all 68 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 133 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (18 children)

As the Pentagon doesn't host promote services for the holidays of other religions to the same extent as they do for evangelical Protestantism, this is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.

Edit: Highlighted corrections to the above statement in italics.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 72 points 7 months ago (14 children)

    Just add it to all the other violations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 7 months ago (12 children)

    Unfortunately, it's added to the list of "so sue me" which is basically this administration response on anything they have done in the last year and change

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (11 children)

    What are you going to do about it? Is the only question that matters to this gangster Administration.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago (10 children)

    The Constitution allows for the possibility of a gangster Administration. Checks and balances. The hope was that the Supreme Court and Congress would keep the executive branch in check.

    The Constitution also recognizes that no system is perfect, so it adds the right to bear arms. Not for sport. Not for defense. The Second Amendment exists specifically to fight tyranny. Just in case the elections get rigged and an extremist party takes control.

    Such an unlikely scenario, amiright?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (7 children)

    ...the argument your making about the 2nd amendment is why it's now obsolete. When America was founded, firearms could actually be used to overthrow a corrupt government. They had practical utility. At this point, however, half the population armed with assault rifles wouldn't make a difference. A combination of the government's mass surveillance and superior firepower would put down the rebellion before it got off the ground

    I'm of the opinion that the constitution should adjust to changing times. 18th century laws aren't geared to solve 21st century issues.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    Totally agree with you, a handgun is no match for a tank. If the military wants to make war on citizens, they will lose.

    However, there is more going on that meets the eye. Many members of the military would not want to shoot their own citizens. And armed citizens can still do more damage than unarmed citizens. In other words, the 2A forces an authoritarian administration to use violence in order to repress the citizens. It ups the stakes. And citizens can strike in ways that the military can't. Guerilla warfare tactics. They don't need to "win", they just need to disrupt, to spread fear.

    But, yeah, with the current surveillance state, along with the culpability of the media, it seems a dubious proposition that armed citizens can save themselves from the fascists. Regardless, I have suddenly become a HUGE proponent of guns. Especially when I see the Black Panthers providing security for demonstrators. Respect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago*

    They have their advantages. They aren't particularly good at protecting a person since a person that owns or wields a firearm is much, much, much more likely to be stabbed or shot. The other person in the altercation needs to kill or disable them to preserve their own life.

    Firearms do, however, make a great store of wealth. If a gun owner ever needs money, they can easily make a profit...especially on the black market. This is arguably one of the most important benefits from the perspective of gun owners. The value of a gun increases with inflation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Many members of the military would not want to shoot their own citizens.

    Which has nothing to do with the second amendment. That'd be equally true whether the citizens are armed or not. Actually, more likely to be true if they're not armed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    When America was founded, firearms could actually be used to overthrow a corrupt government.

    There are almost no cases in history where this happened. And the big driver for the 2nd was southern states wanting to put down slave rebellions, and all the states wanting to continue their genocide of Native Americans. A citzenry with muskets might not survive a battle with a real military, but it sure as shit could overpower some enslaved people trying to resist and some pre-industrial people with bows and arrows.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago* (1 child)

    I don't buy this. Controlling firearms and restricting who exactly can join a militia was a common strategy for preventing rebellions at the time the United States was founded.

    The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with giving armies firearms. The people responsible for putting down slave revolts were always armed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago*

    See, this is why I love real conversation! Now I'm learning something! Thanks for dropping by and sharing!

    Fr, I'd never heard this mentioned. It's an all new take on the purpose of (state? local?) militias, for me anyway, I've got some reading to do now....

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    This is false.

    The Pentagon hosts a Ramadan dinner (at the end of the holiday, to celebrate the conclusion of the fasting ritual).

    The Pentagon has hosted Hanukkah menorah lighting ceremonies. (I'm not sure if they still do.)

    The issue here isn't the sponsoring of a religious activity. The function of the military is to send soldiers to their deaths. Those soldiers who need spiritual support should absolutely have access to it.

    The issue is that the president and the defense secretary have incorporated evangelical Christianity into their cronyism. Religion is being used as a litmus test for loyalty.

