As the Pentagon doesn’t hostpromote services for the holidays of other religions to the same extent as they do for evangelical Protestantism, this is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.
Edit: Highlighted corrections to the above statement in italics.
Unfortunately, it’s added to the list of “so sue me” which is basically this administration response on anything they have done in the last year and change
The Constitution allows for the possibility of a gangster Administration. Checks and balances. The hope was that the Supreme Court and Congress would keep the executive branch in check.
The Constitution also recognizes that no system is perfect, so it adds the right to bear arms. Not for sport. Not for defense. The Second Amendment exists specifically to fight tyranny. Just in case the elections get rigged and an extremist party takes control.
…the argument your making about the 2nd amendment is why it’s now obsolete. When America was founded, firearms could actually be used to overthrow a corrupt government. They had practical utility. At this point, however, half the population armed with assault rifles wouldn’t make a difference. A combination of the government’s mass surveillance and superior firepower would put down the rebellion before it got off the ground
I’m of the opinion that the constitution should adjust to changing times. 18th century laws aren’t geared to solve 21st century issues.
Totally agree with you, a handgun is no match for a tank. If the military wants to make war on citizens, they will lose.
However, there is more going on that meets the eye. Many members of the military would not want to shoot their own citizens. And armed citizens can still do more damage than unarmed citizens. In other words, the 2A forces an authoritarian administration to use violence in order to repress the citizens. It ups the stakes. And citizens can strike in ways that the military can’t. Guerilla warfare tactics. They don’t need to “win”, they just need to disrupt, to spread fear.
But, yeah, with the current surveillance state, along with the culpability of the media, it seems a dubious proposition that armed citizens can save themselves from the fascists. Regardless, I have suddenly become a HUGE proponent of guns. Especially when I see the Black Panthers providing security for demonstrators. Respect.
The Pentagon hosts a Ramadan dinner (at the end of the holiday, to celebrate the conclusion of the fasting ritual).
The Pentagon has hosted Hanukkah menorah lighting ceremonies. (I’m not sure if they still do.)
The issue here isn’t the sponsoring of a religious activity. The function of the military is to send soldiers to their deaths. Those soldiers who need spiritual support should absolutely have access to it.
The issue is that the president and the defense secretary have incorporated evangelical Christianity into their cronyism. Religion is being used as a litmus test for loyalty.
Made corrections to my comment. Importantly, Pentagon leadership should not be any more involved in the organization and celebration of any religious event more than another.
…anymore? When my mother worked there (admittedly, decades ago), the catholic chaplain conducted mass every Friday morning. (Very quickly. “GodblessAmenGetbacktowork.”) They also had other religion’s services. Nothing mandatory.
As the Pentagon doesn’t
hostpromote services for the holidays of other religions to the same extent as they do for evangelical Protestantism, this is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.Edit: Highlighted corrections to the above statement in italics.
Just add it to all the other violations.
I’ll just put this violation with the other violations, then…
Unfortunately, it’s added to the list of “so sue me” which is basically this administration response on anything they have done in the last year and change
What are you going to do about it? Is the only question that matters to this gangster Administration.
The Constitution allows for the possibility of a gangster Administration. Checks and balances. The hope was that the Supreme Court and Congress would keep the executive branch in check.
The Constitution also recognizes that no system is perfect, so it adds the right to bear arms. Not for sport. Not for defense. The Second Amendment exists specifically to fight tyranny. Just in case the elections get rigged and an extremist party takes control.
Such an unlikely scenario, amiright?
…the argument your making about the 2nd amendment is why it’s now obsolete. When America was founded, firearms could actually be used to overthrow a corrupt government. They had practical utility. At this point, however, half the population armed with assault rifles wouldn’t make a difference. A combination of the government’s mass surveillance and superior firepower would put down the rebellion before it got off the ground
I’m of the opinion that the constitution should adjust to changing times. 18th century laws aren’t geared to solve 21st century issues.
Totally agree with you, a handgun is no match for a tank. If the military wants to make war on citizens, they will lose.
However, there is more going on that meets the eye. Many members of the military would not want to shoot their own citizens. And armed citizens can still do more damage than unarmed citizens. In other words, the 2A forces an authoritarian administration to use violence in order to repress the citizens. It ups the stakes. And citizens can strike in ways that the military can’t. Guerilla warfare tactics. They don’t need to “win”, they just need to disrupt, to spread fear.
But, yeah, with the current surveillance state, along with the culpability of the media, it seems a dubious proposition that armed citizens can save themselves from the fascists. Regardless, I have suddenly become a HUGE proponent of guns. Especially when I see the Black Panthers providing security for demonstrators. Respect.
This is false.
The Pentagon hosts a Ramadan dinner (at the end of the holiday, to celebrate the conclusion of the fasting ritual).
The Pentagon has hosted Hanukkah menorah lighting ceremonies. (I’m not sure if they still do.)
The issue here isn’t the sponsoring of a religious activity. The function of the military is to send soldiers to their deaths. Those soldiers who need spiritual support should absolutely have access to it.
The issue is that the president and the defense secretary have incorporated evangelical Christianity into their cronyism. Religion is being used as a litmus test for loyalty.
Signed,
A pragmatic (ex-militant) atheist
Made corrections to my comment. Importantly, Pentagon leadership should not be any more involved in the organization and celebration of any religious event more than another.
…anymore? When my mother worked there (admittedly, decades ago), the catholic chaplain conducted mass every Friday morning. (Very quickly. “GodblessAmenGetbacktowork.”) They also had other religion’s services. Nothing mandatory.