Atheists are 'discriminated against'?

[stubbornone]

Well, here is the story:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blake-pag ... 32279.html

"While there are certainly numerous problems with the developmental program at West Point and all service academies, the tipping point of my decision to resign was the realization that countless officers here and throughout the military are guilty of blatantly violating the oaths they swore to defend the Constitution. These men and women are criminals, complicit in light of day defiance of the Uniform Code of Military Justice through unconstitutional proselytism, discrimination against the non-religious and establishing formal policies to reward, encourage and even at times require sectarian religious participation."

Yep, in this 'long gray line' of hypocrisy and discrimination, our hero above lists ... not a single instance of this supposedly pervasive trend in the military. So, here are some things that our oppressed atheists have to ... painfully tolerate.

#1 - Prayers, those who are religious, and there are many different denominations BTW, will pray. Those who wish to pray collectively are allowed to do - freedom of religious expression is a protected right. Being unconscionably offended by someone else's expression of religion is ... aside from making you a total wanker ... also not about the US Constitution.

#2 - No doubt, just like our hero here, religious groups are afforded space and time to pray and organize, as does the author of this article. Somehow though, allowing others to practice their faith is intolerable to him? But his .. er, religious? views must be afforded sole consideration?

Beyond that, the military really doesn't give a hoop about your faith. It encourages you to have one, in anything, but only because it helps, scientifically proven, to deal with the rigors of combat. You want to be Pagan? More power too ya. You want to be atheist? Great, but we'd encourage you to explore secular humanism, if only to have a non-affiliative source that will help you deal with the emotional aspect of combat.

Somehow, this approach is ... intolerable to young atheists? Science and the effects of combat on human beings are to be rejected in favor of hyperbole?

Well, I for one hope the Army recoups its entire investment in this gravely discriminated dork - who is SO discriminated against that they allowed him into the school, trained him, educated him, allowed him to freely practice and organize his faith - indeed even be a student leader ... and this was intolerable disrespect because the Army didn't shut down everyone else's faith? Prevent the criticism of his precious choices?

Not only will this be an expensive life lesson, but when young atheist super hero joins the actual work force, he'll quickly discover that no employer anywhere appreciates a young crusader who pisses off all their religious clients. What then atheist hero?

The Army is there to win wars. Businesses are there to make money. This guy? Has a lot to learn about how the world works and the costs of excessive pride and rationalization.

I for one advocate that we let him learn that lesson. The last thing our boys need in combat is some wanker talking about how much worse he has it than everyone else around him.

[Zetesis Apistia]

How free is speech when folks are forced to listen to it?

"Oh, it's still free, only you gotta pay to not listen to it!"

How can you claim to be open minded if you refuse to listen to those who oppose you?

[Bust Nak]

#1 - He's an atheist, and he not the only one in West Point. There are indeed many atheists in the Military and guess how many are forced to attend church? Right, zero.

Ok, now guess how many are forced to attend chaplain led Christian prayer session.

Again, I joined the military as an atheist. Guess how many church services I was nevertheless forced to attend? Right, zero. When I did join a church, do you think the Army forced me to attend any particular church? Nope.

That's nice. I guess the army is not totally, but merely somewhat hypocritical. Tell me, how many times were you denied the chance to sit out a chaplain led Christian prayer? Or did it not occur to you that you have to right enshrined in US Constitution to sit out such sessions?

So we have adherence to a made up easily falsifiable claim as the basis of your argument.

More likely you missed my the point.

Again, the Army does a lot of things both right and wrong. Yet the fact that it acknowledges that spirituality is a personal choice and allowed me to take my journey with ZERO interference either as an atheist or as a Christian ... simply put, wonderkid is wrong.

Oh? Mandatory Christian prayer sessions doesn't really strike me as zero interference. Nor does on duty officiers tell their charge that Christianity makes one better, sound like zero interference.

#2 - See above. How do you bring a diverse people together if you ban everyone else's opinions and beliefs ... except obviously yours? Right, you don't.

Of course, but that doesn't explain why you are defending the army banning atheists' opinion and beliefs? It has been subjecting soldiers to Christian prayer sessions against their will.

So we still have atheists wanting to be part of multicultural institutions, but not wanting to be exposed to any other cultures? Because that is actually a form of cohesion?

