Author Topic: U.S. Chaplain Kenneth Reyes Censored For 'No Atheists In Foxholes'  (Read 490 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
  • Darwins +61/-14
Lt. Col Kenneth Reyes


http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/christianity/us-chaplain-kenneth-reyes-censored-no-atheists-foxholes

To me this appears cut and dry.  There is no reason to censor this article.

Does anyone know why this makes sense to censor such a benign article? 

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappĂ©
To me this appears cut and dry.  There is no reason to censor this article.

Does anyone know why this makes sense to censor such a benign article?

Because the phrase "there are no atheists in foxholes" is extremely offensive to atheists who are combat veterans.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2237
  • Darwins +74/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
To me this appears cut and dry.  There is no reason to censor this article.

Does anyone know why this makes sense to censor such a benign article?

Because the phrase "there are no atheists in foxholes" is extremely offensive to atheists who are combat veterans.

And it was on a gov't website, where there is supposed to be, by law, a seperation of church and state.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5062
  • Darwins +582/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Because it repeats a rather pretentious and disgusting truism - the idea that everyone 'believes' when push comes to shove.

The saying "there are no atheists in foxholes" (and a similar statement, just as bad, "there are no atheists on birthing beds"), is a common fallacy.  Essentially, that even someone who states that they do not believe in God will 'demonstrate' that they believe by praying in a foxhole when under fire.

Except that it's wrong.  Even though some atheists revert to old beliefs when under stress, many do not, and even if they did, it is not particularly representative of what they believe now.  It's no different than, say, a Jew who converts to Hinduism still calling on his old beliefs when under stress.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
  • Darwins +61/-14
To me this appears cut and dry.  There is no reason to censor this article.

Does anyone know why this makes sense to censor such a benign article?

Because the phrase "there are no atheists in foxholes" is extremely offensive to atheists who are combat veterans.

And it was on a gov't website, where there is supposed to be, by law, a seperation of church and state.


Well I have to say that Chaplins fall into a strange place.  They are government supported but they are supposed to preach.   So I am not sure you can use the separatiion clause unless you intend to eliminate the chaplin corpse.

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6613
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
The group that protested the article has to be sensitive to all violations of what it sees is religious freedom in the military. So while the chaplain was quoting Eisenhower, his intent was to imply that there truly are no atheists in foxholes, which is false. And misconceptions like this do not go away on their own.

We used to have to pretend that there were no gays in the military. That time is past. Now we're working on the religious bigots. Sometimes it gets ugly. Sometimes it is just awkward.

Opponents of the status quo occasionally have to get real nit picky when fighting injustice, or those doing the bad stuff will consider that minor transgressions a victory, and consider them a foot in the door for more blatant stuff.

I'm not personally offended, but if others are, let 'em have at it.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2237
  • Darwins +74/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire

Well I have to say that Chaplins fall into a strange place.  They are government supported but they are supposed to preach.   So I am not sure you can use the separatiion clause unless you intend to eliminate the chaplin corpse.

Funny!

But yeah, you're right, except I'm not sure exactly of the role chaplains play in military service, except as a "trusted member of the clergy" to supply spiritual guidance to military personnel seeking such. And that guidance would need to be received on a purely voluntary basis, and not rammed down the figurative throat of personnel not looking for any.

However, there's news recently of an atheist attempting to become a chaplain, and got shot down. Somebody else will have to point you in the direction of the thread in question though. I'm, frankly, too lazy, but it is an intersting discussion.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
  • Darwins +61/-14

Well I have to say that Chaplins fall into a strange place.  They are government supported but they are supposed to preach.   So I am not sure you can use the separatiion clause unless you intend to eliminate the chaplin corpse.

Funny!

But yeah, you're right, except I'm not sure exactly of the role chaplains play in military service, except as a "trusted member of the clergy" to supply spiritual guidance to military personnel seeking such. And that guidance would need to be received on a purely voluntary basis, and not rammed down the figurative throat of personnel not looking for any.

However, there's news recently of an atheist attempting to become a chaplain, and got shot down. Somebody else will have to point you in the direction of the thread in question though. I'm, frankly, too lazy, but it is an intersting discussion.

Is a blog entry ramming something down your throat?

I mean we are not talking about withholding pay or liberty.  We are talking about an opinion piece not a matter of law, rules, punishment, or anything else of substance.  It seems like the epitome of free speech .

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappĂ©
We are talking about an opinion piece not a matter of law, rules, punishment, or anything else of substance.  It seems like the epitome of free speech .

You might think so, but members of the military give up certain rights.  An Army officer, for example, cannot write a letter to the editor of his local newspaper stating that he does not approve of the president's decision to send troops to intervene in the civil war in Myopistan.

If the opinion piece in question here had been written by a civilian, then you're right, there would be nothing to discuss.  But it wasn't, so there is.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2237
  • Darwins +74/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire

Well I have to say that Chaplins fall into a strange place.  They are government supported but they are supposed to preach.   So I am not sure you can use the separatiion clause unless you intend to eliminate the chaplin corpse.

Funny!

But yeah, you're right, except I'm not sure exactly of the role chaplains play in military service, except as a "trusted member of the clergy" to supply spiritual guidance to military personnel seeking such. And that guidance would need to be received on a purely voluntary basis, and not rammed down the figurative throat of personnel not looking for any.

However, there's news recently of an atheist attempting to become a chaplain, and got shot down. Somebody else will have to point you in the direction of the thread in question though. I'm, frankly, too lazy, but it is an intersting discussion.

Is a blog entry ramming something down your throat?

I mean we are not talking about withholding pay or liberty.  We are talking about an opinion piece not a matter of law, rules, punishment, or anything else of substance.  It seems like the epitome of free speech .

On a USAF website, it's not free speech. It's the gov't's speech. Gov't sanctioned speech, which is in direct violation of the Bill of Rights. And it's offensive, as there indeed are atheists in foxholes.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Online screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12557
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: U.S. Chaplain Kenneth Reyes Censored For 'No Atheists In Foxholes'
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2013, 03:28:36 PM »
...eliminate the chaplin corpse[sic].

I get your meaning.  Excellent idea.  You should write to your congresspersons. I shall write to mine.

Quote
Stoddard said President Lincoln once said to him: I do believe that our army chaplains, take them as a class, are the very worst men we have in the service.
http://www.mrlincolnandfriends.org/inside.asp?pageID=10

Still true today.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.