To whom it may concern ;
I just want to express my Constitutional rights to free speech by telling you and your organization that what you are suggesting in regards to Maj. Gen. Craig Olson’s speech on National Day of Prayer is in my opinion, absolutely outrageous and unjust! Being a veteran myself, I am so tired of what the liberals keep doing or saying whenever we express our thoughts on God and Christian values. Our forefathers did not have this thought process in mind when this country was founded. As a child I used to be able to say the Lord’s Prayer in school but because of one lady being opposed to it, and because we as the silent majority kept quiet about it, that was taken away from us. Well, I am 68 years old now and no longer will I remain quiet about what you folks are trying to do. As a Christian, all I can do is pray for you folks and ask that you get your hearts released from the hardness they seem to have. I believe that one day we all will stand before God and have to answer for our actions. It is not my place to judge you and I will not. Hopefully you will consider what I have said and have a change of heart in regards to this General.
Have a wonderful day.
(name withheld)
Dear (name withheld),
Thank you for your cordial email and prayers.
Major General Olson did not speak at a government sanctioned National Day of Prayer but at the National Day of Prayer Task Force, a private non-profit organization.
The National Day of Prayer was signed into law in 1952 by President Truman as a day of prayer and meditation for all religions. Many Americans chose to assemble in prayer in front of courthouses, as well as in houses of worship, such as churches, mosques, synagogues, and temples. Luncheons, picnics, and music performances revolving around praying for the nation are also popular observances. The
President of the United States issues an official National Day of Prayer proclamation each year as required by law.
The National Day of Prayer Task Force is strictly a conservative evangelical Christian organization called the “National Prayer Committee” that was formed to coordinate and implement a fixed annual day of prayer (chose the same day as the original National Day of Prayer to give it cover) for the purpose of organizing only Evangelical Christian prayer events with local, state, and federal government entities. This private event is broadcast around the world on GOD TV.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment (Establishment Clause) of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise (Free Exercise Clause) thereof . . . “(1st Amendment)
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.
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.”
1. Any law or policy must have been adopted with a neutral or non-religious purpose.
2. The principle or primary effect of any law or policy must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion.
3. The statute or policy must not result in an “excessive entanglement” of government with religion.
If any government entity’s actions fit into one of these three, then it is a violation of the Establishment Clause.
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 [to include religious speech] 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
Our military is secular and by giving his speech on Christianity in uniform – which gives the impression to the world that we have a Christian military – demeans the morale of those of other faiths. His speech is constitutionally unprotected.
Air Force Instruction 1-1, Section 2.12:
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.
By speaking at a private event held only for Evangelical Christians and in his uniform, gives the appearance to the world – and sanctioned by the Air Force -that our military is an Evangelical Christian one.
If he had shown up in civilian clothes there wouldn’t have been a problem.
A person in uniform also cannot attend a political rally.
Civilian laws and military rules and regulations are different. Major General Olson knows these rules but chose to ignore them.
I’m 68 and I never said the Lord’s Prayer in school because it was optional and allowed each school district to choose whether to allow it or not.
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), was a
landmark United States Supreme Court case that ruled it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official
school prayer and encourage its recitation in
public schools. The vote was 6-1 with 2 justices not voting; one had resigned due to illness and the other did not take part.
“The Court explained the importance of separation between church and state by giving a lengthy history of the issue, beginning with the 16th century in England. It then stated that school’s prayer is a religious activity by the very nature of it being a prayer, and that prescribing such a religious activity for school children violates the Establishment Clause. The program, created by government officials to promote a religious belief, was therefore constitutionally impermissible.”
Madalyn Murray (O’Hair) filed a lawsuit against the Baltimore City Public School System in 1960, in which she asserted that it was unconstitutional for her son William to be required to participate in Bible readings at Baltimore public schools. After consolidation with Abington School District v. Schempp, the lawsuit reached the Supreme Court of the United States in 1963. The Court voted 8–1 in Schempp’s favor, which effectively banned mandatory Bible verse recitation at public schools in the United States. Prayer in schools other than Bible-readings had already been ended in 1962 by the Court’s ruling in Engel v. Vitale.
So, it was Engel v. Vitale that took prayer out of schools and the combination of Abington School District v. Schempp and Madalyn Murray (O’Hair) lawsuits that took bible reading out of schools.
We are not stopping you or any civilian Christians from praying or proselytizing.
Again, we are not trying to take God out of the military, but Major General Olson cannot be given an exception to the rules because of his rank or his religion. He broke the Supreme Court ruling on Parker v. Levy and Air Force Instruction 1-1: Section 2.12.
And you have a wonderful day.
Pastor Joan
MRFF Advisory Board Member