Forcing people into other cultures is more harmful to cohesion.

North Korea it is for you too then?

Nah, too much banning of opinions and beliefs over there.

#3 - I do love the fact that another atheist is blandly claiming the evidence supports their side without actually presenting any, and then making easily falsifiable claims too boot.

The fact is the Army is denying his right to religious freedom. The falisified claim is that he is denying anyone's right to their religious freedom in his attempt to exercise said right.

The difference in stopping a prayer session from being manditory, and stopping a prayer session is huge, hence it is very easy to distinguish between the two.

It does seem to me like a rather deliberate attempt to be a victim at any cost ... and that is what atheists consider freedom - more power to you.

From my side it seem like a rather deliberate attempt to misrepresent what the victim is saying because it is just that hard to get the two mixed up.

However, I for one would point out that atheists should lead by example. If they think others should be barred from expressing their religious opinions ... they should lead, and stop the silly resigning from West Point while publically complaining. Perhaps?

Sure, IF atheists think others should be barred from from expressing their religious opinions. But that's irrelevant since we don't think that. (Well most of us don't anyway, you can argue with North Koreans if you can find one.)

We do however think religious opinions should not be forced onto others, and as such would not prevent others from praying.

PS I still want to know about manditory drinking sessions in the army.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 57:

How can you claim to be open minded if you refuse to listen to those who oppose you?

An open mind need not accept a demand that folks with goofy beliefs be allowed to waste my time carrying on about 'em.

[rosey]

To me, discrimination, bigotry, etc, has always been around, and always will be. It comes from all sides, Christian, Atheist, Pagan, New Age, etc, and does not necessarily reveal or affect the truth or falsity of a claim. None of the above will ever disappear until freewill has been erased and no one has any opinions of their own. That's life. Get over it.

[Furrowed Brow]

Well, that tells me you don't know how the military works.

It is true I have no experience of the miltitary.

The fact that a one star general took the time out to work with and mentor wonderkid - well, that is exactly the kind of treatment he is alleging exists based in religion. Only he got that special access based on his ... atheism - which was fine for him. However, when a general mentors a Christian ... its a special favor.

So please, feel free to explain to us how wonderkids interaction with a GO is not a special favor (and it is), but a Christian cadets interaction with a GO IS blatantly discrimination?

I am not sure of the details to which your refer. But I did read in the ariticle you linked that after intitiating an Equal Opportunity investigation Brigadier General Theodore Martin expressed a desire to see the issue dealt with quickly. Or are you referring to somwthing else? As this hardly counts as "mentoring" I guess yo are referring to something else I am missing.

And the 'mandatory' religious participation is ... opening prayers as mass attendance events which, ALL Soldiers have to attend.

Then that is mandatory pariticipation of religion..

Indeed, in the places where we fight wars, when you lead, and a Mullah opens a session with a prayer, that is considered a good culture practice and inclusion, even if you detest Islam or think it asinine. Its that PLURALISTIC thing that you atheists keep forgetting to actually address.

As an atheist I don't want to be forced to listen or participate in anyone's prayer regardless of religion. If I volunteer or have a choice that is a different a matter.

How does logic get twisted to the point that forced particpation is the product of religious pluralism.

Feel free to explain to us how allowing others to pray openly is too painful?

When some are forced to be there.

By all means, explain to anyone at all, how cultural sensitivity and the ability to tolerate differences in religious opinion actually makes ... our atheist hero a super victim?

That traffic on that two way road you mention previously only really seems to go one way doesn't it. Tolerating someone else's religious belief does not extend to being forced to particiapte in it.

Well, because he says its all bad? But when we examine what he claims, we find a young kid who is making a mountain our of a mole hill, thinking he smarter than Generals about how the military works and what their policies are, and that he is actually a victim, so much so that he is willing to resign ... though he was denied absolutely nothing and given the same access to his religious choice as everyone else was for theirs.

You can either dimiss him or take his resignation seriously. But at no point have you made a serious attempt to dissect his account to show that it is false. Your thrust has been to treat it as a whine, and point out he is making mountains out of molehills. But even if he has he is still the one who has resigned. In which case he has harmed himself for no good reason.

Again if the positions were reversed and a Christian recruit was made to participate in an explicitly atheistic gathering, and refused, and was told to stop whining by the atheists you would have no problem with this I guess. If had no complaint about that then you would be even handed.

