Forum on the Military Chaplaincy

committed to free and diverse religious expression

CaptUSMC On August - 26 - 2013

America continues to move forward toward equality and inclusion.   Within the last four years, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was repealed, the Supreme Court ruled DOMA unconstitutional, and a growing number of states have marriage equality as a matter of law.  As ultra-conservative groups such as the Family Research Council, American Family Association, ADF and CARL continue to lose battles in their self-proclaimed culture wars, they have changed strategy.  Rather than focusing on fighting a specific issue, they now want to be seen as either the victims of intolerance or the champions of religious liberty or both. Their tactic is to enlist conservative politicians to pass legislation that supports their deeply held religious beliefs. Seemingly cloaked in the mantel of the First Amendment, these members of Congress propose legislation that, on its face, seem appropriate and reasonable.  But a closer look at these proposals exposes their true intent to give legal cover to ultra-conservatives in their fight to turn back time. 

PENDING PROBLEMATIC LEGISLATION

There are presently three separate pieces of pending legislation in Congress about which the Forum is concerned. The first deals with the so-called “conscience protection”, the second allowing Chaplains to pray in accordance with their faith tradition (i.e. in Jesus name) and finally preventing the appointment of Humanist chaplains.

1.  Conscience Protection

The 2013 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) contained the first so called “conscience protection” provision. Section 533 of the Act, purports to ensure religious protections for servicemen and women. According to the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, this section of the document “may require the military to accommodate the religious objections of military personnel.”

The text makes it clear that the military must respect the moral views and conscience held by its members. Additionally, it goes on to say that these beliefs may not be used to discriminate against or to deny promotion for those who embrace them (read the entire law, including Section 533, here).

In his signing statement the President said the following:

Section 533 is an unnecessary and ill-advised provision, as the military already appropriately protects the freedom of conscience of chaplains and service members. The Secretary of Defense will ensure that the implementing regulations do not permit or condone discriminatory actions that compromise good order and discipline or otherwise violate military codes of conduct. My Administration remains fully committed to continuing the successful implementation of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and to protecting the rights of gay and lesbian service members; Section 533 will not alter that.

The conservative Republicans concluded that this “conscience protection” did not go far enough. Led by Representative John Fleming (R-LA) they have proposed to expand these protections in the 2014 NDAA. The new provision, Section 530, shifts the burden onto the Pentagon to prove that the expression of religious beliefs would be an “actual harm” to good order and discipline in refusing to make an accommodation. It’s seen as a way for troops to harass their LGB colleagues for religious reasons without fear of reprisal.

As with the previous provision that was included in the 2013 NDAA, the White House objected saying:

Limiting the discretion of commanders to address potentially problematic speech and actions within their units, this provision would have a significant adverse effect on good order, discipline, morale, and mission accomplishment.”

The House version of the 2014 NDAA, H.R.160, with the “conscience protection” section intact, was passed by the House on June 14, 2013 by a vote of 315/108.

On the Senate side, in June 2013 a similar provision, cosponsored by Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), and David Vitter (R-LA), was adopted by the Senate Armed Services Committee on a bipartisan vote as part of the NDAA “mark up”.

The this new provision poses dangers to not only unit morale, discipline, cohesion but also the very existence of the Chaplaincy and are discussed in these articles:

“Conscience Protections”: A License to Bully

“Conscience Protections”: Death of the Military Chaplaincy?

 

2.  Chaplain Prayer

 On February 21, 2006, under new regulations (SECNAVINST 1730.7C) signed by the Secretary of the Navy, chaplains of all faiths in the Navy were asked to consider the views of their audience before invoking specific religious beliefs in prayer. This new policy encouraged chaplains to use only “nonsectarian” language outside of divine services. This prompted criticism that regulating prayer services violates the chaplains’ First Amendment rights.

Complaints by the ultra-conservatives were sent to both the Senate and House Armed Services committees. In September 26, 2006, the NDAA conference committee was considering various House Amendments to Title 10 that would have, except in cases of military necessity, allowed chaplains to pray in a manner consistent with the dictates of their conscience. Further these amendments required that any limitation be done in the least restrictive manner feasible.

As a compromise, the conference committee agreed that the House would withdraw these amendments and the conference instructed the Secretary of the Navy (and Secretary of the Air Force) to rescind new regulations and reinstate the earlier policy.

On November 6, 2006, the Secretary of the Navy carried out the orders of the NDAA conference committee and rescinded SECNAVINST 1730.7C.

On January 22, 2013, Representative Walter Jones, Jr. (R-NC) introduced H.R. 343. This bill authorizes a military chaplain, if called upon to lead a prayer outside of a religious service, to close the prayer according to the dictates of the chaplain’s conscience. Presently being considered by the Personnel Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, it is predicted to only have 6% chance of getting beyond the committee and a 1% chance of being enacted.

