raise a force that he compared to the Nazi Brownshirts:   In 2014, he said while speaking at one event that Jesus would be coming back toting an AR-15: “The Lord is a warrior and in Revelation 19 it says when he comes back, he’s coming back as what? A warrior. A might warrior leading a mighty army, riding a white horse with a blood-stained white robe … I believe that blood on that robe is the blood of his enemies ‘cause he’s coming back as a warrior carrying a sword. And I believe now – I’ve checked this out – I believe that sword he’ll be carrying when he comes back is an AR-15.”   He also “jokingly” blamed the Jews for all the world’s problems, saying, “The Jews are the problem. The Jews are the cause of all the problems in the world.”   Just a little anti-Semitic?   In addition to his bigoted Islamophobic and antisemitic remarks, he has also made anti-LGBT statements, among other things calling the military’s repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” the “absolute destruction of our military readiness and our military morale.”   This has not happened.   Treaty of Tripoli 1797: As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.   Because “America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,” all religions are protected contrary to Boykins statements.   “First you stop Christians from simply being able to speak, then drive them out of work to starve out them and their families and then move in for the physical kill.”   What a ludicrous statement! Did you hear this from someone or did you make it up yourself?   No one here is trying to stop Christians from practicing their faith in the civilian world.   And, don’t you worry about us on the Day of Judgment because the Bible says:   “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.” Romans 13:1-2   We are obeying the above scripture.   Now, go and stop them from lying. How Christians can lie is beyond me.   Pastor Joan MRFF Advisory Board Member

Good Day, Sir or Ma’am –

Thanks for taking the time to write to the MRFF and express your concerns. I’d like to offer a reply that addresses the grave misunderstandings you have expressed. My guess is that you are getting your information from various conservative media sources. Like you, I’ve read much of the commentary in those places and I’ve seen how grossly the activity and mission of the MRFF is being distorted.  As for who I am — I am a lifelong, committed, and active Christian; a USAF Academy graduate (’85); and a veteran USAF officer.
For starters, we are not an atheist organization; we’re not even a religious organization. We are a Constitutional advocacy group comprised of patriotic Americans of a plurality of religious belief and non-belief.  In fact, the vast majority of supporters and clients of the MRFF are people of faith like me, and we work with pride and mutual respect alongside honorable men and women who don’t share our religious beliefs. What we do share in common is a deep and abiding respect for the principles upon which this nation was founded, as articulated within the US Constitution.
It’s interesting to me that you have concluded that MRFF’s concerns run contrary to the “decent people in Kansas”. In reality, the MRFF has no official position on the activity of the general citizenry of Kansas. Our sole focus is on the Constitutional rights of members of the US military, Specifically, our mission is dedicated to ensuring that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
It’s also interesting to me that you seem to find great glee in sharing what you believe to be confident knowledge of what will happen to us on the Day of Judgement. However, your un-Christian (and unbiblical) pronouncement is neither here nor there and has no bearing on the activity of the MRFF.
I also find it quite interesting that you would accuse us of having some sort of violent agenda in our future. That approach to disagreement may be de rigueur for All-American conservatives like Cliven Bundy, Timothy McVeigh, and others, but it’s not our way. We have too much respect for our nation and for its foundation on the Constitution and laws.  Honestly, to make such a baseless accusation really says more about you and your view of what is acceptable than it does about us.
You should also know that, as a Constitutional advocacy group, we speak up against inappropriate conduct by military organizations and its leaders regardless of the specific sectarian religious belief at the core of the inappropriate conduct.  Does it seem that it is most often the activity of Christians that gets our attention? That would be accurate, not because we target Christians but because it is a relatively small subset of Christians, often referred to as Dominionists, who most often act inappropriately.  Would that this small but active percentage of misguided Christians who scoff at our Constitution and insist on advancing their Dominionist Christian agenda cared as much about the Constitutional rights of ALL military members as we do.  Then there might be no need for organizations such as the MRFF. But today, there is a need and we will not shirk from doing our duty as we see it.
Thanks again for writing.
Mike Challman
Christian, USAF veteran, MRFF supporter

