Air Force approves of “have a blessed day” at the gates
Apparently, this was a thing. Gate guards at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia would wish folks “a blessed day” after they checked your ID cards for entrance to the base and it didn’t sit well with one fellow, according to The Christian Science Monitor;
As anonymous airman complained to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation that as a nonreligious person, he felt uncomfortable being told numerous times to “have a blessed day.”
“I found the greeting to be a notion that I, as a nonreligious member of the military community, should believe a higher power has an influence on how my day should go,” the airman wrote. The organization reported similar complaints from 13 Air Force individuals, nine of whom were described as practicing Christians.
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation isn’t about freedom of religion at all, for some reason, they don’t want there to be religion in daily life. Their current target is the military, although they will at times swerve off that path and attack memorials. Anyway, the Air Force decided that “have a blessed day” is keeping with Air Force standards;
“The Air Force takes any expressed concern over religious freedom very seriously,” base spokesman Roland Leach said in a statement Thursday. “Upon further review and consultation, the Air Force determined use of the phrase ‘have a blessed day’ as a greeting is consistent with Air Force standards and is not in violation of Air Force Instructions.”
The standard greeting at the base is “welcome to team Robins,” to which guards may add courteous and professional greetings if they wish, Mr. Leach said.
Little Mikey Weinstein, the nominal head of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation isn’t happy about gate guards’ freedom to greet people at the gate, however;
“Whenever the Air Force is pushed to the test, they will crater to the religious right,” he told the newspaper (which is not a government publication). “This is an example where it’s fine to say, ‘Welcome to Team Robins,’ but, as I said before, what are you going to do if the gate guards say: ‘Welcome to Team Robins, hail Satan!'”
How’s about they say “Welcome to Team Robins, screw Mikey Weinstein, the whiny little creep”.
Category: Air Force
I wonder how “Peace be with you” would fair.
Or Allahu akbar?
Why do I get the feeling that Little Mikey wouldn’t bat an eye if the gate guards said, “As salamu ailaikum.”
“May the force be with you”
with 1 ea. snappy salute!
YEAH, and the moment someone said “May the Force be with you” the little shits would bawl about it claiming to be offended Trekkies! 😀
A snappy Vulcan salute?
Of course the folks in the car could just say “These aren’t the doids you are looking for” and blow the gate.
With the talk of the ‘religious right,’ and pointing out that Christians ‘also’ object, it’s almost as if the article’s author is implying that this is a Christian greeting. It’s not. It’s a common hippy earth-fairy greeting. They’ve got a special flower at their gate that didn’t get hit with enough socks in basic. At least that’s my take.
That stopped me dead …
“Blessed Be” is the pagan Wiccan greeting!
Are they witches?
As a Christian, I could give a rat’s ass. It doesn’t bother me one way or the other.
I concur.
Not a Christian, but it wouldn’t bother me.
Maybe the “offended” people are afraid they’ll get Christ cooties?
Exactly
I was thinking closer to the ‘namaste’ crowd of hippies, but that works too. In any case, my guess is that the watch is trying to stand out more than greet people.
A friend of mine on Facebook commented on this story and made this observation about the Wiccan greeting:
“The only greeting from Wiccans I can remember is … ‘and your little dog, too!'”
It is religious. That is a fact.
Get the fuck over yourself, Larsie-boi.
To get offended over something so little people really must not have anything else more pressing in their lives. Get the fuck over yourselves. I’m not religious and it doesn’t bother me at all. Hell if he said “Hail Satan,” I’d laugh and go about my day.
Lars, will you please quit being a dogmatic dick?
Do they float?
When I first was working down in Chicago, there was a parking lot about a block from where I worked.
Whenever I went there, the guy who took your $1.50 and gave you your little ticket to park would say ‘Keep Jesus on your mind at all times.”
He meant nothing by it. It was just his way of greeting people. He was a nice old man. One day, he forgot, so I had to remind him to keep Jesus on his mind.
Why is it that people can’t just say a simple ‘thanks’ or ‘you, too’? MUST everything be considered an invasion of personal space and/or a personal attack?
Someone let me know when these idiots grow up, mmmmkay?
Just make sure I get the memo.
“Welcome to Team Robins, screw Mikey Weinstein, the whiny little creep”. Right on Jonn.
Welcome to Team Robins, please remember Mikey Weinstein & Larsdass Taylor are both pusses, have a nice day !!!
I have to admit that I’d probably do a double-take if someone greeted me like this, particularly at the gate to a military institution. But would I be offended by it? Nah. I would take it as what it was meant to be: a polite greeting.
A friend of mine is a Satanist. He is very polite, and normally uses only standard social greetings with strangers and casual acquaintances. Wiccans also, although they may offer you a blessing if they think you will understand and accept it.
We’re Americans. I really think we need to stop getting in each other’s faces about things like this. We need to be more gentle with each other.
The Airman in question using the greeting is a Wiccan.
Must. Not. Tolerate. Thoughtcrime.
My feelings are essential! You must defer to my feelings!
Oh please. Get a life and get over it. If you really did not believe, or had no doubt of your particular beliefs, that greeting would be as meaningless as “Peas porridge hot” (or for that matter, “have a nice day”.)
Once upon a time, a practicing pagan threatened to inflict serious magical mayhem on me, and went all whoopy-doopy- spellcaster on me.
I laughed.
I suppose I must lose all belief in the power of Drill Seargents to de-stupid people, if that mentality of “my feelings trump all!” can survive basic training. Sigh…..
Thats bullshit Jonn. How about an Atheist gate guard stating, ‘There is no God, get over it’or ‘there are no invisible friends, make your own day’.
How about the growing number of Air Force members that were denied re-enlistment because they refused to confess a belief in a God of any kind.
Shove that shit in my face any time and I will tell you to get fucked. Believe in what you want, so will I. The difference is I have some sound reasoning for my beliefs, not superstitious baseless hope built on the fear of death or damnation.
Its like the ‘I will pray for you’ bullshit, great ‘I will think for you’. I cant wait to pull of to the gate and hear ‘Allahu Akbar’because some dipshit happens to be muslim.
Thats how fucking stupid some Christians are with their bullshit. They dont think, they just believe. Allow religious greetings of one kind and you must allow all kinds. But, lets not think, fuck the constitution, we dont really like those amendments if they get in the way.
“Lighten up, Francis.” (from movie Stripes)
Damn, Dave…. you are really an extremist atheist. I remember seeing your Facebook page and concluding that promotion of atheism seemed to be your most important “cause.” Even with so many other more worthy causes out there which one could put their time and effort into.
And you speak to, and about, Christians in a way (i.e. full potty-mouth mode) that no Christian I know would ever speak to an atheist. That alone makes the Christians better people than you.
America was established as a Christian country, founded, formed, and fought for primarily by men who identified as Christians. The belief in God was a vital part of early American life, and produced fine people and institutions.
Dorks like you want to turn our history and traditions on their head. No other religion traveled to so many far-flung corners of this planet and contributed so much to the betterment of the world… bringing literacy, medical care, better housing, building schools, roads, water purification, taking care of orphans, etc., etc. All because these Christians believed in that higher power, and it compelled them to try and help people worldwide.
Even if you argue that many of these Christian do-gooders just wanted to convert the local peoples to Christianity, Catholicism, or whatever, they still did a hell of a lot of good and noble things to improve the lives of their fellow humans.
So give it a rest, Dave. Go ahead and associate yourself with the likes of Mikey Weinstein. You culture vultures should flock together.
Out.
Yes, it is my most important cause. I make no bones about that. I only use potty-mouth mode if I am around or posting where people can handle shit without running it through filters.
