GOP hate speech continues ban on atheist chaplains in military

[Minoosh]

I feel like a bad atheist after reading this thread. I would express the ideas this guy mentions and I use the phrase "worm food" all the time. The difference is I find something reassuring in it.

Yeah, what is so bad about feeding worms?

The Zoroastrians dragged bodies to hill tops to be picked clean by vultures. Circle of life and all.

But ... this thread title says GOP hate speech continues ban on atheist chaplains in the military - does such a ban actually exist?

 

[ponderingturtle]

You act like you have no idea what the Second Vatican Council was.

Not terribly effective in stopping the religious wars and genocides in the former Yugoslavia. Catholics put a lot of muslims and eastern orthodox to death.

 

[mijopaalmc]

Not terribly effective in stopping the religious wars and genocides in the former Yugoslavia. Catholics put a lot of muslims and eastern orthodox to death.

Let's just ignore the ethnic hatred there.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

But ... this thread title says GOP hate speech continues ban on atheist chaplains in the military - does such a ban actually exist?

Very good question.

I think the story is about a proposal to begin incorporating people who
"who are certified or ordained by non-theistic organizations and institutions, such as humanist, ethical culturalist, or atheist."

That's from a House proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

Here's the Friendly Atheist's blog on it: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...-they-would-make-a-mockery-of-the-chaplaincy/

Here's a direct link to the PDF of the proposed amendment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7oqgcchceld5fza/AtheistChaplains.pdf

ETA: I don't know whether there is anything in the current law that requires chaplains be ordained or certified by theistic institutions, even though that has certainly been the custom. I'd be curious as to whether an openly atheist Buddhist cleric has tried for the job.

 

[mijopaalmc]

Very good question.

I think the story is about a proposal to begin incorporating people who
"who are certified or ordained by non-theistic organizations and institutions, such as humanist, ethical culturalist, or atheist."

That's from a House proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

Here's the Friendly Atheist's blog on it: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...-they-would-make-a-mockery-of-the-chaplaincy/

Here's a direct link to the PDF of the proposed amendment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7oqgcchceld5fza/AtheistChaplains.pdf

ETA: I don't know whether there is anything in the current law that requires chaplains be ordained or certified by theistic institutions, even though that has certainly been the custom. I'd be curious as to whether an openly atheist Buddhist cleric has tried for the job.

Wait, I thought atheism wasn't a movement or an ideology. Why doesn't the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, or any other body of mental health practitioners suffice if you are concerned about atheists getting adequate mental health support?

 

[tyr_13]

Wrong. The only time psychological counseling goes on a soldier's "record" is when he or she has been ordered to receive it. Otherwise it's just as confidential as in the civilian world. The idea that chaplains are the only place in the military where one can get confidential counseling is false.

Wrong. That's how it's supposed to work, but that is not how it actually works. Simply going to the real counselors is not only a huge stigma but can and does often result in a destroyed career. This is not the case with chaplains on either count.

The civilian world isn't too confidential either, despite how it is 'supposed' to be. I have a rejection letter from both the Air Force and JET that can speak to that.

An atheist chaplain would have to minister religious counseling if a soldier requests it. How many atheists are prepared to tell soldiers that they must maintain their faith, or aspire to follow Jesus' word?

By reading and understanding the Bible and the theology of the modern churches that use it exactly as a chaplain of a different faith would do. By doing the job of the chaplain just like non-Christians do.

This is not a valid objection. It applies no more to atheists than it does of any chaplain of a different faith and is thus of no use as a criticism.

 

[Travis]

Wait, I thought atheism wasn't a movement or an ideology. Why doesn't the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, or any other body of mental health practitioners suffice if you are concerned about atheists getting adequate mental health support?

Why would they want to kiss their career goodbye?

I mean let us face it there is a stigma when visiting a psychiatrist or counselor that there isn't with a chaplain.

 

[pteridine]

It would seem the term "atheist chaplain" is a bit of an oxymoron. The United States requires its chaplains to be endorsed by a religious group to serve.

The term for chaplains used by us geezers was "sky pilot." Of course we also "una$$ed a slick" when getting out of a Huey helicopter....

 

[mijopaalmc]

Why would they want to kiss their career goodbye?

I mean let us face it there is a stigma when visiting a psychiatrist or counselor that there isn't with a chaplain.

And the way the address that issue is to destigmatize seeking mental health support, not to start waving around the Atheist Stamp of Aproval™. Atheists don't mark foods with hechsherim, because atheists only lack a belief in the supernatural. Atheists should not be sanctifying or anathematizing mental health care providers for that very same reason.

 

[jj]

Wait, I thought atheism wasn't a movement or an ideology.

Yep, focus on atheism, not on the atheists in the services who are denied counseling except via ways that create an unbreakable stigma.

Why are you endorsing prejudice against atheists, please?

You say "it should not be so", but it is so, and furthermore, it is so in a very big, and career destroying way. Deal with what is, not pie in the sky. Given the routine hatred fostered against atheists by politicians, ministers, and other dominionists, the "what is" is outright, express discrimination.

So work to end that first, m'kay.

 

[mijopaalmc]

Yep, focus on atheism, not on the atheists in the services who are denied counseling except via ways that create an unbreakable stigma.