Dear (name withheld) –   I am writing in response to your June 5, 2016 email to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (“MRFF”).  Your claims concerning the mission of MRFF are not only false, they are completely irrational.   First, we are not “atheist supremacists.”  We fight for the religious freedom of service members of ALL religious faiths, or no religious faith.  In fact, over 96% of our clients are Christians suffering religious discrimination or persecution!  However, the demographics of our clientele are irrelevant because every service member – whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Wiccan, Atheist, Buddhist, or any other religion – is protected by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.  Constitutional rights are not bestowed based on a show of hands.   Your contention that we “[persecute] Christians for simply living out their faith” is simply untrue.  We have no problem with the free exercise of any religion, as that is a right guaranteed by the First Amendment.  That said, the right to free exercise of religion is limited by the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state actors from endorsing one religion over others.   Government may not coerce a person into worshiping against her will, nor prohibit her from worshiping according to it.  It may not prefer one religion over another or promote religion over nonbelief.  It may not entangle itself with religion.  And government may not, by “endorsing religion or a religious practice,” “mak[e] adherence to religion relevant to a person’s standing in the political community.”   *** When the government associates one set of religious beliefs with the state and identifies nonadherents as outsiders, it encroaches upon the individual’s decision about whether and how to worship.  In the marketplace of ideas, the government has vast resources and special status.  Government religious expression therefore risks crowding out private observance and distorting the natural interplay between competing religious beliefs.  Allowing government to be a potential mouthpiece for competing religious ideas risks the sort of division that might easily spill over into suppression of rival beliefs.   McCreary County v. ACLU, 125 S.Ct. 2722, 2746-47 (2005) (O’Connor, J., concurring).  It is true that we find ourselves primarily fighting constitutional violations committed by Fundamentalist Christians within the military.  This fact does not mean that we want to “[drive] believing Christians out of this nation.”  Instead, it is because virtually all of the complaints we receive from service members, cadets, and veterans concern the actions of Fundamentalist Christians.  We have simply never received any complaint that a military leader required those under his command to follow a kosher diet or participate in a celebration of the Pagan sabbat of Yule.   As for how our “actions will ultimately be dealt with on the Day of Judgement [sic],” that is not your concern.  You know nothing about MRFF’s mission, our clients, or our staff.  Yet you have the audacity to proclaim how we will spend eternity.  If there is a Day of Judgment, I am quite certain that YOU will not be doing the judging.   Finally, your apparent belief that MRFF would physically harm anyone is delusional.  In what world does protecting the constitutional rights of our brave men and women in uniform inevitably lead to killing Christians?  Do you seriously contend that because you do not understand our mission, we are doomed to a future of criminal activity?  Have you been swinging from power lines?  I am actually incapable of seriously responding to these claims because they are so ridiculous.   At best, your email demonstrates your fundamental misunderstanding of what we do at MRFF.  It contains nothing more than assumptions, false accusations, and specious predictions.  In the future, I highly recommend that you at least attempt to know what you are talking about before clicking “send.”   Blessed be,  
Tobanna Barker MRFF Legal Affairs Coordinator


Dear __________?:

As you can see, Mikey forwarded your e-mail to me for a reply, although, having read Mikey’s reply to you, I’m at a loss of what more I can say.

Let me just comment that your entire e-mail is a emetic outpouring of profound insecurity and persecutory delusion thinly papered-over by a triumphal faith in things that cannot be proven which allows you to deny (or at least avoid) reality.  I refer to your counter-factual narrative of ‘atheism’ and ‘anti-Chrisianism’ since, even the most cursory overview of the MRFF website, Mikey’s writings, and objective information about MRFF would have provided you with factual data (such as Mikey provided in his reply to you) regarding the overwhelming representation of people of faith (of all types, but largely Christians) at all levels of the organization.  But your level of need to lash out at whomever you’ve been misled into blaming for whatever failure affect your life precluded your investigating facts before defaulting to fictional justifications for your insecure behavior.

You mention that MRFF’s ‘attacks’ seem to be directed against Christians.  Allow me to point out that the attack on our Constitutional secular democracy both in the military and in civil society is largely the result of fundamentalist Christian domionists attempting to subvert our democracy and create a Christofascist theocracy.  On those few occasions when someone of another (or no) faith has overstepped Constitutional bounds Mikey’s been on their case immediately as well.  The difference is that there is no organized, concerted, well-funded, vocal, media-savvy, propaganda campaign supporting the creation of say, a Buddhist theocracy in the U.S. whereas such does exist for the domionist Christian wrong-wing.  To wit:  Faux[NOT]New, NoNewsNow, the extreme wrong-wing of the GOP, and innumerable bizarre blogs that take the positions you appear to espouse and which you have clearly spent far too much time perusing.

I’ve wasted far too much time on you… fuck it!





Share this page:

Commenter Account Access

  • Register for a commenter account
    (Not required to post comments, but will save you time if you're a regular commenter)
  • Log in using your existing account
  • Click here to edit your profile and change your password
  • All comments are subject to our Terms of Use

No Comments

Start the ball rolling by posting a comment on this article!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *