GOPUSA – Atheist says God Bless sign ‘like a tarantula on a wedding cake’
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.Click to read at GOPUSA
See you’re continuing to make an ass of yourself.Atheist says God Bless sign ‘like a tarantula on a wedding cake’
By Chad Groening, OneNewsNow.com October 1, 2015 11:50 am
Text Size: A A AAn anti-Christian activist is at it again, this time demanding removal from a U.S. military base a sign asking God’s blessing on the troops – but the base commander is being advised not to kowtow to the demand.
The sign at Marine Corps Base Hawaii reads: “God bless the military, their families, and the civilians who work with them.” It has stood there for 14 years. But Mikey Weinstein, founder and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, recently demanded that the sign be taken down or moved to be near a chapel.The sign stands out “like a tarantula on a wedding cake,” Weinstein told one Honolulu newspaper.Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, spoke with OneNewsNow about this latest effort by Weinstein, who he says is “going through his usual rant.”“He’s demanding of the commander that he take [the sign] down … and as usual Mikey is wrong,” says Crews. “There’s absolutely nothing wrong with a sign that says God bless our military.”In an email to Col. Sean Killeen, the base commander, MRFF spokesman Blake Page described the sign as “a brazen violation” of the Establishment Clause in the U.S. Constitution, arguing that it sends a clear message that the base “gives preference to those who hold religious beliefs over those who do not.”In response, Crews has challenged Weinstein and his group’s claim of unconstitutionality.“Only someone with a great misunderstanding of the First Amendment or an axe to grind against religion would claim that such a slogan poses a threat or is in any way unconstitutional,” he says in a press release. “The real threat is posed by those who want to whitewash any reference to God from public discourse – even ones as innocuous and uplifting as this one.”Crews points out to OneNewsNow the U.S. military has a rich Christian tradition. “Our first commander-in-chief, George Washington, one of the first things he did was call the soldiers to prayer and ask for God’s favor on this nation,” the former military chaplain notes. “And so that’s our history. Our military needs God’s blessings.”The Alliance leader says Col. Killeen was going to take Weinstein’s complaint to his legal advisors. “… It is my sincere hope that this commander will stand firm and keep that sign where it belongs: right there for people to see,” Crews concludes.Alliance Defending Freedom emailed the base commander on Monday, urging him not to remove the sign and explaining that, in fact, it would be a violation of the Establishment Clause to do so because it would show “preference for no religion over religion.”“The Establishment Clause,” wrote ADF’s Daniel Briggs, “does not provide a heckler’s veto to those who find offense. MRFF and its members are entitled to feel offense, but it is part of living in a pluralistic military community.”—-Copyright OneNewsNow.com. Reprinted with permission.
Mikey Weinstein has granted me the privilege of responding to your October 1, 2015 email to him and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (“MRFF”). Please allow me this opportunity to show that the only person making an ass out of himself is you.
As an initial matter, because your email includes the text of an article, I will assume that you have adopted the erroneous opinions expressed in the article as your own. Your claim that Mikey and/or MRFF is “anti-Christian” is simply untrue. In fact, over 96% of MRFF clients are Christians! We not only have no objection to Christianity, we protect and defend the religious freedom of thousands of Christian service members.
Do you feel like an ass yet? No? I’ll continue…
The opinion that, “There’s absolutely nothing wrong” with the sign stating “God Bless The Military” is not supported by constitutional law. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of any particular religion. This prohibition has been held to include actions or policies by state actors if (1) the purpose is not secular; (2) the principal/primary effect either advances or inhibits religion; or (3) it fosters an excessive entanglement with religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).
There is no secular purpose for a sign that invokes the blessing of a Christian God, the primary purpose of the sign is plainly to advance religion, and such endorsement of Christianity clearly fosters an entanglement between the military and religion. Only one of these conclusions is necessary for any action to constitute a violation of the Establishment Clause, yet the subject sign satisfies all three.
As you can see, we have a very firm understanding of the First Amendment. Further, a violation of constitutional rights is never “innocuous” or “uplifting.” If the police broke into your home, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and searched only one drawer, would you find it harmless?
This brings me to the claim that the military has a “rich Christian tradition.” First, the argument of “that is the way it has always been” is generally a poor excuse to continue anything. If it were a valid defense, medical treatment would still consist of bleeding and poultices made of horse dung. George Washington may have called soldiers to prayer, but the Founders of this country clearly created a government based on democratic principles, rather than religious principles.
Additionally, the drafters of the Constitution plainly created a wall of separation between church and state. Article 6 states, “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust.” The First Amendment provides for the freedom to practice any religious faith (or no faith at all) and also prohibits the establishment of any particular religion. The original Pledge of Allegiance, written in 1892, did not even include the words “under God” – those words were added in 1954. If our Founding Fathers intended to create a “rich Christian tradition,” they certainly had the means and opportunity to do so, but they declined.
At this point, you are probably feeling fairly ass-like. Let me assure you, this feeling is perfectly natural. I doubt it feels pleasant to realize that any fifth-grader with the ability to read the plain language of the Constitution could easily crush you in a debate.
Finally, the idea that removing the sign would violate the Establishment Clause is laughable. How could moving the sign to the chapel – which is what MRFF demands – possibly show preference for no religion over religion? I sincerely doubt you would make the same argument if the sign invoked the blessing of Kartikeya, the Hindu god of war, or some other non-Christian deity. If it referenced Allah, you would come running to MRFF demanding that it be removed and you would have no concern for a “pluralistic military community.” The only reason you defend this sign is that it expresses your personal religious belief.
This is not a matter of “feeling offense.” It is a matter of requiring that the mandates of the Constitution be obeyed. Such mandates include the requirement that any religious faith be expressed in the proper time, place, and manner.
That feeling in the pit of your stomach…that is what it feels like to be proven a complete and utter ass.
Blessed be,
Tobanna Barker
MRFF Legal Affairs Coordinator
Recent Posts
- November 7, 2025 | No comments
3 Comments
Comments are closed.
You are entitled to your opinion, but so am I. Just like you find the sign offensive, I find your attitude about it offensive. We all get to choose our religion or lack of religion. Just like having a manger scene in a town square seems to be offensive to a few, but well received by many and should remain, those of us who believe in God appreciate seeing the sign there and our feelings, as Americans, is that we desire for God to bless our troops and keep them safe as they protect us.
Nobody is making them learn about God or making them pray, unlike our schools that are now insisting on teaching about the Muslim faith in class. Nobody says that they have to believe in the statement or in God. However, if you were to take a poll of those in the military that agree with the sign you would find a rather large number of them who are fine with it. Probably way more than those who would say that it needs to go away.
Like I said, removing it is offensive to me and many others who do believe in God and Jesus.
You are wrong about people learning about God. Most of us were born in families with whatever religious denomination that family belong to and most of us don’t have a choice to pick and choose what religion we want or don’t want to belong to. If we told our parents, that we don’t believe in God or we want to belong to another church denomination, our parents would smack us down mentally and/or physically.
Jim, popular thoughts are not automatically correct.