Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Rights and Liberties

Birth of the Christian Soldier: How Evangelicals Infiltrated the American Military

By Michael L. Weinstein and David Seay, Thomas Dunne Books. Posted April 21, 2007.


It took decades for evangelicals to infiltrate the military, but eventually fundamentalist theology adapted as its entry points the culture of authority, duty, and sacrifice in the armed forces.
0312361432.01.sclzzzzzzz
sdf
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The following is an excerpt from With God On Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military by Michael L. Weinstein and Davin Seay (Thomas Dunne, 2007).

Despite the church-state scandals that have plagued the US military in recent years, religious practice in the armed forces is hardly a new phenomenon. In the 1846 Mexican War, Roman Catholics were incorporated into the hitherto all-Protestant chaplaincy for the first time, as much to blunt implications of a sectarian war with Catholic Mexico as for any effort to address the actual religious demographics of the fighting force.

In 1862, President Lincoln, at the request of the Board of Delegates of American Israelites, struck the word Christian from all regulations relating to the chaplaincy appointments, and during World War II, Greek Orthodox chaplains were allowed to minister to their flock in uniform for the first time. The Buddhist Churches of America were registered as an official endorsing agency for the first time in 1987, and six years later the Army saw its first Muslim chaplain.

These earnest attempts at pluralism were often contrasted with unsanctioned attempts to bring sanctity to the armed forces, from the revivalist fervor that swept both Union and Confederate camps during the Civil War, to various hectoring attempts to stiffen the moral fiber of troops during and immediately after World War II. GIs were returning from combat, according to a 1946 report from the Veterans of Foreign Wars, "physical, mental, moral and social wrecks, having been infected with venereal disease" and "coddled by a complacent service attitude which encourages promiscuity."

The situation was subsequently exacerbated at the dawn of the Cold War when, in 1945, President Truman proposed a one-year program of universal military training for all males over eighteen, a move vigorously resisted by evangelical churches. "We began to wonder what might happen to our youth removed from home and church influences," fretted the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), "and subjected to the temptations for which military training camps are notorious."

The proliferating paranoia of the Red Scare, however, radically altered such attitudes by the early fifties, when the world, according to literature distributed by the Nazarene Service Men's Commission, was neatly divided between "the Communist dictatorships and the Christian democracies." The Nazarenes concluded, "The stricken nations are looking to the free world ... we are our 'brother's keeper.'"

Aside from being a bulwark against godless communism, the military was perceived as a target-rich environment for missionary outreach. In 1959, the NAE asserted, "Fifty percent of all who pass through the military service have no religious background or church connection." The implication was clear. "This is the ripe harvest field in which our chaplains are working."

They weren't the only ones intent on reaping the souls of unsuspecting soldiers. Early in the decade, mainline Protestant denominations aggressively promoted annual "preaching missions" on U.S. military bases, and in 1952, the year the campaign was initiated, nearly a hundred weeklong events were launched around the theme "Christ Is the Answer."

Competition between liberal Protestantism and fundamentalist evangelicals for influence within the military was fierce, focused primarily on inserting as many chaplains as possible into all available postings. A battle quickly shaped up between the rival commissioning arms of various denominations, with the evangelicals fighting on two fronts against both mainline Protestants and Catholics. "Evangelicals must not fail the proportionately large number of men in the armed forces who are anxious that the New Testament gospel be preached," warned the NAE. "... Real evangelistic work must be carried on by our chaplains."

Evangelicals were also at the forefront of what author Anne C. Loveland in her pioneering study, American Evangelicals and the U.S. Military, 1942-1993, calls "an unprecedented religious and moral welfare program" instituted by the Truman administration, largely in response to a widespread outcry against drunkenness and immorality among Korean War conscripts. Dubbed Character Guidance, the program was in force throughout the fifties, and while ostensibly nonsectarian, the curriculum reveals a rigorous religious agenda, bristling with exhortations that "service to the nation is most effective only when religion becomes part of individual life," and that in the "covenant nation" of America, "public institutions and official thinking reflect a faith in the existence and importance of divine providence," with God as "the final source of authority."

The most effective wedge for the insertion of evangelicals into every rung of military life was the NAE and its influential chaplain-endorsing agency, the Commission on Chaplains, which worked tirelessly as a liaison for a wide array of fundamentalist denominations, from the Assemblies of God to the Southern Baptist Convention to the full index of offshoot and splinter congregations. Notwithstanding the military's policy of allotting chaplaincies on a quota system designed to roughly reflect the religious affiliations of society as a whole, by the late '60s evangelical denominations were regularly exceeding their allotments.