Yeah, focus on your caricature of what happens instead of what really happens. Confidentiality laws are apparently not being followed strictly or even at all. The remedy for that is to enforce the laws as they are written not to write new ones that abuse language and directly contradict claims atheists make about themselves with respect to their beliefs.

Do you think anyone will take the atheist chaplains any more seriously with respect to cofidentiality than the already take the phsychological and psychiatric staff?

Why are you endorsing prejudice against atheists, please?

I'm not; atheists simply do not meet the requirement for the chaplaincy deu to their lack of belief.

You say "it should not be so", but it is so, and furthermore, it is so in a very big, and career destroying way. Deal with what is, not pie in the sky. Given the routine hatred fostered against atheists by politicians, ministers, and other dominionists, the "what is" is outright, express discrimination.

"Hatred"≠"discrimination"

So work to end that first, m'kay.

Why should I adopt your priorities?

 

[jj]

Do you think anyone will take the atheist chaplains any more seriously with respect to cofidentiality than the already take the phsychological and psychiatric staff?

Why?

 

[BStrong]

Yep, focus on atheism, not on the atheists in the services who are denied counseling except via ways that create an unbreakable stigma.

Why are you endorsing prejudice against atheists, please?

You say "it should not be so", but it is so, and furthermore, it is so in a very big, and career destroying way. Deal with what is, not pie in the sky. Given the routine hatred fostered against atheists by politicians, ministers, and other dominionists, the "what is" is outright, express discrimination.

So work to end that first, m'kay.

I never once felt "discriminated" against while in service, and I've never run into someone who expressed "routine hatred" against me for being an atheist - "RH" for being a cop, sure, but for being an atheist?

 

[jj]

I never once felt "discriminated" against while in service, and I've never run into someone who expressed "routine hatred" against me for being an atheist - "RH" for being a cop, sure, but for being an atheist?

Just so it's clear, I'm sure you get that for being a cop.

I would regale you with some of the nonsense that gets floated around routinely about atheists, but you must have seen it somewhere.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I'm not; atheists simply do not meet the requirement for the chaplaincy deu to their lack of belief.

That's simply question begging.

And I'm not sure it's technically accurate even without the proposed amendment. Sarge listed the qualification requirements, and not one of them said that any particular belief was a requirement.

Why do you think belief in god is or ought be a requirement to be a chaplain?

In fact, I've already provided two actual examples of atheist chaplains (non military). So the idea isn't incoherent as some people think.

 

[BStrong]

Just so it's clear, I'm sure you get that for being a cop.

I would regale you with some of the nonsense that gets floated around routinely about atheists, but you must have seen it somewhere.

I can't help but think of the old saying about insults - It doesn't matter what they call you, it only matters what you answer to.

I just do not give any individual not in my family or circle the power to insult me.

What some fool says to me is about as significant to me as the barking of a dog.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

It would seem the term "atheist chaplain" is a bit of an oxymoron.

I've already provided two examples that shows that it's not an impossibility. (There is a Humanist/Atheist/Agnostic Chaplaincy at Harvard, and I have a friend who is a Buddhist priest who is a prison chaplain.)

The United States requires its chaplains to be endorsed by a religious group to serve.

Not "endorsed" but rather credentialed or ordained. First, that requirement actually doesn't exclude all atheists (many Buddhists are atheists), and second, that requirement is the subject of the proposed amendment. You're only pointing out that that's how it is if this amendment doesn't pass; you're not offering an argument that that's how it should be.

 

[mijopaalmc]

That's simply question begging.

And I'm not sure it's technically accurate even without the proposed amendment. Sarge listed the qualification requirements, and not one of them said that any particular belief was a requirement.

Why do you think belief in god is or ought be a requirement to be a chaplain?

In fact, I've already provided two actual examples of atheist chaplains (non military). So the idea isn't incoherent as some people think.

Hunamists are not atheists and atheists are not humanists. Quit equivocating!

A chaplain is by definition a religious functionary. Atheism, by the claim of atheists themselves, is not a religion. Atheist can neither be nor be served by a chaplain. Attemting to redefine the word so that the lack of atheist chaplains becomes a legal issue only feeds into people's stereotypes of atheists as dishonest.

 

[Ausmerican]

Hunamists are not atheists and atheists are not humanists. Quit equivocating!

A chaplain is by definition a religious functionary. Atheism, by the claim of atheists themselves, is not a religion. Atheist can neither be nor be served by a chaplain. Attemting to redefine the word so that the lack of atheist chaplains becomes a legal issue only feeds into people's stereotypes of atheists as dishonest.

I, and several other people on this site, am ordained. I can perform marriages, park in the clergy spot (not that I do) and use the title Reverend. I am an atheist and have never in my life been a member of a church.
But the ordainment is probably enough to qualify as far as chaplaincy goes.

As for honesty, is it any more honest for a chaplain to support what he considers the hell-bound delusions of someone he has been sent to help that is of a different faith?

 

[jj]

Hunamists are not atheists and atheists are not humanists.

Your statement is false. More than one or two atheists are humanists, and vice versa.

Perhaps you did not mean that these were mutually exclusive like you seem to have claimed?