Atheist Soldier Sues Military for Discrimination

Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein at 5:01 AM on September 19, 2007.

Lindsay Beyerstein: Spec. Hall's superiors prevented him from holding a meeting for atheists and other non-Christians.

Post Tools
EMAIL
PRINT
18 COMMENTS

cross

Share and save this post:

AlterNet Social Networks:

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

PEEK RSS Feed

Main AlterNet RSS Feed

This post, written by Lindsay Beyerstein, originally appeared Majikthise

Kudos to Spec. Jeremy Hall of the 97th Military Police Battalion for standing up for his rights as an infidel:

FORT RILEY, Kan. - A soldier whose superior prevented him from holding a meeting for atheists and other non-Christians is suing the Defense Department, claiming it violated his right to religious freedom.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan., alleges a pattern of practices that discriminate against non-Christians in the military. It was filed Monday to coincide with the 220th anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution. [AP]

Hall's lawsuit alleges that he got permission to distribute fliers on his base in Iraq advertising a meeting for atheists and other non-Christians, that an officer prevented him from holding the meeting and threatened to file charges against him.

It's ironic... Some believers love to claim, disparagingly, that atheism is just another kind of religion. Yet, I wonder how many of them are also prepared to treat atheism and free thought as equivalent to religions in the full legal sense.

Tagged as: religion, atheism, us military

Lindsay Beyerstein a New York writer blogging at Majikthise.

Return to PEEK » Post Tools: EMAIL PRINT 18 COMMENTS PERMALINK

Also in PEEK
After Casting Sole No Vote on Slavery Memorial, Rep. King Keeps Digging Deeper This is one contorted excuse. Post by Steve Benen. July 9, 2009.	Airing of Grievances: Right-Winger Incensed over 'Commie's' Jab at 'Saturday Night Fever' Oh, and Pinochet was a good guy, damnit! Post by Roy Edroso. July 9, 2009.	Panetta: CIA Lied to Congress Note to Obama: The object of oversight is to keep covert activities within a legal framework and protect people's rights. Post by Booman. July 9, 2009.

Comments	Turn comments off sitewide	Give us feedback »
Comments closed. The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.		View:
OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. [Report this comment] Posted by: Axiom69 on Sep 19, 2007 7:09 AM Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Hall's lawsuit alleges that he got permission to distribute fliers on his base in Iraq advertising a meeting for atheists and other non-Christians, that an officer prevented him from holding the meeting and threatened to file charges against him. Is that it? That's all we're going to be told about this story? Where's the rest of the info? Ok. Everyone start leaving the comments about the evil military and the intolerant Christians. Lets not ask any questions before jumping on the band wagon. Lets not ask why the meeting was not allowed. Lets assume it was because he was an atheist and not because groups of soldiers in "meetings" draw enemy mortars and rockets. Lets assume that the officer was gonna bring him up on charges for being an atheist and not for possibly disobeying an order when told he couldn't gather a group of soldiers together in one spot. This soldier may have legitimate gripes and his lawsuit may be 100% justified but we can't learn that from this article. Don't bash me for defending the military because I'm not. I'm just tired of these half-stories that leave too much out too form a decent opinion on. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: mike_burns » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: Axiom69 » RE: Left one thing out. Posted by: Axiom69 » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: JAVA » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: drmflorida » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: somegirl » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: LouisFallert » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: somegirl » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: Axiom69 » RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: edge We are a bunch of [Report this comment] Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 7:12 AM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] Religious based Jihadists. After all, that is what the neocon ideology is all about. If you're not a Christian you can't belong to the Ideology. You become a threat to the cause. I have to laugh at the news when they demonize islamic mudrassas, (Muslim Schools don't sound scary enough), on the radio, and I am driving by a Southern Baptist High School. If you give up Chistianity, you can't qualify to be a government sposered terrorist. You must believe in God, and God is on your side when you murder babies. If you didn't have God on your side, you would be forced to have a conscience. That would be counter productive. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] I am afraid I have to agree. [Report this comment] Posted by: Bart Thesc on Sep 19, 2007 8:16 AM Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] As an agnostic I would be outraged if the soldier was prevented from his practice of his version of religion. And we have heard that Christianity has caused problems at the Air Force Academy. Unfortunately, the content of this story is very incomplete and there is no way to judge what the real story is from the sparse facts presented. Alternet needs to do a better job of screening stories and not just plastering up anything that fits the agenda. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] I know Jeremy! [Report this comment] Posted by: Dolly Dagger on Sep 19, 2007 9:09 AM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] I know Jeremy and he's a stellar person, a credit to the U.S. Army and the United States. I'm awed by his bravery and proud to be his friend. Please watch this story and support him in every way you can. At the moment he has applied to become a Warrant Officer and a helicopter pilot. Let's do what we can to make sure this opportunity isn't taken away from him because he has the courage of his convictions. The Major in question actually came to the meeting that Jeremy had pre-approved! Intitially he pretended to be someone who was interested in attending. After a few minutes he flew into a rage and issued his threats, including that he would prevent Jeremy from re-enlisting. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] » RE: I know Jeremy! Posted by: Axiom69 Nothing New [Report this comment] Posted by: edraven on Sep 19, 2007 9:24 AM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] When I was in basic training at Ft. Jackson, I was forced to go to church. Even though I'm not superstitious, I had nothing else to do, so I thought it might kill some time. I found out that southern christian churches had the best songs. Great music - - harmonies. I really loved the music. I also found that there was, and is, a big christian subculture in the military. That's sad. Fighting wars (killing people) should not be supported by any group that believes in the ten commandments. Or, has a rational thought. Ed Graham [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] Career military atheist [Report this comment] Posted by: Doubtom on Sep 20, 2007 1:20 AM Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] As a 30 year retired military person I can attest to the long history of persecution of the atheist in the military. We weren't even allowed to indicate our "preference" on our dog tags. We were required to put something religious, so I have three sets of dog tags that say I'm a Moslem, a Mohamedan which at the time was a joke but they accepted it. The military also use to force church attendance. They've evolved a bit since then but there's still a very real prejudice against the non-believer. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5] Worst "Article" - Ever [Report this comment] Posted by: monkopotamus on Sep 22, 2007 7:05 AM Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent] This "article" is of no value whatsoever. It is barely newsworthy and surrounds the tidbit of real news in a mean way. The "writer" sandwiches the newsblurb with sarcastic kudos, then puts together one coherent sentence, and closes with a breath-takingly ignorant dare while claiming false irony. How embarrassing for all: "writer", publisher, and readers. Does AlterNet screen articles? At least for being an actual article? -- This one slipped through by mistake. [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

«	July 2009					»
Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: mike_burns

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: Axiom69

» RE: Left one thing out. Posted by: Axiom69

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: JAVA

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: drmflorida

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: somegirl

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: LouisFallert

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: somegirl

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: Axiom69

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: edge

» RE: I know Jeremy! Posted by: Axiom69

Newsletter

PEEK archive by date:

Use » and « to view other months.

Search:

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: mike_burns

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: Axiom69

» RE: Left one thing out. Posted by: Axiom69

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: JAVA

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: drmflorida

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: somegirl

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: LouisFallert

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: somegirl

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: Axiom69

» RE: OK let's all get outraged because the author thinks we should be. Posted by: edge

» RE: I know Jeremy! Posted by: Axiom69