    Signed,

    A pragmatic (ex-militant) atheist

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    ...anymore? When my mother worked there (admittedly, decades ago), the catholic chaplain conducted mass every Friday morning. (Very quickly. "GodblessAmenGetbacktowork.") They also had other religion's services. Nothing mandatory.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 53 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    Oh I’m gonna loooove asking my MAGA Catholics about this!

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 7 months ago (7 children)

    Are there any? Pope has made it clear maga is not aligned with Catholic Church

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 7 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Really?

    I honestly didn't know that cause I thought the circle was all "Evangelical" or at least posing as that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    He's a cultish cuntish Catholic like Thiel. In fact he probably converted to demonstrate his servility to Thiel.

    And Vance made the rookie mistake of lecturing the Pope on some of his cultish bullshit. For a person devoid or charisma or original ideas, he really is an arrogant shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Yes, there are absolutely Catholics to the left of the pope, less than under Francis but still.

    The whole "trad-cath" movement is essentially a rejection of Vatican II reforms. Hell, Nick Fuentes is Catholic

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 28 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    I'm Episcopalian. One of my mentors was a wonderful old bishop who once noted that Christianity goes through a sort of 500-year cycle where we see segments of the church get real wealthy and in bed with political power, followed by a group that seeks reforms, who then themselves become the "in-group." The Protestant Reformation happened about 500 years ago, protesting the wealth and political hegemony of the Roman Catholic Church...

    Watching the Western world the past several decades has convinced me that we're witnessing Protestantism's "high medieval era" moment. I wonder what the new reformation will look like? It'll probably all happen a lot quicker than the Protestant Reformation's process did.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    I kinda hope the new one will be an actual, ACTUAL "love thy neighbor" Christianity.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    The drunk bastard is turning the Pentagon into a church and the US military will become the Christian version of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 7 months ago

    Favoring one religion over another is a clear violation of the First Amendment.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 7 months ago

    If only we had a "liberal media", they would be quite busy asking more questions about the Seven Mountain Mandate and scum of the Earth like Drinky Pete.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Mountain_Mandate

    Not one of these assholes believes in the Constitution nor what America is supposed to stand for. And no, this place was not founded as Jesusland.

  • source
  • [–] 60 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    And us Atheists who point out that all the various Gods are fucking fanfic have to shut up and take it

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    I mean, take what?

    That the exclusive nature of any base doing anything religious is smaller this time than it normally is?

    Like, I'm a vet, I'm an atheist...

    I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.

    If it was slightly more inclusive it wouldn't be news and no one would care about every still excluded.

    Which just means more people realize how fucked any religious association is, and that modern chaplains should be replaced with trained social workers.

    Overall Kegsworth overstepping early works like a vaccine

    Bro...

    If you think he's bad, do you have any idea what the Air Force has been like for decades?

    Here's an article from 20+ years ago illustrating it's a known problem we just won't fix:

    Professor KRISTEN LESLIE (Yale Divinity School): And she was scared and was not able to move, and so the other cadets in a way to cheer her on were trying to support her but yelling very evangelical, `Jesus will be with you. Jesus will save you,' and that struck us as odd as a way to motivate someone in an environment that is not intended to be a religious environment.

    BRADY: During a Protestant church service, Leslie says chaplains urged cadets to proselytize their bunk mates and warned that if they didn't turn their lives over to Jesus...

    Prof. LESLIE: ...they would burn in the fires of hell.

    https://www.npr.org/2005/06/02/4676698/air-force-academy-embroiled-in-religious-controversy

    You know who runs the Air Force Academy board now?

    Erika fucking Kirk.

    They religious far right have been grooming incoming officers for decades and now they're 20-30 year high ranking officers.

    ...

    And you're mad that the annual Christian celebration just now cut off Catholics?

    All this does is make that demo realize they're on our side whether they like us or not

    Edit to add:

    Like, this the "second wave KKK" type shit that's been around a century already, but these movements always get less inclusive:

    The Ku Klux Klan that surfaced in the 1920s formed the second wave of Klan activity in the United States. Unlike the first emergence of the Ku Klux Klan, formed in the South in 1868 and mainly concerned with keeping black people from exercising their new freedoms, the second wave of the Ku Klux Klan focused their efforts on a wider range of issues. This new wave portrayed themselves as a race-protecting group that “espoused a virulent form of racism, anti-Semitism, anti-Catholicism, and anti-immigrant sentiment.”1 Secondly, they saw themselves as “moral, law-abiding citizens dedicated to political and civil reform, civic improvement, and the defense of traditional American values.”

    https://depts.washington.edu/civilr/kkk_i49.htm

    They've been focusing on all the military academies for generations now. They prosetlyze like crazy even tho it's against regs, and prey on people during training when they're most suceptible.

