Regarding national prayer day

Published On: June 2, 2015|Categories: MRFF's Inbox|Comments Off on Regarding national prayer day|

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 Ms. Weinstein,
I would have directed this to Mikey Weinstein but did not find a contact for him. It makes me very sad that your organization felt obligated to attack Major General Olson for his prayer on National Prayer Day. This country is indeed a country built on the freedom of religion, and his speech did not alienate anyone. He sated his belief but attacked no one.

I understand that it is the remark he made of being a “redeemed believer in Christ” that made you upset. Christ himself was crucified for stating that he was the son of God and exposing the darkness in the souls of men. “Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” I pray for you that your own heart be filled with the light of truth.
Blessings and best wishes,

(name withheld)

 

Dear (name withheld),
Thank you for your kind email that did not contain hate or death threats.
 
We are not an anti-Christian group as the media and others deliberately portray us; they know the truth about us but that wouldn’t make you angry. 
 
Mikey – who is Jewish – is the face founder and President of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) and prays 3 times a day to the same Father we do. There is also the Board, Advisory Board, volunteers and supporters that total 230 and 87% of them are Christians. A full 96% of our 41,600+ soldier clients are Christians – Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodist, Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, etc. We fight for Christians more than any others.
 
MRFF does not act on its own but at the request of soldiers’ complaints of the blatant disregard and trampling of the Constitution and the Military Code of Justice; blurring the lines between the separation of church and state. Every complaint is vetted by Mikey who was a JAG lawyer at the Air Force Academy for 10 years; worked in the West Wing under Ronald Reagan; and held positions in private practice. 
 
We also rely on our military supporters for their expertise in all matters concerning the military and religion. To name just a few that you may heard of:
Board Member – Major William E. Barker
Board Member – Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV
Advisory Board Member – Lawrence Wilkerson – Secretary of State Colin Powell’s Chief of Staff (2002-05).
 
The National Day of Prayer Task Force is not the National Day of Prayer signed into law by President Truman in 1952.
The National Day of Prayer is celebrated by Americans of many religions as a day of prayer and fasting. The President issues an official National Day of Prayer proclamation each year as well – by law signed by President Truman.
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 (held on the same day as the original National Day of Prayer) for the purpose of organizing only Evangelical Christian prayer events with local, state, and federal government entities. It is broadcast around the world via GOD TV.
The National Day of Prayer is sanctioned by the government where the National Day of Prayer Task Force is not.
The Pentagon treats mainline Christians and other religions differently. I do not know where they prayed this year, but last year “the Protestants, except for those Episcopalian types, get the nice big event in the auditorium complete with world-class musical entertainment on the actual May 1 date of the National Day of Prayer. The Catholics get to have their event on the right day, but in the Pentagon’s chapel. Muslims have to wait a day for their event. Then there’s another Protestant gospel service thrown in the middle of all this. The Episcopalians, who are apparently not the same as Protestants have to wait until May 7. And, last but not least, there are the Hindus and Jews, who get to observe the May 1 National Day of Prayer on May 8.”
 
Is this consistent with the original National Day of Prayer? No, it demeans soldiers of other faiths that they are not welcome during the one day each year set aside to pray for our country.
The wording and meaning of the original First Amendment was several times upheld by the Supreme Court as an accurate description of the Establishment Clause:
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 or no faith. His speech is constitutionally unprotected.
 
The Air Force has strict regulations on religious neutrality:
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. 
 
The violation of this – by speaking in uniform at a civilian event- is a felony under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
 
Because Major General Craig S. Olson showed up in uniform to give his speech, he is also providing an unlawful endorsement and selective benefit to a non-Federal entity
(the NDPTF, which is a private organization), in violation of both the Joint Ethics Regulation (DoD 5500.7-R) prohibition on endorsement of non-Federal entities and DoD Instruction 5410.19, which prohibits the providing of a selective benefit or preferential treatment to any private organization.
 
Major General Olson knows these rules but chose to ignore them with the backing of the Air Force.
 
He ended his speech with: Pray for them when they have to go again that they can bear through that by depending on Christ.
 
Our military is secular and our wars are not Christian Holy Wars. He gave the appearance to the world that he was speaking on behalf of our military.
 
We have many clients who are Christians who are serving in our military and we are not trying to take Christianity out of it but force it to obey the Constitution, Supreme Court rulings, Air Force instructions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as to the time, place and manner in which one may give his testimony.
 
I hope this clears up any misconceptions you had due to the media omitting all of the pertinent laws that Major General Olson broke.
 
Pastor Joan
MRFF Advisory Board Member

Recent Posts

Share This Story