 

3.  Humanist Chaplains

 After Representative John Fleming (R-LA) was informed the military was considering appointing Humanist chaplains, he introduced an amendment to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (DDAA), 2014, H.R. 2397, which would prevent funds from being used to appoint chaplains that did not have an endorsing agency.

On July 23, 2013, after debate in the House the amendment was passed by a vote of 253 to 173. On July 24, 2013, the DDAA was passed by the House. The DDAA 2014, in its present form, has a 20% chance of being enacted.

With the pending application of Jason Heap to become the first Humanist to serve as a chaplain in the US Armed Forces, this issue is very timely.  It is discussed in these articles:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rita-nakashima-brock-ph-d/atheist-military-chaplain_b_3679755.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rita-nakashima-brock-ph-d/the-military-chaplaincy-n_b_3759033.html

http://townhall.com/columnists/roncrews/2013/08/01/atheist-chaplains-a-contradiction-in-terms-n1654053

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-carpenter/humanist-need-not-apply_b_3713989.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-carpenter/post_5346_b_3707605.html

 

The Forum on the Military Chaplaincy has taken a position on this issue found in its Statement of Principle:

http://forumonthemilitarychaplaincy.org/resources/time-to-embrace-a-chaplaincy-for-all-the-troops/

  • CDR_N

    As a mainstream Christian – (the sort you label “ultra-conservative”) I was able to minister to both atheist and Wiccan military members. The humanist chaplain could do that too, but would but utterly useless when asked to minister to the religious needs of the majority.
    You are correct in only one particular; Christians are both the victims of religious intolerance and the champions of religious liberty. The hyper-leftist fringe you represent portends the end of religious freedom.

    • JasonTorpy

      I think there’s a disconnect. You say you were able to ‘minister’ to atheists. I disagree, unless you mean misunderstand them and push your beliefs on them. To say a humanist chaplain would be utterly useless to other religious persons shows your ignorance. Did you ever once contact a humanist or other nontheist organization to help educate yourself? Did you ever put one of those atheists in contact with others of like-mind or organizations that could help to ‘minister’ to their needs on their terms, or did you just patronize them with purely secular counseling and veiled (or not) evangelism? Chaplains perform or provide through other means. It sounds like evangelize, patronize, shame, or shun is the SBC policy for many troops.

      • CDR_N

        “Minister” is an industry term Jason. If humanists ever become chaplains they’ll have to learn the vocabulary. “Ignorance”? I retired after 29 years of Chaplaincy. Happy to compare my extensive knowledge and real-world experience to your theoretical presumptions.
        Perhaps I could learn more about tolerance from you. You wrote: “the SBC-NAMB has an authorization to endorse military chaplains. These new restrictions invalidate that authorization, and the DoD should rescind the organizational authorization.”
        Yeah, so maybe not. Freedom of religion means every religion – even conservative religion. Since the humanists seem to advocate systematic censorship of all views but their own – while Conservatives have a long history of cooperation and service, I think we’re OK as is.
        BTW, the motto of the Navy Chaplain Corps was “Co-operation without compromise” I still believe it

        • JasonTorpy

          “If humanists ever become chaplains” – You mean like at Harvard and Stanford, for 50 years in the Dutch military, and at various hospitals and schools already? You’re too ready to try to dismiss and belittle what experience we already have instead of trying to reach a hand out to educate. That’s what we’re doing – educating you on your woeful lack of understanding of the humanist community and your unhelpful, uneducated help to those atheists you ‘minister’ to. We are educating ourselves about chaplains and other beliefs and want to help chaplains like you and those still in the military better understand us in order to improve their ministry. That’s tolerance. The SBC approach of refusing to work with people they disagree with is not tolerance and it’s a violation of military policy, and it’s certainly not cooperation.

Featured Posts

“Pathways to Military Chaplaincy” Report

“Pathways to Military Chaplaincy” Report

The Forum on the Military Chaplaincy provided leadership for a consultation entitled “Pathways to Military Chaplaincy” held at Boston University School of Theology April 8-9, 2016. We are pleased to provide the summary and report from that very successful consultation.

DoD publishes new faith and belief codes

DoD publishes new faith and belief codes

This is a very important document for a number of reasons. It now recognizes many additional faith and belief groups including Humanists, Atheists, Agnostics, Pagans, Shamans,  etc.   Faith-and-Belief-Codes-for-Reporting-Personnel-Data-of-Service-Members

DoD Lifts Ban on Transgender Service.

DoD Lifts Ban on Transgender Service.

The Department of Defense has lifted the long standing ban on service by transgender citizens. This has been a thoroughly researched and vetted decision. The Department has issued both a press release and a memo on the new policy.