It must be. After all, Sally Quinn, wife of former legendary editor of the Washington Post Ben Bradlee and author of the "On Faith" part of the paper, wrote that U.S. military should put religious freedom at the front.
There are others here for whom tracking the Dominionists in America, including what they are doing in the military, is their main focus. Thus you could - and should - have read Death by Dominion by Frederick Clarkson, who is an acknowledged expert on the topic. When I pointed out the Quinn piece to him, he encouraged me to write about it.
What I offer is placing the authorship in context. Sally Quinn is as representative of "The Village" - the conventional wisdom of the permanent pundit class of Washington - as is anyone.
The occasion for this piece is a conversation Quinn had with three men - former chief of staff to Colin Powell Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, and head of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation Mikey Weinstein (who has been attempting to get people to address this issue for a number of years).
Wilkerson pointed out that proselytizing and sexual assault both undermine the bonds necessary for a functioning military. Allow me to quote what Quinn writes next:
The chaplain’s role, according to Wilson, “is to minister to spiritual needs. You don’t proselytize. It’s a workplace violation.”
Weinstein told me after the Pentagon meeting that military leaders need to understand that “there is systematic misogyny, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in the military.” He said it is all part of the same culture.
“This is a national security threat. What is happening [aside from sexual assault] is spiritual rape. And what the Pentagon needs to understand is that it is sedition and treason. It should be punished.”
spiritual rape - an interesting turn of phrase in a nation with both a ban on establishment of religion and a guarantee of free exercise - the latter to include the right to have no religion.
Quinn notes that
The proselytizing they referred to is primarily from “dominionist” or fundamentalist evangelical Christians.
The problem may be especially severe in some of the special ops units, and it might be worth noting in connection with that assessment several known facts:
1. William Boykin, now executive Vice-President of the Family Research Council, had a long connection with Special Ops. He was well-known for espousing - even imposing - his particular interpretation of Christianity upon others, first coming to the attention of the general public when William Arkin provided both a tape and remarks about Boykin, speaking about hunting down a leader in Mogadishu. As quoted in the Wikipedia article on Boykin,
"He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, 'They'll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me.' Well, you know what? I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol."
Boykin was not removed from his high position in the George W. Bush administration, and the public remarks released on his behalf had had some further inflammatory language removed.
2. We have seen an increasing number of people who serve in special ops taking their training and going to work for private security contractors at large amounts of money. It is not just American special ops people, but for now we can focus on that.
3. Erik Prince, whose sister is Betsy DeVos, and who established Blackwater which became Xe, dropped out the Naval Academy, completed his undergraduate education at Hillsdale College, very much a center of conservative Christianity, and then became a Navy Seal, all before establishing Blackwater.
Quinn's piece lists a number of offensive things related to this topic. Those of us who pay close attention saw nothing new in the list she provided, but putting them all together potentially raises the issue in a powerful way to others. Let me just quote two of her bullet points:
● So called “Jesus rifles,” with gun sights inscribed with Bible quotations, were used in battle by troops. The MRFF fought successfully to have the New Testament passages removed.
and
● A chaplain in Afghanistan recently was the target of complaint for sermonizing to troops, including Afghan soldiers, that they had approximately 2,000 days to live and needed to “get right with Jesus.”
Quinn's piece is heavily reliant upon the words of Weinstein. You can read how he recounts numerous efforts at attempting to get things fixed, commitments in theory made, but which, according to Weinstein, have not been backed up, which is why he thinks there is a need for courts-martial to hold at least some people to account.
This leads to the most pointed paragraph in the piece:
What must stop is the concept that America needs to conquer the world for Christ. An example that Weinstein gave: The Officers Christian Fellowship, in a posting on the Naval Academy’s Web site, promoted the idea of Christian officers exercising biblical leadership to raise up godly military ambassadors for Christ in uniform empowered by the Holy Spirit. “They are trying to create a spiritually transformed U.S. military,” said Weinstein.
That Weinstein is Jewish should play no part in assessing the legitimacy of his complaints. Those with no religion, those who are Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, are all similarly not only disadvantaged - it is becoming clear that for some in the chain of command there is a religious test for promotions and assignments. It applies equally to those who may well consider themselves Christian but do not accept this particular interpretation, one which is clearly associated with the Dominionism about which Frederick Clarkson wrote.
There is no doubt that some Dominionists are attempting to take over America and turn into an instrument of their desire for a dominionist theocracy. Remember the big event attempting to anoint Rick Perry as their champion?
There are multiple dangers in allowing such patterns to continue unchecked within the military. It is not hard to imagine multiple tragedies that could flow from such a scenario.
It has not happened yet.
But remember that phrase spiritual rape can be applied not only to the consciences of individual service personnel subjected to this, but also to the institution of a US military that is supposed to represent all Americans, and also to American society as a whole, in its politics, its business, its culture.
Quinn says that Hagel told the group meeting with him that they would always have a friend in the Secretary of Defense. She responds with her final two words:
Prove it.
No one in the military should be allowed to use religion as an instrument to control subordinate personnel.
No one in the military should be proselytizing.
No one in the military should be denigrating the religious faith of others.
No one in the military should be treating those who choose no faith as less than their equals.
For a number of years, the Supreme Court used a three-part test established in Lemon v Kurtzman to judge whether government involvement with religion was legitimate under the Constitution. While Justice O'Connor later tweaked the test some, the original three broad principles are easy to grasp.
Is the government's purpose purely secular?
Does the government's action neither favor nor disfavor religion?
Does the government's action avoid excessive entanglement with religion?
If the answer to any of those questions is no, the government's action is unconstitutional.
A person in a military capacity is the government. Proselytizing is a clear violation of the Lemon test, and certainly contrary to the good order and cohesiveness among troops of diverse and no religious beliefs.
We can start with that.
It is no different than a person who finds her religion in conflict with her oath of office under the Constitution. In such a case, if not willing to abide by the Constitution, she should leave her position.
I do not know how all this will play out.
I usually do not pay attention to what Sally Quinn writes.
Yesterday I did, and that led to my writing this piece.
Perhaps given her place in "the village" of Washington elite opinion, this issue will now finally be addressed?
If not, then are we not watching our democracy be taken away in yet another fashion?