NO, THIS COUNTRY WAS NOT BUILT ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGISON. YOU ARE WRONG, THAT IS A MYTH. Most all of our founding fathers WERE NOT CHRISTIANS.
“Most all of our founding fathers WERE NOT CHRISTIANS”
Well .. they were .. but they didn’t go around saying “have a blessed day” either .. they spent their time dreaming up the freedoms we enjoy.
No, they were not. Its not an opinion. It is in their own words, by their own pen.
Most were Deists, they did not believe in the divinity of Jesus or a resurrection. Pretty sure you have to believe in that to call yourself a christian.
Adams was a Unitarian, Jefferson was called a ‘howling Atheist’ and rewrote the Bible taking out all supernatural references. Washington only went to church with his wife (who was Christian) and publicly refused to participate in Communion, he would walk out.
Thomas Payne, well he makes me look mild when it comes to religion. Franklin could have cared less and thought light houses were more useful than churches.
It is a modern myth that they were Christian and easily disproved.
Really, a myth that they were Christians? Then why did they wait on the inauguration of Washington as our first President until they could get a bible for the ceremony.
Go ahead, disprove that. Yes, there were some of our Founding Fathers who were not Christians, but there were many who were and that DID help shape the laws we have and the Constitution.
If they weren’t Christians then why did the Declaration of Independence have in it We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Wow “THEIR CREATOR” sure sounds like religion to me. And since they weren’t Muslim I guess they must have been talking about a Christian god.
Actually, only one of them was a deist. Some, and nowhere near all, like Benjamin Franklin were Christians who despised organized religion.
But even they supported the basic principle that anti-theist reject. That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator (and yes, they meant God) with certain unalienable rights and that they base purpose of The Constitution is to vouchsafe those rights.
It is simple and a common misunderstanding. They were Deists not Christians. Many believed in the existance of a God that probably created the universe. The did not believe in Jesus as the risen savior. God yes, Jesus as Christ No.
Actually, Dave – they were. At least publicly.
Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestant – 28 Episcopalian, 8 Presbyterian, 7 Congregationalist, and 2 each Lutheran, Dutch Reformed, and Methodist. Two additional delegates were Roman Catholic.
51/55 = 92.7+%. IMO that rather easily qualifies as “most”.
See The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America, by Frank Lambert (2003).
Ya, I read that too. No they were not. Christian apologists have been publishing things like that for a long time.
Even Lincoln nearly a hundered years later when asked said, ‘Christianity is not my faith, the Bible not my book.’
There are references to Jefferson being a member of the Bible Society as proof, no it isnt.
Lambert has published many boods on the topic as is known for his Christian bias in publishing. I can site thousands of them.
I will dig up the source information to debunk that claim, I wrote about it several years back. My problem with most writers like him is they knowingly print what is not true as long as it supports their slant.
He also states in that same book:
“By their actions, the Founding Fathers made clear that their primary concern was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. Individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States. Thus the Founders ensured that in no official sense would America be a Christian Republic. Ten years after the Constitutional Convention ended its work, the country assured the world that the United States was a secular state, and that its negotiations would adhere to the rule of law, not the dictates of the Christian faith. The assurances were contained in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 and were intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers.”
http://infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html
Believe whatever you want to believe, Dave. I’ll believe what the man himself said regarding his religious preference:
The quote is from a letter written by Jefferson roughly a year before he died, so it likely represents Jefferson’s religious views at his demise. Previously (1803), he’d explicitly referred to himself in private correspondence as a Christian. Between those two occurrences, he’d also referred to himself as a “Epicurean”, a “sect unto myself”, and as a “materialist”. And since Epicurianism and materialism are philosophies that do not exclude religious beliefs, no – there’s no contradiction there.
In Jefferson’s day, the Unitarian sect was considered a Christian denomination. It still is widely so considered today.
As I said: believe what you want to believe. I’ll take the man at his word.
Did you here the story about the dead atheist?
There he was, laying in his casket, all dressed up and no place to go…….
Or the dyslexic agnostic who, on his deathbed asked, “Do you suppose there really is a Dog?”
You know how you can easily spot an atheist in a crowd? Don’t bother. They’ll tell you about it.
Encouraging, I have read that Christians are now a minority in 9 states. I am looking into that data. Seems it comes from only one poll.
I can always be hopeful.
No, Unitarian at that time or this was not considered Christian.
Todays Universal Unitarian has become more of an ‘anything goes’ philosophy. Its roots however are not Christian.
The evidence of Jeffersons refusal to be called a Christian is overwhelming. The direct evidence he was not is equally overwhelming.
His private correspondance references are contained but not limited to my link. Its is a long article.
I will quote his as follows:
Writing to Adams again, Jefferson said, “And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter” (April 11, 1823). These were hardly the words of a devout Bible-believer.
Incorrect.
Unitarianism was indeed considered Christian in the early 1800s. It is still generally considered a form of Christianity today, albeit an out-of-the-mainstream one.
You appear to be referring to Unitarian Universalism, which is a different religion entirely. Jefferson was NOT a Unitarian Universalist, as the religion did not exist in his day – it was established in 1961, and was an extension of the original Christian Unitarianism. Universal Unitarianism includes both non-Christian and Christian congregations.
Wikipedia gives a good rundown on the two religious movements. While there is some overlap (some Christian Unitarian groups and congregations are also part of Universal Unitarianism), the two are not the same.
You are correct about the particular sect of Universialists. Unitarian doctrine of Adams time and to a large extent today do not believe in the trinity or the divinity of Jesus. Ask any Christian if someone does not believe in the resurrection of Jesus, the virgin birth, or trinity if that person is ‘considered’ a Christian. They were not then, nor are they today Christian.
An odd fact but true: Both Jefferson and Adams died on the same day: July 4, 1826
Exactly. This is a religious statement that should not be made part of a greeting by a service member conducting their official duties.
It is flat wrong.
I am so tired of the religio-fascists in this country acting like the victims when they are prevented from shoving their religious preferences down the throats of their fellow citizens.
Yeah, when I think of religio-fascist, those goddamn Wiccans are at the top of my list. Glad you do too. Means a lot to have an S2 guy on the team. [hug]
Heh, I get tired of anti-theist fighting against the religious root of America. That is that our rights come from God (no they really believed that) and that the purpose of founding America and The Constitution was to vouchsafe those rights. Granted that was the erstwhile reason, though considered primary was one among several reasons for the founding.
Lars, in case you haven’t figured this out yet, I’ll explain it to you. You’re as predictable as you are obnoxious. Everybody here knew what your opinion was before you offered it, and nobody gives a shit about it. Fuck off.
Everytime you post on a topic like this, you talk about the Air Force denying reenlisment for those that won’t profess a faith…do you actually have anything to back that up? I call bullshit.
For every Soldier I’ve ever reenlisted, I was required to ask them two things before I gave the oath – did they want to swear or affirm, and did they want the “so help me God” part.
http://archive.airforcetimes.com/article/20140904/NEWS05/309040066/Group-Airman-denied-reenlistment-refusing-say-help-me-God-
The Air Force seems to have had a problem with this issue. The Army has had a few but corrected the issues in short order.
The case has been resolved but unlike the Army the Air Force failed to take action without external pressure.