    And just a week ago Kegsworth forbid Chaplins from displaying rank, and intead show an icon of their faith. While at the same time shrinking the number of options from 200 to 31...

    I'm not saying don't be pissed, I'm saying be pissed at the shit that matters, not the shit that gains us reluctant allies

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 7 months ago

    Was there not an entire deal during the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearings where the GOP was up in arms about the left being 'anti-Catholic' for questioning her beliefs about abortion and about queer rights? And now they're doing this?

    I'm not surprised by the hypocrisy, I just feel like it merits pointing out.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Where are your MAGA friends now, Opus Dei?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago
    [–] 13 points 7 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago

    They need to randomly breathalyzer him. If he's found to have any alcohol in his system, it a felony. The second in command of our military services is a raging alcoholic. I live with one a couple years ago. You can not trust them with you Pets let alone Military lives. If you have family or friends in the military I would tell them to demand Sneaky Pete isn't blacked out drank when sending troops and Iranians to their deaths. Freaking crazy. Drug Test Pete! He's obviously drunk every time on TV but no one is calling it out.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago

    I hope that everyone refuses to serve in Hegseth's Army. He wouldn't put his life on the line for the troops, even if they happened to be Protestant.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Fuck Heslgsetu with a hot poker and all, but this is not as bad as it sounds.

    It's just saying there's only 1 Christian service for Good Friday, and it's Protestant. The reason for that is probably because Catholic Mass is less inclusive than Protestant. For instance: you have to been through Catholic Confirmation to take part in Communion in a Catholic Mass, whereas Protestant churches typically have open communion allowing anyone - including Catholics - to take part.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    This just flat out isn't true. I've not been through confirmation and I've been to Catholic masses. When it's time to receive eucharist you just join the line, but cross your arms over your chest. The priest gives you a blessing instead. That's the only difference if you're not confirmed.

    Maybe some Catholic churches operate the way you say, but it's absolutely not required. How would people even go through the process of joining the church if they have to go through confirmation just to show up?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    You just specifically described how they aren't allowed to take part in the Eucharist. Most Protestant services have an open table, where anybody can take part in the sacrament.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    Yes, but the eucharist is a tiny part of a service, and you still participate, you just get a blessing instead. Suggesting that somehow counts as excluding people would be stretching the word to breaking point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    If you're setting up a joint service for the holiday, which do you pick? The one that has restrictions limiting the participation of most people, or the one that allows anyone to participate fully?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    And probably not even the less-bad kind of Protestants. More like the pro-slavery drive-through-church snake-juggling glossolalists.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 7 months ago

    The Holy American Empire is becoming a reality

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Hmmm. Where's my colander...

  • source
  • [+] -22 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    Anti-theists are stuck in the classic bigot's dilemma.

    On the one hand, they hate the administration. On the other, they love religious discrimination.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • 1 comment in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    The Pentagon has invited more than 3,500 employees to attend a Good Friday service at its in-house chapel. Except it’s only for Protestants, not Catholics.

    About 25,000 employees work at the Pentagon on any given day. So, it's pretty obvious that not everyone was invited. The article gives no information on how employees were chosen, which is concerning. It could be officers only?

    “Just a friendly reminder: There will be a Protestant Service (No Catholic Mass) for Good Friday today at the Pentagon Chapel,” reads a Friday email sent by Air Force leadership, a copy of which was shared by an employee.

    This states that the service will not include Catholic Mass. This seems pretty standard for a non-denominational observance of Good Friday. (Though, knowing Kegseth, it will probably be an evangelical service.)

    The Pentagon Memorial Chapel is a 24-hour interfaith chapel that employees can use for prayer and reflection, and that is used for religious services.

    The Pentagon Memorial Chapel only seats 80 people. SO WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE OTHER 3,420 PEOPLE GONNA SIT?!

    All in all, some pretty shitty reporting on the part of Huff Post. Lots of unanswered questions here.

  • source