The phenomenon mirrored, in part, the explosive growth of fundamentalist Christianity in America and, in part, the assiduous efforts of the NAE and its Commission on Chaplains to fill posts left empty by the Catholics, Jews, Orthodox, and others who were regularly failing to meet their allocations. In what Loveland terms a "quota juggling act," the NAE and others aggressively lobbied to fill chaplaincies left vacant by other denominations, resulting in a marked shift in the selection process weighted more and more to religious demographics within the military itself, where evangelical numbers continued to swell. This consolidation of power would result, by the late eighties, in the NAE Chaplains Commission's acting as the endorsing agent not only for established denominations but for hundreds of nonaligned individual churches.

By the mid sixties nearly all the forty evangelical denominations listed by the Armed Forces Chaplains Board had met or exceeded their assigned postings. This influx of evangelizing chaplains would have an extraordinary effect on the spiritual tenor of the armed forces, especially in the wake of such mandatory programs as Character Guidance, which had imbued chaplains with hitherto unimagined authority. Loveland cites a glowing article in a 1952 issue of Chaplain, the official publication of the Navy Chaplaincy, that focuses on religious instruction at the Great Lakes Naval Training Center, where recruits regularly attended lectures designed to "reinforce the moral and spiritual strength of Navy men during the most impressionable period of their Naval career."

The "thorough, dynamic program of evangelism," concluded the story, presented "a vital religion that may never have been available to them in civilian life." "Faith," another article in Chaplain asserted, "is an integral part of being a good solider," and it was to that end that chaplains were provided extensive contact and increased influence at every level of the military hierarchy.

Career considerations were another contributing factor to the flood of evangelicals into the chaplaincy. "Pastors are taking a new look at their military counterparts," wrote one observer, "and a significant number are leaving their civilian pastorate for service as a chaplain." The subsequent rush by pastors into the armed forces was hardly surprising, considering the steady paycheck, generous benefits, and comfortable pensions provided by the government.

But it wasn't only individuals who were taking a "new look" at the military mission field. Evangelical church support organizations began to bring their considerable proselytizing prowess to bear on the armed services, spearheaded by such entrenched outreaches as the Colorado Springs-based Navigators, the Officer's Christian Fellowship, the Overseas Christian Servicemen's Centers, the Christian Military Fellowship, Campus Crusade for Christ, and the Full Gospel Businessmen.

As the most established among them, the Navigators had, by the mid eighties, a staff of over seventy dedicated solely to missionary work within the military, operating active chapters in and around far-flung bases from Turkey to West Germany to Spain. In the literature of their Military Ministry branch, the Navigators singled out the Air Force Academy for special attention with an ominous-sounding (if syntactically muddled) goal to "impact eternity by multiplying disciples through spiritual generations."

It was inevitable, considering the concerted effort by evangelicals to penetrate every echelon of the service, from the lowliest barracks to the loftiest policy-making aerie, that there would eventually emerge a cadre of Christian officers emboldened to openly profess their faith and use the full influence of their rank to bolster the cause.

Among them were such high-profile figures as Army general William Harrison, dubbed the Two Star Evangelist by the press in recognition of his status as one of the nation's first bona fide born-again celebrities. While he worked at the Pentagon in the early 1950s, Harrison's exhortations could regularly be heard on the Word of Life radio program, sponsored by the Officer's Christian Union, an organization he would later head. Steadfastly promoting an end-time doctrine, Harrison, while still in uniform, declared, "The second advent of Christ will include great wars with terrible suffering," a leading indicator that "the course of civilization is toward self-destruction." It was, to say the least, a peculiar conviction from a man sworn to uphold the peace and preserve civilization.

Another front-and-center fundamentalist was John C. Broger, whose more than two decades at the helm of Armed Forces Information and education (AFIE) from 1961 to 1984 provided him, according to Anne Loveland, "a central role in the ideological indoctrination of armed forces personnel." A former radio evangelist, Broger was hired by the Defense Department at the height of the Cold War to provide what his mentor, Admiral Arthur Radford, called "Spiritual stiffening" of the troops in their battle against atheistic communism. Broger's view of that battle was quickly made clear: it was a fight that could not be won on the basis of "military manpower and production potential" alone.

What was needed was "godly precepts and principles," and "strength and inspiration in godly righteousness." To that end he created the Militant Liberty program, consisting of what some observers at the time dismissed as "pseudo-scientific jargon and high-sounding clichés." It was nevertheless relentlessly promoted by the Defense Department, with Broger delivering briefings on its provocative precepts to war colleges and service schools around the country. The eventual refusal of the Pentagon to fully implement Militant Liberty hardly slowed the peripatetic evangelist's military career track: he was subsequently appointed director of AFIE, from which perch he delivered such pronouncements as "If the government is to be ordained of God, then spiritual and moral concepts must under-gird and relate to all political, economic, educational and cultural areas of national life."