Our polarized approach to this issue is killing people. It’s your fault, it’s my fault. We are to blame for this. Our divisive opinions are causing the escalation of violence worldwide. Like it or not, our opinions as the most influential nation on earth have their repercussions. Not just the opinions of our leaders, our perceived popular opinion carries more influence in the world than any single American regardless of that individual’s position. What is stopping us from getting our act together on this issue? We have been picking sides on this issue as if we are playing an adolescent game of dodge ball. Each side has been ducking and weaving to avoid any real responsibility for our failure to solve the problem. This problem needs to be addressed without the current jerk knee responses and the attention span of a nat. It will not be resolved by the ‘Right’ or the ‘Left’, both sides have had their opportunities to bring an end to it. Both sides have failed. A traditional ‘Centrist’ approach is usually a moderate amalgamation of opinions from both sides. The use of half measures will not free the world from aggressive extremists using the sword to gain power. While we are playing a game of dodge ball over blame, the world is being torn apart by our lack of definitive action. Shame on us all. It is time for us to stop acting like Hans Brinker. We are simply running out of fingers to use. Neither will this be resolved with a Rube Goldberg strategy. The Left leaning approach this problem as if it were a matter of social and economic repression from our civil rights era. If we created an environment where they could rise out of poverty, offer education, job opportunities and then the problem will simply go away. They want to use the Olive Branch to bring peace to the region. We have tried that, It has not yielded sustainable peace. Our mission in Beirut from 82-84 was peace keeping. Marines that served there know two motto’s: ‘We came in Peace’ and, ‘Never… Read more »
Huh?
cpt Lard’s evil twin?
So, those therapy sessions still haven’t paid off for you yet, I see. Maybe you should try the anti-psychotic prescription they offered you for your paranoia. It won’t make your brain shrink like the pot you’ve been smoking since you were 13.
Those who turn their swords into plowshares will end up plowing the fields of those who didn’t.
Ummmm, I don’t think you know what the word traditional actually means. A “Traditional” centrist approach would be an entirely Christian approach with arguments between different denominations.
Sorry, I was referring to a generic sense of the word not related to religion specifically.
I would agree with your statement in regards to Christian centrist.
The Air Force, and other branches of our military, now exist to serve the individual, rather than the nation’s defense.
THERE IS NOT REASON TO SAY THIS PHRASE EXCEPT TO PROMOTE A RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE.
Why say it at all?
Isn’t “Welcome to team Robbins, have a nice day?” not religious enough?
Have a blessed day is too Baptist for me.
This is just too Christian for me:
http://archive.airforcetimes.com/article/20140904/NEWS05/309040066/Group-Airman-denied-reenlistment-refusing-say-help-me-God-
Dave. I read the piece. Like the “In God We Trust” inscribed on our currency, the oath of enlistment is prescribed by law. “In God We Trust” is also, by law, our national motto. A reference to God is found in dozens and dozens of US Code provisions, including, of all things, the oath taken by Supreme Court justices and other judges. So, this airman won’t take the oath that is not within the discretion of the USAF to alter. I guess he goes to court then. Bully for him. In the meantime, I wonder do his principles prohibit him from using the money he earns. I’m guessing not.
Yes it does, that money was earned from his profession as a career military member.
The words ‘In God We Trust’ did not appear on the dollar bill until 1956, or in the pledge until 1954. They are a result of a modern era Christian movement.
So if you are an atheist are you off the hook with the oath then?
No, I must attest and affirm my commitment. Just as John Q Adams did at his oath for President. He refused to use a bible and instead took his oath on a book of law.
‘If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein’.
Those words actually first appeared on US currency around 1864. The world didn’t end then.
People need to quit being sore losers. It’s not our fault “In Whoever Strikes Our Fancy Today We Trust” didn’t make the cut. Although I think I would have voted for Reagan’s “Trust But Verify.”
They appeared on limited coin currency at the end of the civil war.
I would go with “Trust by Verify” as well.
Appeared on “limited coin currency”? Hardly.
Here are the dates since which the phrase “In God We Trust” has appeared contiuously on common US coinage. I’ve omitted rare items such as the 3-cent coins, 20 cent coins, gold dollar coins, and one or two others most people have no idea ever existed.
Dollar coin – continuously since 1866
Half dollar – continuously since 1866
Quarter – continuously since 1866
Dime – continuously since 1916
Nickle – continuously since 1938
Penny – continuously since 1909
Gold Eagle ($10), Half Eagle ($5) – since 1866
Quarter Eagle ($2.50) – since 1907
Double Eagle ($20) – since 1866, with the exception of the 1907-1908 Saint-Gaudens variety
In short – since 1866, on most US coins the phrase has been present continuously. The penny, dime, nickle, and quarter-eagle ($2.50) were the only common coins without it – and all of those but the nickle had it by 1916.
That is correct – for paper currency. However, the motto “In God We Trust” has appeared on US coinage since the introduction of the Two-Cent coin in 1864.
The phrase has appeared on all US coins except the nickel since 1916, and on all US coins since the introduction of the Jefferson Nickel in 1938.
Yes, that is something I often use in debate. Once a religious idea gets introduced through the use of government it will become more aggressive.
It is not enough for many Christians to worship as they choose, they must profess it by all means. Using the government in any form to do so is exactly what our founding fathers, Jefferson, Madison, and Adams in particular stood against.
It has not stopped at coins. It has been forced into public schools, blue laws, and in 9 states a mandate to hold public office.
Many of us have become tired of this aggressive intrusion.
You’re correct about the date, but you’re wrong about why. It was because America’s greatest enemies were atheists and anti-theists (a basic precept of socialism). So we added that to as an FU towards America’s enemies and to differentiate America from such heinous ideology. I don’t know where you got that “Christian movement” tripe from.
Senator McCarthy.
This issue got resolved very quickly –
http://archive.airforcetimes.com/article/20140917/NEWS/309170066
Yes, it was resolved. But, only after several organizations filed work papers, including the one mentioned in this post.
A couple of comments, for what they’re worth:
“Welcome to Team Robbins” offends those of us who may not be team players.
And to the little Airman who doesn’t believe that a higher power has an influence on how his day should go, piss off a Sergeant, junior, and see how your day gets influenced.
Sigh. So many people are so oversensitive about the slightest thing!
I am an atheist (small “a”) who tries to live by the Golden Rule. These Atheists (big “A”) have made atheism into a religion itself, acting like the sight of a cross (but not Islamic imagery) will make them melt into a puddle like the wicked witch or burst into flame like a vampire dragged out into the sun.
How about just being polite and accepting “Have a blessed day” with the sentiment for which it’s being offered? Just respond with “Thank You” or “Have a nice day too” or “Live Long and Prosper”. And yes, if Muslim should offer me their equivalent of “have a blessed day”, i.e. “Peace be upon you” or a Jewish person would say “Shalom (Hello, peace) “that would be OK too.
I was walking the dogs last summer and came across a woman from a nearby church enjoying her day. We greeted each other and she asked if she could pray for me. Since such an act can’t hurt me and would make her day, I said sure, go ahead. Is it really a bad thing for people to wish you well in their own way? It’s not going to change my mind or convert me, so where’s the harm in passing on some kindness?
I think those who are so up in arms about something so innocuous are pretty insecure in their beliefs and choices, or it wouldn’t bother them so much.
I am sure you will find I speak out against Islamic religious dogma more than any other. I dont know an Atheist that doesn’t. Yes, that is a capitol ‘A’.
I do not care if people pray for me. It happens often. I do care if they are representing our government while doing it.
I defend and respect an individuals right to believe as they choose, particularly when it is different than mine. A private individual, not a person representing our government.
Its just some poor guy on guard duty, right? Wrong, the problem is his actions were condoned. He has no more purpose for uttering religious sayings than an Atheist does while on duty. I would speak out against it if that were the case.
Its not Walmart, he is not a door greeter.
Hardin,
Grow up, put on your big girl panties, and get over yourself.
“Have a blessed day”. . . “blessed” by whom?
That’s about as religious as “have a nice day”.