Lemmings.

If this is a claim then please support this claim with evidence.

[JoeyKnothead]

To me, discrimination, bigotry, etc, has always been around, and always will be. It comes from all sides, Christian, Atheist, Pagan, New Age, etc, and does not necessarily reveal or affect the truth or falsity of a claim. None of the above will ever disappear until freewill has been erased and no one has any opinions of their own. That's life. Get over it.

Cancer has pretty much always been with us too.

That doesn't mean we ought'n try to do something about it.

[rosey]

To me, discrimination, bigotry, etc, has always been around, and always will be. It comes from all sides, Christian, Atheist, Pagan, New Age, etc, and does not necessarily reveal or affect the truth or falsity of a claim. None of the above will ever disappear until freewill has been erased and no one has any opinions of their own. That's life. Get over it.

Cancer has pretty much always been with us too.

That doesn't mean we ought'n try to do something about it.

Generally speaking cancer isn't a choice. And generally speaking discrimination doesn't prove fatal. Even further anyone who feels discriminated against because somebody doesn't like them or put up a sign they don't like is frankly a wuss in my opinion. Real discrimination is, oh I don't know, crucifying someone. Or passing a law that requires they pass out stuff they are forbidden by their religion to pass out? Yeah, that's real discrimination.

[Furrowed Brow]

Generally speaking cancer isn't a choice. And generally speaking discrimination doesn't prove fatal.

Discrimintaion does often show through in health and life expectancy. So maybe a better analogy than cancer would be cerebal palsy or curvature of the spine.....caused by the extra weight that has to be carried. We all have a crosses to bear I guess. But I'm not sure why us atheists have to bear the Christian one.

Even further anyone who feels discriminated against because somebody doesn't like them or put up a sign they don't like is frankly a wuss in my opinion.

And calling those discriminated against a wuss reinforces the discrimination no?

Real discrimination is, oh I don't know, crucifying someone.

The Roman were pretty indiscriminate in the torture they handed out. How did they treat Jesus differently from other folk of his class, race, belief system, or peer group they also tortured and killed? But yes. Point taken. Killing someone is extremely prejudicial.

Or passing a law that requires they pass out stuff they are forbidden by their religion to pass out? Yeah, that's real discrimination.

Well yes I suppose you are referring to Obamacare. Maybe there is a debate to be had here. But that takes us off at a tangent.

[rosey]

Generally speaking cancer isn't a choice. And generally speaking discrimination doesn't prove fatal.

Discrimintaion does often show through in health and life expectancy. So maybe a better analogy than cancer would be cerebal palsy or curvature of the spine.....caused by the extra weight that has to be carried. We all have a crosses to bear I guess. But I'm not sure why us atheists have to bear the Christian one.

Come on, you guys aren't even discriminated half as much as Jesus was/is.

Even further anyone who feels discriminated against because somebody doesn't like them or put up a sign they don't like is frankly a wuss in my opinion.

And calling those discriminated against a wuss reinforces the discrimination no?

Sure why not? I experience more discrimination as a Christian than I ever did beforehand, but I'm fine.

Real discrimination is, oh I don't know, crucifying someone.

The Roman were pretty indiscriminate in the torture they handed out. How did they treat Jesus differently from other folk of his class, race, belief system, or peer group they also tortured and killed? But yes. Point taken. Killing someone is extremely prejudicial.

Or passing a law that requires they pass out stuff they are forbidden by their religion to pass out? Yeah, that's real discrimination.

Well yes I suppose you are referring to Obamacare. Maybe there is a debate to be had here. But that takes us off at a tangent.

indeed.

[Furrowed Brow]

Generally speaking cancer isn't a choice. And generally speaking discrimination doesn't prove fatal.

Discrimintaion does often show through in health and life expectancy. So maybe a better analogy than cancer would be cerebal palsy or curvature of the spine.....caused by the extra weight that has to be carried. We all have a crosses to bear I guess. But I'm not sure why us atheists have to bear the Christian one.

Come on, you guys aren't even discriminated half as much as Jesus was/is.

Half? less than Half? It ain't our cross. Why should anyone accept any level of discrimination.

I experience more discrimination as a Christian than I ever did beforehand.....

If this is true then it must be stopped.