Yet of all the emergent Christian cold warriors in the years before and during the Vietnam War, none wielded more influence and authority than Army general Harold Johnson. A survivor of the Bataan Death March and a Korean War combat veteran, Johnson was appointed Army chief of staff in 1964, four years after he had declared in an interview for the American Tract Society that "Christianity is the very foundation of military leadership." The four-star general would regularly deliver addresses with titles such as "Turn to God," proclaiming, "There is a special need for the soldier to understand the strength and purpose that can be provided by a deep and abiding faith in our Father through His son, Jesus." Only Christ, according to Johnson, could provide "the inner strength that is essential to meet the wide variety of conditions encountered in the environment of the warrior."

Johnson, in fact, considered the "environment of the warrior" to be his unique purview, as witnessed by his efforts to protect and preserve the explicitly Christian content of the Character Guidance program, in place since the end of World War II. In 1962, the American Civil Liberties Union had first lodged a complaint about the "religious indoctrination" inherent in the curriculum and succeeded in removing some of its more egregious First Amendment violations, such as the "One Nation Under God" lesson plan, with its stated objective of "leading the individual to a recognition of the importance of the spiritual element in his training."

Six years later, under Johnson's watch, Character Guidance once again came under attack from the ACLU, and the Army chief of staff took personal charge of the Pentagon's response. According to historian Anne Loveland, Johnson "saw nothing wrong with using the Bible in support of the program," and, more significantly, took a staunch stand in opposition to many mainline denominations, united in their criticism of the program's coercive character. Suffice it to say, Johnson at the same time aligned himself resolutely with the evangelical political forces, still smarting from recent Supreme Court decisions banning school prayer and for whom the attack on Character Guidance was another attempt to excise God from every social sphere.

The cumulative effect of men like Harrison, Broger, and Johnson on the prevailing military mind-set was ultimately to move evangelicals from the fringes of America's fighting forces squarely into the councils of power. Yet, for all their personal charisma and crusading zeal, it was implacable historical forces that best served to consolidate fundamentalist influence within the armed services. "It was Vietnam," remarks Anne Loveland, "which really turned the tide.

As the war progressed, more and more mainline denominations spoke out against it and, in fact, became centers of organized resistance. That never really happened with evangelicals." Perhaps largely due to their stark view of human events as a titanic struggle between the forces of good and evil, evangelicals often subscribed to official rationales of the war as a necessary stand against the domino-tipping strategies of a godless opponent.

Fundamentalist John Rice, editor of the fire-breathing Sword of the Lord, neatly summed up the bellicose attitude when he wrote that, in Vietnam, America was "carrying out the command of God." The sentiment was echoed by preacher Carl McIntire, who thundered, "It is the message of the infallible Bible that gives men the right to participate in such conflicts, and to do it with the realization that God is for them, that God will help them, and that if they believe in the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, and die in the field of battle, they will be received into the highest heaven."

As the war continued to grind away at American conscience and consensus and the military increasingly became the object of the swelling antiwar movement's fury, a siege mentality took hold. In the us-against-them polarization that was splitting the nation, the armed services looked within itself to single out and promote those who would wholeheartedly support the savagely decisive conflict, and none were more vociferously vocal in their allegiance than the evangelicals, who had spent much of the last two decades securing positions within the ranks. "Should a follower of Jesus participate at all in the messy military business of killing people?" asked evangelical author Randolph Klassen. "Would Jesus? Would Christ carry a draft card? I am convinced He would. Does He want me to carry one? Of this I have no doubt."

But there was more at play than simple knee-jerk jingoism or even evangelical opportunism. Setting aside for a moment the fatalistic complexities of premillennial theology -- in which Christ's return is delayed until man's cup of iniquity is filled to overflowing, and the death and destruction of war becomes a precursor to paradise -- the interface of the military's historical identity and fundamentalist Christian rhetoric reaches much deeper.

The Bible, of course, is rife with martial imagery, from the scorched-earth conquest of Canaan, to David's stalwart stand against Goliath, to Paul's familiar Ephesians metaphors for the well-equipped Christian: "the breastplate of righteousness," "the shield of faith," "the helmet of salvation," and "the sword of the Spirit."

Together they comprised "the whole armor of God," in which believers would sally forth to do battle against "the rulers of darkness of this world and against spiritual wickedness in high places." The Church Militant has been one of Christianity's most resonant and effective self-conceptions, from the time of the Crusades to the military orders of the Salvation Army, and of course, the Christian Soldier in the durable old hymn, forever marching as to war, the cross of Jesus going before, their royal master leading against the foe. With the possible exception of athletic similes, it is the serried imagery of combat that is most often evoked from the pulpit, and while the warrior archetype may not answer to the often diffuse and inchoate longings that bring seekers to the foot of the cross, it seems especially well suited to the evangelical aesthetic of conquest and conversion.