The Libtard Progressive side always wants to have a civil discourse, but ends up attempting to shove their opinion down everyone else’s throats. Collectively, of course. ProgLibTurds such as yourself can’t STAND differences of opinion, or speech, or anything. They want good little robots who all parrot the same phrases, say the same things, have the same thoughts.
And I notice that all the “facts” you point to about the founding fathers, are all third party observations, not first party original source material from the founders themselves.
Buh bye. “Have a blessed day.”
It is the ‘opinion’ or ‘belief’ of many that there is a God. The fact is there is no evidence whatsoever that there is. The ‘opinions’ being shoved down throats are coming from the religious that are free to worship as they choose but cant restrain themselves from using the government to have everyone hear it professed.
You should come to a meeting of Atheists with me, there are a majority of Libtards there. I love discussing a difference of opinion with people, I draw the line when government is used to support religious ones.
First party observations can be made at the Smithsonian. I have seen and read most of it in person. You can too, including the 4 Bibles that Jefferson cut up to take out all mythology, miracles, and supernatural events.
I wish you a ‘blessed day’ and Gods speed if that is your belief. I just will not do that while representing myself as a Government entity.
I am not nor is any Atheist I know offended by ‘God Bless You’. I find the belief in what ever particular version of God you hold no more offensive than I do the Easter Bunny.
I just dont use the government to support the idea that the Easter Bunny has ultimate authority over you.
Dave … does it really matter?
I mean, in the overall scheme of things, does it matter if a gate guard (however inspired) says, “Have a blessed day”? Wouldn’t this expenditure of energy be better used on things that actually matter to other people?
You’re an Atheist (and in deference to you I’ll use the capital ‘A’ too). Fine. I respect that. I’m a Christian. That, too, is fine. And I won’t shove my religion in your face if you don’t shove your lack of it in mine.
This whole thing is a tempest in a tea pot. In the end, what difference does it make if an airman at the gate wished you a blessed day? I mean, seriously?
I do understand what you mean. Is is some huge breech of civil rights? Nah, not by a long shot.
The difference is his actions were endorsed by a branch of the military that has a recent history of allowing religious ideas into their policy.
Much Respect and have a blessed day.
Semper Fi.
It’s not a “recent” history. It’s more like their entire history until recently with the rise of Mikey Weinstein and the anti-Christians.
There certainly seems to be a lot being read into a very simple phrase.
How come the assumption is that the speaker at the gate is Christian? Nothing in the phrase, “Have a blessed day” indicates who would be doing the blessing – that is left entirely to the hearer of the words. It also says nothing about the religious beliefs (or lack thereof) of the speaker.
Now, if the gate guard had been more specific, I, too, might object. The phrase, “Have a blessed day” could mean, depending upon my interpretation, a desire that I be blessed by Mother Earth, the fraternal order of oak trees, or some other entity or philosophy entirely.
Of all the things in this wide world to find egregious, this just isn’t.
It is LITERALLY a religious phrase. It does not matter if it is Christian. Military members should not be giving this greeting as part of their official capacity because there is a significant percentage of Americans that do not believe in God.
Some here would agree with your conclusion, Taylor, but I doubt anyone here would agree with your reasoning. The fact that some number of Americans do not believe in God has nothing whatsoever to do with this.
A significant percentage? Cite, please.
Besides, even if it is significant, it is a minority – and minority rights, while protected by the majority, do not trump majority rule.
Fun fact.
It was ONE Security Forces Airman in question that was using that greeting, not the entire Gate Guard cadre. He is also a Wiccan, not a Christian.. So the whole religious right argument is null in this case. People forget that the military is filled with every religion. Not just Christians.
How about a greeting like Ron Burgundy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HNJ93HCxUA
Or maybe the gate guards shouldn’t say anything, and just glare.
All I can think is, whatever the gate guard says or doesn’t say, they sure as hell BETTER…salute the Officer’s wife!!!
Sorry jjak. Meant that to be a separate post.
I expect Lars would be offended by “stay classy” as well. 🙂
Well, I’m offended. Period.
What happens when we encounter the Thralians and they believe in sacrificing goat cheese and a cheap red wine to Bacchanalia, Goddess of the Vine and Skimpy Clothing, and their greeting at the gate is ‘Drop your skivvies and dance?’ If that’s how they greet each other on their homeworld and they want to work here or join the United Space Fleet, what do you say in return? Do you quote Ron Burgundy?
Why can’t individuals understand that not everyone shares their sentiments/prefences and just say something neutral like I do at the checkout stand at Walmart: ‘You have a good day’?
At the same time, why does anyone find it necessary to get their shorts in a bunch over something that is relatively innocuous and simply wishes the recipient well?
This pissy little episode is not remotely like the born-againers in 1970, who were not students, running around all over the campus at my school, shouting (yes, loudly) ‘Jesus loves you’ and if you said something like ‘I’m glad someone does’, you had to physically defend yourself against them, over absolutely nothing.
If you don’t like someone else’s religious preference (atheism is a religion, DH), but greets you with something like ‘Peace and brightest blessings’, I do not see that as attempted recruiting.
What the hell happened to tolerance?
If I have to tolerate your preference, you had damned well better tolerate mine.
This.
Well said!
Sacrifice goat cheese? Seriously? Chevy is not amused!
+10
This is not OK and those that support this are religio-fascists that refuse to accept that freedom of religion is also about FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.
So make false patriots on the forums who claim to love the constitution but only the constitutional rights of themselves or people like themselves.
This absolutely creates a hostile environment from agnostics and atheist and members of several religious groups.
Do continue, Taylor. I suppose that your authority for that freedom from religion is at your fingertips; so, let’s have it.
LOL
Works on so many levels…
2/17AirCav, it is freedom OF religion.
Well, I do want to allow Commissar time to pound the keys and find something other than DU to point to as authority for his pronouncement. Of course, he is notorious for issuing authoritative statements that are nothing more than personal opinion so maybe this is just another instance of that.
“…or the free expression of …”
No. I will not be silenced. If you can freely say ” there is not” then I may say “there is”.
Settled law. We maintain our rights even in military or government service, military is subject to good order and discipline. “I don’t wanna hear it” is not valid to silence anyone, you, me, or the others.
” or the free expression ”
“Free”
Nope. I wont shut up. Neither will you, or anyone else.
“No, there is not” is not a privileged belief. In other words, you have the same obligation to debate your closed-universe view as I have to debate my own universe view.
You said you were done with us, lardass. You said that last night.
So you lied to us. Just flat-out lied.
This means that nothing you have to say is of any value and you are talking to hear yourself talk.
Yanno a few threads ago I said Lars had been behaving himself lately?
I wanna take that back, now.
“This absolutely creates a hostile environment from agnostics and atheist and members of several religious groups.”
Who are in a minority. And while the majority must never trample the rights of the minority, neither must they give in and sell out the store to the minority.
As I say elsewhere, there are going to be people offended no matter what … pick your battles wisely.
Some judge once stated, quite eloquently, “The Constitution is NOT a suicide pact…”
Methinks you need to re-read the 1st Amendment, fella.
Actually, no maybe you should. The papers and speeches done by Jefferson and most notably Madison are available. The intent was a government free from religious interference.
The papers they wrote are fine and all, but they aren’t the law. It’s was just their opinion and there were a lot of other people involved in writing the Constitution than those two.
So, no, you can’t use them to try and redefine what the Constitution says.
That is true. Point taken. The ruling of SCOTUS and how they rule is the law. They often use the intent of law .
And the SCOTUS at times changes its mind on a given issue. See punishment, capital, or any one of a number of other issues.
