Quantcast

«

»

Jun 19 2013

Congress Members Want Military Gays to be Free to Mock Christians

An amendment to the FY14 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), if it remains in the bill and is signed into law, would give gays serving in the military permission to openly mock and denigrate Christians.

The amendment, introduced by Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) has already passed in the House, but has also already been objected to by the Obama administration. A similar amendment, introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has passed the Senate Armed Services Committee.

What Rep. Fleming’s amendment would do is alter the language of the “religious freedom” amendment that made it into last year’s NDAA, raising the bar on just how much our gay men and women in uniform can mock and denigrate their Christian fellow service members.

If passed, these new rules will be a huge victory for gays in the military. No longer will they have to be respectful of those whose religious beliefs tell them that homosexuality is a sin. They will be free to openly mock the Bible and Christians and push the gay agenda on everybody — and their commanders won’t be able to do a damn thing to stop them.

This is how the proposed changes will alter section 533 of last year’s NDAA (new language bolded and in brackets):

(a) PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF CONSCIENCE.—

(1) ACCOMMODATION.—[Except in cases of military necessity,] the Armed Forces shall accommodate the beliefs, [actions, and speech] of a member of the armed forces reflecting the conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the member and, in so far as practicable, may not use such beliefs, [actions, and speech] as the basis of any adverse personnel action, discrimination, or denial of promotion, schooling, training, or assignment.

(2) DISCIPLINARY OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION.—Nothing in paragraph (1) precludes disciplinary or administrative action for conduct that is proscribed by chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (the Uniform Code of Military Justice), including actions and speech that threaten [actually harm] good order and discipline.

No longer will name-calling and harassment be prohibited if these “sticks and stones” merely pose a threat to good order and discipline; they will have to result in actual harm to good order and discipline. In other words, a commander will no longer be able to head off a potential breach of good order and discipline in their unit by stopping a gay service member from calling a Christian a “Bible thumper” or “Jesus freak” — they will have to wait until such name-calling escalates to a point where the persecution of the Christians in their unit becomes so great that the unit cannot function efficiently.

And Fleming’s amendment doesn’t stop at mere words. The anti-Christian actions of gays in the military will also be protected! Gays will be free to push their gay agenda on everybody in any manner that doesn’t rise to the level of violating Chapter 47 of the UCMJ! Pro-gay chaplains will even be able to stop heterosexual Christian wedding ceremonies from taking place in military chapels!

Yeah, right. Now go back and read this post reversing Christians and gays because that, of course, is what Rep. Fleming’s amendment will do. This amendment, under the guise of “religious liberty,” is really all about undermining and even reversing the repeal of “Don’t ask, don’t tell,” and everybody knows it.

12 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Randomfactor

    Seems like your interpretation would also be credible. Unless the military wants to get into the business of deciding what religious actions are and are not legitimate.

  2. 2
    Chris Rodda

    Yep … that’s something these wingnuts just don’t seem to be able to grasp … that the same rules have to apply to everybody.

  3. 3
    bodie425

    Egad, I thought you were dyslexic at first, then I thought the world truly had ended. Then I read the last paragraph–you really had me going.
    Only the most delusional person could not see the hypocrisy of this bill.

  4. 4
    grumpyoldfart

    Is this just a “Look at me being friends with Jesus” amendment, or does it have chance for success?

  5. 5
    Alex

    Huh, for a moment you had me there…

  6. 6
    anubisprime

    A version of ‘give em’ enough rope’ gambit methinks.

    At least they hope it is!

    They cannot imagine anyone not openly discriminating against their bigotry…
    And If ‘teh ghey’ had the upper-hand they would discriminate as well, stands to fundy reason!
    And if they discriminate enough a few articles and ‘leaked documents’ and whistle blowers like the good jeebus warrior Dowty would soon get the nonsense repealed and with it the DADT attitude.
    It would be a great day for intolerance to reassert its Christian preference.

    What would be hilarious is if there were enough dumb jeebus droolers in the executive to give the legislation a pass at every stage…thinking it a cunning sure shot plan…and it was adopted then ….nothing happened!
    No discrimination against xtians nothing zilch …not even a nasty attitude in the mess hall…so the only resort for the jeebus fans will be back to usual lying and fabrications…only for those lies and fabrications to be shown up as lies and fabrications…and the only folks suffering would still be the xtians because they will be banged up for perjury!

    Well one can dream!

  7. 7
    kacyray

    You had me going for about a second, too.

    Good post… great way to make your point.

    Thanks for your efforts in correcting the cultural deficiencies in our military.

  8. 8
    patricksimons

    There may be places in the world where it’s tough to be a christian, but the United States certainly isn’t one of them and that goes double for the military. Religious tolerance has not developed out of an improvement in the human intellect as much as it has been the result of the inability of religious groups to force their beliefs on others in the public square, which is something the evangelical community would dearly love to change.

  9. 9
    Who Knows?

    conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs

    The thing is, these people don’t believe that gays have a conscience, moral principles, or legitimate religious beliefs. So, there is no way this would apply to gays.

  10. 10
    Karen Locke

    My first impression was “Ed’s reading The Onion or something similar and sharing it with us.” Then I got to the last paragraph and got jerked quickly out of my amusement moment back to reality. These people are totally obnoxious, as are their voters.

  11. 11
    Karen Locke

    Sorry, I wrote Ed, I meant Chris. Just came from reading Ed Brayton’s blog. Brain not keeping up.

  12. 12
    patricksimons

    Actually, they’re free to “openly mock the Bible and Christians” now, and always have been. Which is not to say people might not get some blow back from their fellow troops for doing it, but it isn’t illegal.

Leave a Reply