Atheist Claims He Was Denied Enlistment Due To Refusal To Say “So Help Me God”
If this is true than I do not see how the Air Force is going to win on this issue:
An atheist airman at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada was denied reenlistment last month for refusing to take an oath containing “so help me God,” the American Humanist Association said Thursday.
And in a Sept. 2 letter to the inspectors general for the Air Force and Creech, Monica Miller, an attorney with the AHA’s Apignani Humanist Legal Center, said the airman should be allowed to reenlist without having to swear to a deity, and instead given a secular oath. Miller said the AHA is prepared to sue if the airman is not allowed to reenlist. [Air Force Times]
You can read the rest at the link, but the Air Force is blaming Congress for the wording of the enlistment.
I can’t say for certain but I’m pretty sure when I did the oath both times I came in that the last part where it mentions god it was stated that saying the last sentence was optional. Need to look that up..
Army has the following, still looking on the AF.
Army Regulation 601-210, Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program provides that:
The words “So help me God” may be omitted for persons who desire to affirm rather than to swear to the oath.
You are right Smokes so that is why I am confused on why the Air Force does not have a similar regulation if this report is true?
What sort of B.S. is this? Even 30 years ago (my God, has it really been that long? I digress) the swearing in officer at the Denver MEPS told us we could swear, or affirm, and that “so help me God” was optional.
Invoking a deity has been optional for as long as I recall, what bug crawled up the reenlisting officer’s azz to insist that God must be invoked at this point?
There may not be any atheists in a foxhole, but there damn well are back with the rest of the REMFs…
You could always tell when the military is in a draw down mindset when they start dredging up and reinterpreting obscure regulations to screw with people’s retention.
Expect more of this type of thing in the months and years to come.
MTB Rider, you are better than that trotting out the old lie that atheists don’t serve honorably and don’t risk life and limb for our country and are so weak as to become converted when threatened. You also do the deity du jour a disservice buy implying it couldn’t see through such a ruse.
In a way, they are braver as they expect no heavenly reward for making the ultimate sacrifice. Oddly, many have died of late fighting religious fanatics. Click this and scroll away: http://militaryatheists.org/atheists-in-foxholes
As far as everyone wondering why this is suddenly an issue, had you bothered to read the article, you would know.
Smokes / All,
You need to understand how policy / regulation / instructions / etc are derived from public law. Everything is derived from the beginning of the chain, and working it’s way down to local command policy. Any subordinate regulation / policy cannot violate it’s parent, grandparent, etc. policy leading all the way up to public law in the US Code. For example, local policy cannot violate regulation, regulation cannot violate DOD instructions, DOD instructions cannot violate public law. When a public law changes, it takes supreme jurisdiction over all subordinate regulations and policy. When public law is changed or amended, it is mandatory for the DOD / Services to issue amended instructions / regulatory guidance. Public law will always take precedence.
In this instance, it looks like the law changed, so the services must change to follow.
Dave / All,
No, what you need to understand that Smokes always has an ace up his sleeve:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Oaths
Unconstitutional bizsnatches. 🙂
Based on the latest hub bub from the Air Force on this and that they passed the buck to DoD, this guy’s going to be allowed to reenlist without swearing to Santa. Or was it god?
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/air-force-seeks-dod-ruling-on-re-enlistment-oath-1.302225
In order for the DoD Instruction to change, the law must change, i.e. passing the buck to Congress.
They simply need to change the law as it was rewritten.
What needs to change? It’s as plain as day in article 6:
“but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
God is pleased. Should be a good corn harvest this year.
Just wondering why an alleged atheist would have trouble saying the words. If he doesn’t believe in Goid, that is. Narcissist is more likely than atheist.
If you are required to swear to something that you admit you don’t believe in, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of the whole swearing?
Before I start, read this:
Seems to me the Airman is on the right track. He is displaying AF values.
1. As JoeC stated, why would anyone want to force him to swear to something which he doesn’t believe? It compromises the oath, it diminishes his service, it isn’t a requirement to believe in deities in order to serve honorably. It is also unnecessary. Why would a deity need the approval of a state or military organization.
2. Does forcing him to swear against his beliefs somehow help the deity or its believers? I don’t see how.
So, religious persecution is OK as long as it’s the RIGHT religion doing it. It’s not religious persecution to force your beliefs on other people if they do not believe is gods. It might help them someday, right? You know, it’s a good religion so it doesn’t hurt anything. The words do not mean anything so it’s all good to force people to lie and mouth them (which directly conflicts with the stated AF values). Be very careful what you wish for, someday the shoe may be on the other foot.
Are believers faith so weak that they need constant promotion of their religion by the government?
I doubt a just and righteous god would approve.
Maybe we could force service members to be baptized. It’s only water.
Maybe we could force them to take communion. Why not? It’s only a cracker.
Yes, making someone swear to a deity they believe in is pointless.
No, God (assuming he exists, as I do) isnt’ likely to care.
“Aw, they’re swearing an oath in my name, that’s awesome fellas”
(nor does Christ care if anyone responds, “Rocks!” to after another person shouts “Jesus!” . In fact, if he isn’t a douche he (or He) thinks that’s really lame. Who is this for, really?)
This is akin to ancestry worship.
They don’t believe in, intended to say with the first…
Lets see:
The Eidformel der Schutzstaffel (Oath of the SS) was as follows:
“Ich schwöre Dir, Adolf Hitler, als Führer und Kanzler des Deutschen Reiches Treue und Tapferkeit. Wir geloben Dir und den von Dir bestimmten Vorgesetzten Gehorsam bis in den Tod. So wahr mir Gott helfe!”
(English: “I vow to you, Adolf Hitler, as Führer and chancellor of the German Reich loyalty and bravery. I vow to you and to the leaders, that you set for me, absolute allegiance, till death. So help me God!”)
Just, amusing.
Some religious US Army want not to “swear” but are not offended at “affirm”. I never really gave a crap either way. When I signed the contract and raised my right hand, the Army and its cronies got me for another 4 years regardless of whatever I said. We all know it is a ceremony where one promises to “uphold” the constitution. Haha, if we were REALLY allowed to do that, we would getting rid of a lot of leaders and police departments haha.
Personally, I always thought it was a waste of time swearing at re-enlistments & officer promotions. I swore the oath when I first entered, and again when I became an officer (different oath). Does that solemn oath (either the enlisted or officer version) end when my enlistment contract is up or when I get promoted as an officer. I don’t think so. If it did end or change, then the oath should include an expiration date.