Ghosthunting is the term used to describe the search for intent behind a legislative act. There are modern instances in which a legislator’s own statements regarding the legislation he helped pass have been accorded no weight. All this is to say that even sponsors of a law are neither the be all nor end all in a search for intent. The reason why an individual legislator or two voted for a bill is not representative of anything: the rationale is limited to that legislator or two. In the matter of the 1st Amendment, the language is plain and straightforward and a peek at England and its official church suggests why the amendment was deemed to be necessary.
Bingo. The First Amendment’s language concerning religion forbids the creation of an official religion by act of Congress, and guarantees freedom of religion. That is all. Later SCOTUS decisions have extended that prohibition on establishing an official religion to state and local governments.
The Constitution does NOT say you have any right to be “free from exposure to religion”. It also does not forbid public expression of religious sentiment by Government officials, whether in an official or unofficial capacity. However, case law has established that such expressions of religious sentiment may not in general be made compulsory. And the Constitution prohibits any form of religious test for Federal employment (Article V, not the 1st Amendment).
All such policy and court restrictions in this area have come later, and are unsupported by the actual language of the Constitution.
Nobody is asking to be free from exposure to religion, as if that were even possible.
You do bring up a point about something that I struggle with. At what point does the separation of church and state overreach an officials right to free speech?
My position is a military member on duty as a law enforcement member should not be using that moment to express his personal beliefs. Even if he is Atheist.
And my take would be that it’s bad form, but not prohibited – and not worth getting really bothered about. Kind of of like someone in uniform using a US flag as a hammock for an 8-day-old baby while having their picture taken, actually.
Yep, good point. Now, if the Air Force published a finding supporting the use of a flag as a hammock, I would take exception to it. I guess its not what the guard said that I object to, it is the findings of the Air Force that does.
Agreed. Fully.
Hey Lars! Newsflash! Nobody cares what you think! Fuck off and die! Happy St. Patrick’s Day (in the Roman Catholic tradition), asshole. Have a blessed fucking day!
“Happy St. Patrick’s day!?”
HOLD it! I do NOT want to be oppressed by some alcoholic fascist christian Irishman!
Oh, what a give away. Did you here that, did you here that,
eh? That’s what I’m on about — did you see him repressing me, you saw
it didn’t you?
Wait a sec, you just called me an “alcoholic fascist Christian Irishman?” Alcoholic? ALCOHOLIC? How DARE ye make such a blatantly racist assumption based on the other three charges?
Seriously, dude, that was pretty good. I needed that. Thanks.
Somewhere along the line, people of our country seem to have forgotten about the phrase “Majority Rules.”
For things that really matter, when Spurs have the MOST points they win. The worthless politician with the MOST votes wins. The MAJORITY of jurors decide if you go to jail or go home.
So you see, not everything is set up where everyone wins and is happy. And life keeps on going. Every fat kid is not going to get a trophy. Every doctor isn’t going to get a buxom blonde and every politician isn’t going to get a kickback. Sometimes we’re not going to get things our way – tough titty kitty – we’ll all get over it.
Let’s be concerned with the things that matter and quit being selfish, sore losers.
Majority does not equal right. Your logic would be welcomed in the antebellum South…
Minority butthurt doesn’t equal right either. Majority rules=democracy. Minority rules=dictatorship. The rule of the majority, as we practice it in this country, allows you to make your case and try to bring others around to your way of thinking, giving your side the majority. If you can’t do that, then either you didn’t present your case well enough, or it doesn’t have merit.
I don’t see the problem here.
Why would anyone be offended by “Have a blessed day”? Does it really matter in the long run if someone wishes you that? Besides, who are they hoping blesses you? God? Satan? The Dalai Lama? The attendant at the service station? Your first sergeant?
People today are going out of their way to find things to be offended about. Personally, I respond to “Have a blessed day” with, “You too.” And then I move on. I don’t know the person nor do I know who they’re wishing blessings on me from – nor do I care.
There is nothing in the law that says anyone in this nation has the right to be unoffended. Or, to put it another way, there’s always going to be someone or something out there that will offend you. And in our seeming push to become an inoffensive society, we apparently end up offending everybody.
I think we should pick our battles carefully here. As my JROTC instructor back in high school used to say, “Is *this* the hill you want to die on?”
For all out there who get so worked up about an innocent little phrase like, “Have a blessed day” …
Many of you assert that there is no God. You live your lives believing that, and I say that’s perfectly fine. I won’t try to tell you that there is, if you don’t try to convince me that there isn’t. I won’t pee on your tree if you won’t pee on mine.
And if you’re right, who – in the long run – have I harmed by my belief? That’s right, nobody. If, when we die, the lights go out, the door is closed, and we simply cease to exist, then hey – I was wrong but I didn’t harm anyone else in believing otherwise.
But … what if you’re wrong?
I love this question, seriously I love being asked this. If there is a God then he or she better defend themselves if I meet them.
God is thanked for the touchdown while a mother sits and watches their child be consumed by cancer.
God is thanked for food while children guilty of nothing more than being born are eaten from the inside out by parasites.
God is tanked for the newborn while a son watches his hero and father being stripped of his dignity by Alzheimers.
No, the suffering of the innocent alone can not be dismissed if indeed there is a being that can intervene and refuses to. As Epicurus said,
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
This of course presumes that a human can/should impose his human invented morality on God. That may be comforting, but that wouldn’t be much of a God.
If there is a God, then s/he/it is the standard of right and wrong, moral and immoral, not me. We’ll leave aside for the moment how one would know that standard. But it does seem that the notion of God put s/he/it above my judgment. Try to understand? Sure. But arrogate the right to judge? Seems to me at first glance that defies the God/Man relationship.
Unless, of course, we have a different idea of what God/a god is.
Philosophically I think it difficult to posit ‘God’, and make them subject to my judgement.
In any case, the Book of Genesis answers Dave’s questions pretty clearly. Dave is not obligated to read or believe the Scripture, but it’s there if he ever feels like doing so.
And I am tired of YOUR aggressive intrustion, Dave Hardin. You are proselytizing to force everyone around to YOUR way of thinking. That is as obnoxious as you can get.
You don’t be forced to accept anyone else’s beliefs but YOU expect everyone else to accept yours.
That is NOT how it works. You have to accept the beliefs of other people whether you like it or not, and whether you agree with them or not. Otherwise, YOU are engaging in persecuting anyone who disagrees with YOUR beliefs. You’ve made a hell of an effort here to do that.
We GET that you are an Atheist. That is a religion, whether you like it or not.
I don’t give a fuck what your personal beliefs are. You can believe in crop circles and Ents or a purely mechanical universe and Schrodinger’s cat, for all I care. But if you expect me or anyone else to accept your beliefs, then YOU had damned well accept the beliefs of other people or you are no better than that bitch Mary Tudor, who executed my ancestor by fire because he wouldn’t convert to Catholicism.
That’s how it works.
So what are you going to do to me if I DON’T agree with you and DON’T want to listen to you? Are you going to set me on fire? Are you going to behead me? Are you going to make me dig my own grave and stone me to death for daring to disagree with you?
That is EXACTLY where you are going.
Yes, it is.
I you use or support the use of government to support your religious belief I will condemn that act as aggressively as possible.
You are tired, like I give a shit. You have no idea what being tired is. I have said countless times that I respect the right for anyone to worship as they choose no matter how much I disagree with it.
Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby. If you dont give a fuck what my beliefs are then shut the fuck up about them.
Stick to fucking with the kid, or change your fucking tone. I can be civil, also the first to admit I am not perfect at it. I didnt start this thread. I will defend my position the tone of it from its origional posting was bullshit and a slap to the face of anyone that doesnt hold the idea there is a God. Dont like being slapped back dont throw the first punch.
I will continue to confront bullshit when it is wrong. I do not support the harming of anyone for any belief, I will and have stood in their defense.
Whether you accept it or not, there are people who are self-declared Atheists who have said they consider their belief system to be a religion. They say it is defined as an ideology, therefore to them it is a religion.
As Hondo said here: http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=58737&cpage=1#comment-2494575
there is nothing that precludes a government official from expressing a religious sentiment. You, in fact, agreed with him.
Someone on active duty is, in effect, representing the government and is by proxy a government official.
Some AD gate guard giving a personal greeting that includes the term ‘blessed’ instead of ‘nice’ or ‘great’ has the right to do so.
If you expect everyone to engage in neutral language in all aspects of life in this country to suit YOUR needs, it means that you are unwilling to give even the slightest mote of respect to what they believe in, no matter what it is.
How is ‘blessed’ more offensive than ‘shalom’? Than ‘good’? Than ‘great’?
The people who use the term ‘blessed’ have rights, too, you know. If you expect everyone else to respect YOUR beliefs, regardless of our station in life or yours, then you are obligated in a civilized society to return the courtesy.
You can’t have it both ways.
You are taking offense over nothing.
I still do agree with Hondo on that point and most other points he makes. A ‘gate guard’ is on duty and under arms. That is not the time to be spouting personal views.
Its really not the guard that I take exception too, it is the reaction of the Air Force. That finding has opened a box of bullshit from every crack pot who believes in anything to verbalize it while on duty.
Yes, people do have rights to express their views. The also have a right to express their religious views in particular. I can not seem to express my belief in that right strongly enough.
I do openly struggle with the issue of when a government official’s right to free speech is trampled upon by the rule of separation of church and state.
Should a police officer say. ‘May God keep you safe and watch over you’ as he hands you a ticket? I am not offended by that kind of thing, I just don’t find it appropriate.
As a reminder to all of those playing the home version, you’ll have to go to Colorado, Alaska, or DC to get legally stoned.
And BTW, for anyone who cares, God never promised to fix everything that’s broke. He’s given us the ability to make and live by our choices, and also to suffer (cancer, Alzheimer’s, and so on) so we can appreciate the lives we have, not take a healthy and worthwhile life for granted, and to put up with those whose views are so totally out of whack, that even God chuckles.
Have a Blessed Day.
My plan is to go to Alaska, Colorado, or DC to get stoned when I get Alzheimer’s. I just hope I don’t forget!
Order of the Oak Tree blessings to all.
Pax in Terra
It is okay only if I can counter their 1st Amendment Right with my own First Amendment Right and give them a hardy “Go Fuck Yourself”.
If you are really hip to the scene, you should answer “Have a blessed day”. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Have+a+blessed+day!
[Black folks’ code for “Fuck off, Honkey!”
That Cracker really pissed me off, so I told him to “Have a blessed day!”]
[5 WORDS RELATED TO HAVE A BLESSED DAY!
drop dead fuck off fuck you go to hell screw you]
Never really had a need for a code to tell someone to Fuck Off.
If they really want to bless my day, tell me where the daily speed trap is set up.
Look for the elephant’s trunk.
That’ll slow you down.
Living in Madison WI for 15 years I got well acquainted with Annie Laurie Gaylor and her Freedom from Religion foundation. What a bunch of angry, control freak losers… As a Christian and a spiritual being myself I can only offer this to the argument. It has been my experience to note that atheists, mooslummers and those of the secular group of people seem to be the angriest people on the face of the earth. It is painfully obvious and there is no doubt in my mind that they have a great big hole in their souls and have tried to fill it with everything else BUT a belief in a spirit or power greater than themselves. I tried to fill mine with Sex, Drugs and Rock and roll… Well, that didn’t work out to well for me. I finally decided that whatever it is out there has really been instrumental in my life and as of about 4 years ago I found out that I was actually being carried by someone else for most of my life. Someone truly greater than me had helped me out in ways that would take an encyclopedia to describe. Those angry secularists believe that the human being itself is the highest form of evolution and that they are at the top of the pyramid of evolution because of their “enlightened” mindset. Anyone that disagrees with them are considered heretics and lower forms of life and should be burned at the stake. Immediately. Atheism is a religion, it requires you to believe a certain manner of thinking which is the same dogma as Christianity… Think about that for a while. It is painfully obvious that atheists are control freaks with huge anger issues that want to make certain that someone else’s beliefs do not upset their own beliefs by contradicting that thought pattern. The belief pattern is so insecure that they know deep inside themselves someone greater than they are had to put this hugely complicated machine we call the human body and the rest of the universe together. That is why they have… Read more »
Thankx, I am not that angry and miserable all that much. By the way, I do agree with you on some of what the Freedom from Religion foundation does.
Here in Indiana they tried and are still attempting to file a case against a city for having a veteran monument with a small cross on it. Fact is, many if not most veterans are Christian. I have spoken publicly at several meetings about this action. They are over reaching in this case. It is not the only one they have done this. That monument was privately paid for and donated to the park. I have no problem with that and will continue to defend the city’s decision to display it.
Best Regards.
Thunderstixx…First, thank you. I take no offense at, yet completely disagree with Dave Hardin. I read his comments and do see his points. I do not agree with them and that is the wonderful thing about our free society of expression and this blog’s echo of the same. I don’t have to regard them anymore seriously than I choose. Anymore than I would expect Dave to acknowledge, give regard or lend credence to my beliefs. Second, thank you for courage to express your beliefs. I share the same beliefs. I try very hard to live by two verses in the Bible from Matthew, though I falter and fail each day. ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ This was Jesus’ answer to the question of “which is the greatest of the commandments?” My God first then others in my life next because it is a given, for me anyway, that I already love myself. On my worst days when experiencing one or more of, failure, setback, despair, grief, remorse, shame or things I can’t put into words, I still fed myself, clothed myself and cared for myself. Certainly there were days when overcome with one of those, I didn’t feel hungry or like a shower and fresh clothes. However I knew my cupboards and closet were full and there. I do love the God I serve. Who, served me first, beyond measure. Then those of my family, my friends and neighbors as best as the faulted person I am can. This is also my biggest failure. I have the common human nature to judge most things in life, including others. Sometimes harshly and even prematurely. Sometimes, even those closest to me. I will be first in line to check the “I Am Not Perfect By A Long Shot” box with a heavy black marker. To the issue of the thread, I do not want the government involved in my beliefs… Read more »
Is it me or just a strange coincidence: Laurel & Hardy / Lars & Hardin?
See – God does have a sense of humor.
I had wondered if anyone besides me did notice that. Thank you.
I admit I did laugh at that. Look, I admire anyone who holds their ground if they believe in their cause. I also admire the ability to admit when one is wrong. I often do, just not in this particular case.
Semper Fi.
Until they see their shadow again and get scared that is.
Their shadow and what follows it….
Actually on the fence on this one.
Used to have a DC that thought he was the latest coming on Richard “The Lion Heart”. Great deployment speech about how we were “holy warriors” and all. Really pissed off the FRG. Sorta get it.
We should have had Red Crosses on our “armor” and IBAs.
Guy was a zealot and a one-sided dick, but a competent and functional officer.
Just saying…
Never really bought into the religious component, as it is still PREACHED in certain units.
It is what it is…..but I have always been tolerant.
Understandable. At the same time, I haven’t let 1 (or 10) crappy Wal-Mart employees keep me from shopping there or to start an anti-walmart crusade like some our less tolerant, more singular types.
I am probably the worst excuse for a Christian out there, but something about cpt Lard and pvt Hardon just bring out the “Saturday Night Tent Revival” in me (and I’m Methodist – we don’t do Tent Revivals), so thank you Green Thumb for being tolerant.
“What we need is a longhaired hippie Jesus preaching from the book of Johnny Cash” or something like that…
I actually saw an OER one time years back where “going to church several times a week” was listed.
Wow.
Atheists are always so rude and nasty when it comes to them making their argument.
I have had people of different religions, beliefs, etc. wish me well according to their ” ways”, and I simply said thank you. This is because I am able to understand that they are wishing me well, even if it is in a way that I don’t believe. They are showing me that they care. I have had Muslims tell me to have a blessed Ramadan. I am not Muslim and do not practice Ramadan, but it am able to understand that they mean it in a good way, to me, and I accept their well wishes with a simple thank you.
When it comes to atheists, they have to be rude about it instead of just accepting that it is a persons way of wishing them well. From now on, if I say have a blessed day and I offend an atheist ( I’ll know because they will be sure to tell me ” you know I’m an atheist” right?”) I’ll simply say ” oh, I’m sorry, then Fuck you, and have whatever kind of day.
AND, this country was founded on Christian values, and by Christians. It is what it is, regardless of how much theywants to rewrite history.
“They want” not theywants.
Founded on Christian beliefs? Ehh…. If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution. – GW We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society -JA I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another -TJ Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law -TJ The legislature of the United States shall pass no law on the subject of religion -CP Those are all things the Founding fathers said about religion, I just thought they were badass quotes. But anyways, who the fuck cares what someone says? “God bless you” “Wasalyma Alakum” “Praise the Speghetti Monster” “Joseph Smith be with you” Who the fuck cares? Why do people get so butthurt about what other people say and believe? I’m not religious, but if someone says “God bless you” instead of “Bless you” to me I will say thank you. It is a person meaning the best they can towards you. I mean if you are the type of person (because of whatever you believe) you’re going to tell some nice Chaplain or Old lady who is praying for you to be safe on a deployment or says God bless you when you sneeze to “Fuck off” because you don’t believe what they believe, then you are just a douschbag. I mean all they said was “Have a blessed day” not “You can’t come on or go off of this post until you accept Jesus into your hearts.” I fucking hate people. The next thing you know they will try to change the colors on our flag because… Read more »
“next thing you know they will try to change the colors on our flag because it is offensive to gays or whites or asians or native americans or blacks or some bullshit along those lines.”
That’s exactly what this is all about for Liberals and Progressives
The more they get away with this it chips away at the collective resolve. Makes it easier to get their way with the big things.
Did gays flock to enlist after the repeal of DADT?
Of course not because it was never about that. It was about providing another argument to support gay marriage
Chip, chip, chip…
Another illogical and unsupported arguement from the sage of wisdom himself.
Quick, you are missing Todd Starnes speak on Fox News. Run to your TV.
How exactly is it unsupported? Do tell
Simple. You never gave any substantiation to your claim that the political driving force behind the repeal of DADT was about support to marriage equality rather than the stated purpose.
Just because you don’t like what I said doesn’t invalidate what I said. Another liberal notion I might add.
You’re right, it doesn’t. Your statements must first have some semblance of validity in order to be invalidated.
What O-4E wrote and how you restated what he wrote differ. So, now you are responding to your own twist on his words. Good luck with that. I agree wholeheartedly with O-4E’s point that that a chipping away has occurred and continues to occur. The starting point is that marriage is between one man and one woman. There is a pile of evidence that rivals Mount Everest in support of the contention that all manner of effort has been aimed at turning that definition of marriage aside. So, what’s your beef? Do you dispute that contention?
How is it invalid? Let’s start there
“That’s exactly what this is all about for Liberals and Progressives”
You do realize that the founding fathers were flaming progressive liberals, right?
They were revolutionaries, you know. They supported the overthrow of the lawful government by force and pledged, publicly, everything they had to the effort.
The conservatives supported the King and Crown.
Were they offended by and make a major issue of “in God we trust?”
They may well have been progressives and liberals. But not in the same vein as the freekshows that carry the title today
“You do realize that the founding fathers were flaming progressive liberals, right?”
That’s true. The Founding Fathers were ardent proponents of gay marriage, stumped for redistribution of wealth at every opportunity, were unanimous in support of abortion, were fiercely anti-capital punishment, and many dedicated themselves to expanding voting rights to women, poor folks, and minorities. What’s more, the Founding Fathers were internationalists by nature, favoring a one-world, one government approach over nationalism and “America first” isolationism. They also favored compulsory, cost-free education, a welfare safety net, free healthcare, and equal pay for equal work for all. The collective, not individual liberty, was paramount to the Founding Fathers, so much so that many scholars today credit the Founding Fathers with setting the stage for Marx himself and heavily influencing his economic theory.
Or not. Calling the Founding Fathers flaming liberal progressives is beyond silly: it is reprehensible.
Wow, you are just dense. You really ignored the first part of his post, eh?
Wtf are you babbling about?
He made two main points:
1) This country was not founded on Christian principles
2) “who the fuck cares”
Your response to his post seemed to imply that it was reinforcing your conservative activism/revisionism. It wasn’t.
Will someone please go back and tell those stinking Pilgrims why they really came and settled what would later become the USA. It wasn’t religious persecution – they were tired of Benny Hill reruns.
I think that we are making the same argument. You are better at getting the words from your brain to print than I am.
The main point is if someone is wishing you well, by whatever their belief is, just accept it as a kind statement and say thank you. There is no reason to be offended by it.
As much as the atheists want to make the argument, it just is not true that when a Christian says have a blessed day or bless you, they are not trying to convert you to their religion.
I stand by my previous statement,if they are offended by me saying have a blessed day then fuck’em.
This camel keeps poking its nose in the tent here, there, and everywhere. If it doesn’t get slapped back soon it’ll be sitting right in the middle of the tent. Hope they discontinue this unnecessary and polarizing practice.
Apathy engaged.
The ever predictable and tedious “Lars”. Forward!
I honestly feel bad for people who have such pathetic and lonely lives that they get off by actively searching for something to be offended by.
I posting something earlier I meant to add this at the end but I don’t know where it went so whatever. But, if you are a Service Member and get offended by something as simple as “Have a blessed day” then you need to get the fuck out of the military or stop being a thin skinned bitch. Man I use swear words a lot I really need to stop that at some point.
Commissar can go suck a dick
In spite of the rantings and ravings to the contrary, there are a significant number of people in this country who would never use the phrase, “Bless your heart,” in a church, around folks for whom they have any respect, and never within earshot of clergy of any sort. Why? Because it is not a religious phrase. It is derisive. Very insulting, in fact.
That said, to all who might take offense, “Bless your heart.”
Solution:
Seargent of the guard reminds guard to use the provided mission-relevant greeting(s) of the day, and perform duty in prescribed manner.
Guard has enforced good order and discipline.
Seargent of guard then tells everyone else to leave his service person the F alone, and stop interfering with the seargent’s job.
Junior enlisted screwing with thin-skinned superiors? Nah. Who would believe it.
If anyone told them that something like “have a nice day” ( a wish) was OK, then leaving it up to them to wish was -explicitly- authorizing wishing, and that means from personal perspective, AKA faith-based.
If they -only- authorized athiest-based wishing (no god references) then the guard also acted apropriately in ignoring the unlawful “one belief over another” order.
Again, no particular universe view, open or closed, is privileged in this circumstance.
We can either have a thick-skinned “so what?” approach, or endlessly litigate thin-skinned feelings.
It is the military.
Shmudlapp! Just follow the forking script! You are not Shakespear! Do fifty while repeating the greeting of the day “welcome to Camp Swampy! Keep your socks dry.”
Sir, with respect, that man is my problem, not yours. I will handle this.
sir, do I understand correctly? You are offended bu the guardns well-wishing?
Solution: Seargent of the guard reminds guard to use the provided mission-relevant greeting(s) of the day, and perform duty in prescribed manner. Guard has enforced good order and discipline. Ideally seargent of guard then tells everyone else to leave his service person the F alone, and stop interfering with the seargent’s job. Junior enlisted screwing with thin-skinned superiors? Nah. Who would believe it. If anyone told them that something like “have a nice day” ( a wish) was OK, then leaving it up to them to wish was -explicitly- authorizing wishing, and that means from personal perspective, AKA faith-based. If they -only- authorized athiest-based wishing (no god references) then the order was improper. Again, no particular universe view, open or closed, is privileged in this circumstance. We can either have a thick-skinned “so what?” approach, or endlessly litigate thin-skinned feelings. It is the military. Thick-skinned is best. Next time they will salute you as a gaggle of twenty individuals, at staggered three meter intervals. …..sir…. Want another helping of junior enlisted disrespect? .sir…. How about the mockery of your peers and the public? ….sir. Skin thickening yet? …sir. It helps advance the career……sir. Never let the EMs even slightly suspect they are under your skin…..sir. Or you make -my- job rather more difficult……….Sir. Sheesh. All that above heartache and flame war over someone with sand in their shorts over a politely phrased greeting? Give me a freaking break. By stiring the pot., the -whiners- have turned this into a discipline-killing flustercluck. Lighten up! Grow up! If -that- little junior EM bs bothered you, you are way too thin-skinned to be wearing a uniform Or to survive in a free society. Which was probably the whole point of griping about it. Cant hack it? Silence it! -that- will show your comitment to freedom! Silence the expression of contrary views in anyone who picks up the burden of military service! Wow. Way to support the troops. Demand they subordinate their views to yours. Cause they havent rights like other equal folks? Lost the thread, somewhere. Were we discussing their freedom from your… Read more »
Sorry folks. My smart-phone has a bigger brain-cramp than I
I am one of those minority religion folks (observant Jew) who just responds with ‘thank you’, and goes on with his business in these situations. I think that is the appropriate response for most people in most situations, most of the time. I don’t think that Las Cruces has to change its historical name or city symbol. You get the idea.
But I think Dave Hardin has fairly limited the scope of his complaint here to a small, legitimate (if not so critical) issue. The guard’s greeting, however done, was a personal initiative when he is in a position that really shouldn’t allow for that. He shouldn’t be allowed to alter the standard greeting in any way, really. Religious or otherwise.
Uniformed personnel on duty should stick to unit discipline. Personally, I like the ‘just have them glare’ approach.
I just think that, per my opening paragraph, I wouldn’t have bothered making a Federal case of this. There’s a hellavu lot of communities that will have to change their names because they express religious sentiments. No need or point in rewriting history. And no need or point in really agonizing how someone greets me. I know that’s their own initiative; and not ordered or imposed by the establishment. Good enough for me.
I am not a believer and was not raised in a Christian household but I now live in the middle of the bible belt where they pray before HS games, they pray after city council meetings and even the weatherman throws out a religious reference now and again. You know what bothers me about that? Absolutely nothing. I often wonder about people like Dave Hardin and Commissar who seem so strident in their insistence in people seeing things their way and conforming to their views even when they resort to historical inaccuracies. It comes across as pompous bigotry and makes you wonder if like the newly converted Christian, they need to voice those views so frequently and loudly because they still have doubts. I was given a Mezuzah when I retired and bought my farm by a friend I met in Israel while I was training there with the Marine Corps.It now rests proudly on our front door stoop and has great religious meaning to those of the Jewish faith but for me its meaning is that someone cared enough to think of me in that way and give me that gift of himself. Am I Jewish? No. I have a Saint Christopher’s medal I was given years ago by the Catholic Chaplain in our BN when I was going through some tough times; I have kept it all these years and it gives me comfort in the memory of a great Chaplain who never asked my faith but was there in my time of need.Was I Catholic or even a Christian? No. When I was deployed to OIF the last time our Terp was a devout Muslim and a great asset to us and we always made sure he had time to pray. During Ramadan we respected him by not eating or drinking (except for hydration) during daylight hours and he frequently prayed for all of us. Was I a Muslim? No. If a gate guard said to me “Have a blessed day” I would take it in the spirit intended and offered my thanks because that is what… Read more »
I second the motion.
While you make some good points, it is unfortunate that were people in your area to know your lack of belief, they would not vote for you, be less likely to hire you, and possibly trust you on par with a rapist. That should bother you. I too, am not bothered by small kind gestures of good will. It scares me when people vote on religion or a lack thereof and not credentials.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-atheists-we-distrust/
I would urge those who paired Dave Hardin with Commissar to reconsider. Dave is, to be sure, quite passionate about his position and we should respect his view. He is entitled, just as we are entitled to disagree with him on this or any other matter. Commissar, on the other hand, isn’t like Dave Hardin. Taylor can’t articulate his thoughts on any subject, it seems, without first checking for a reply in the Lefty Handbook or trying to regurgitate what he read at DU or some other cockamamie site. Anyhow, that’s my take.
2/17AirCav, I concur to the extent that Dave Hardin is clear and coherent in what he says, and frequently concise. He gets right to the point. However, he’s hammering this nail of his so hard, he has countersunk it.
Look, I have things in which I am extremely interested myself, but I don’t spend a massive amount of time rubbing people’s noses in them. Neither do other people who comment here.
If you think for a fleeting second that I do not respect you and your views, please accept my apology for giving you that impression. Never doubt my respect for you or your service.
I have lost count of how many times one of your posts made me rethink something I said.
Other than my initial posts I was responding to rebuttal. I did not intend to rub your face in it, or for it to come across that way.
We do not agree on a few issues, but I do have a great respect for you. If that is your impression of my posts, I must reconsider my approach. I do value your opinion very much.
Semper Fi.
You just seemed to be repeating yourself, Dave. You appeared to me to keep hitting the same points more than once. That’s all.
Dave Hardin is someone I greatly admire. He knows why. That’s all I’m saying. Have a great day Dave.
As a guy who has been a Security Forces Flight Chief at 3 different installations, I will tell you that I have no problem with this. I would certainly rather they say “Have a blessed day…” which is somewhat left to interpretation, then have one of my little gate monkeys say “Hey, f@ck off you idiot, get out of my face…”
Which one do you think would cause me more trouble?
Well I am really late to this party, but as I stated in Poetrooper’s column, I think most people know where I stand with respect to religion. I am a none, I’m not an atheist because to me atheists have become their own religion…I’m more of a guy who doesn’t much concern himself with things not of this earth…I just don’t think about it. I object to people trying to legislate religion into the law with respect to how I must conduct myself. But a guy at a gate wishing me a blessed day does about as much damage to me as a 100 year old cross in a cemetery honoring Spanish American War dead which is absolutely zero. The gate guard saying those words isn’t the full force of the government, he’s not commanding me to follow some religious babble he’s just being polite. If he said, you must agree to my views on religion in order to live a blessed life and enter this facility we’d have a problem…but his greeting carries all the weight of the pimply teenagers at McDonald’s wishing me a great day when I get an orange juice in the morning…it’s no harm no foul. I’m a lot more offended by a corporation that tries to pervert the law based on a religious view than I am by any individual’s words. If you believe in god and you want to talk to me about the good news, I’m not ever going to be rude to you. I will explain that I can’t take your views seriously on that topic because I absolutely don’t believe in your god or anyone else’s god for that matter, but I don’t mind a good discussion on the topic. I do not believe that is an incursion of any sort, it’s not the edge of a slippery slope until someone at the base demands that guards say those words, then by all means I will have a huge problem with that aspect of the words. Said without pressure, no problem, said by order or demand quite different. Not all… Read more »