Given this potent affinity, it's hardly surprising that fundamentalists found a familiar context for their exalted concepts of authority, duty, and sacrifice within the military and all but inevitable that the methods of war would be deployed in the Great Commission: to reach the whole world for Jesus in preparation for his promised return.

It is a convergence that would, in turn, reach its apotheosis in You the Warrior Leader, a gung ho handbook for "applying military strategy in victorious spiritual leadership," published at the same time Weinstein was beginning to gird himself for a different kind of battle. Written by former Green Beret and current Southern Baptist Convention president Bobby Welch, You the Warrior Leader is as unequivocal a statement of evangelical militarism as could be imagined, an unabashed tactical manual on storming the barricades of unbelief with rousing rhetoric that evokes a kind of holy bloodlust for the trophies of triumphalism.

"Fix bayonets" commands the first chapter, broken into subheads variously titled "Scratching, Biting, Ear-Ripping-Off War Fighting," "Jesus the Warrior Leader," and "Making Hell Gun-Shy." In "The Quick and the Dead," a section dealing with battle-hardened evangelism, Welch seamlessly melds the urgency of conversion with a military leader's motivational role: "The Warrior Leader knows he must not only exemplify personal evangelism, he must never stop trying to get every Christian man, woman, boy, and girl to perform evangelism. Leaders must not allow those whom they lead to become disoriented and thereby fail to rescue family and friends from the devil and hell."

In the chapter "Attack! Attack! Attack!" Welch asks, "Remember the Warrior Leader's Mission-Vision?" as he hammers home with steely-eyed determination his grand strategy for winning souls: "To develop victorious spiritual-war fighters who form a force-multiplying army that accomplishes the Great Commission."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: evangelicals, military

Michael L. Weinstein and Davin Seay are the authors of With God On Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military (Thomas Dunne, 2007).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

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:
Separation of Church and State
Posted by: Lector on Apr 21, 2007 12:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Certain Christians believe that in the right circumstances Jesus Christ would kill and that the infallible Bible gives men the right to create and participate in any project that furthers their power-grasping agenda.

Christian Embassy is in the thick of it. Here we see where the Christian Embassy has invaded the White House.

Robert Lightfoot

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Separation of Church and State Posted by: Bruce Wilson
Something smells.
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 21, 2007 3:50 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
During my 10 years in the United States Air Force (1956 to 1966), I never saw any evangelical influence being exerted on officers and airmen. The chaplains I met during that time were either Jews, Protestants or Catholics and they seemed like everyone else in the military -- patriotic Americans.

The tone of this article makes me suspicious. I sense a hidden atheistic agenda.

Hugh E. Scott, editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption. AlterNet readers who object to my NON-PROFIT campaign to expose President Bush as a lying crook can email me through the website rather than comment here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The article says Vietnam was the turning point Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» RE: Something smells. Posted by: Bruce Wilson
» WTF is an "atheistic agenda"? Posted by: justaguy
» RE: Something smells. Posted by: rhinojos
» RE: Something smells. Posted by: zorro
Bringing Black and White Together
Posted by: The Western Confucian on Apr 21, 2007 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It used to be said the Sunday was the most segregated day of the week in America. That is no longer true, at least in the military.

The Evangelical, and more importantly Pentecostal, style of worship is considered one of the most important facts that it is serviceman and -women, not progressives, who report the higest rate of interracial friendships in the US.

It will be remebred that Pentecostalism began as an interracial movement led by Blacks a century ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All that's missing--
Posted by: VannaLaRoche on Apr 21, 2007 6:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
--is "Kill! Kill! Kill!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: All that's missing-- Posted by: robmikejas
What are you talking about?
Posted by: White middleclass male on Apr 21, 2007 7:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most soldiers I know do not attend services often, (I never attend) and just want a blow job and a beer when we get back.

Oh and church groups: If you want to send care packages please know that I can buy foot powder and toothpaste in the PX. Please send lesbain porn. That is harder to come by.

1LT L US Army Taji Iraq

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: no, he asked for Lesbain porn Posted by: eddie torres
» You live in a country where... Posted by: White middleclass male
» RE: What are you talking about? Posted by: Daniel Shays
Christianity and the military.....
Posted by: tap17x on Apr 21, 2007 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....go together perfectly. It's time to realize that Christianity is inherently a violent superstition. Christianity is also a practice containing elements of polytheism, cannibalism, and idol worship. It's time to get rid of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Much more dangerous: white supremacists in uniform
Posted by: eddie torres on Apr 21, 2007 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Evangelism is just another ideology. Its influence over government can be contained or moderated by the rule of law and the democratic process - if enough Americans wake up from their Prozac stupor.

White supremacists in uniform, however, are a more serious threat to US civilians. Their ties to organized criminal activity, especially in the US Pacific Northwest, will lead to a repeat of the Vietnam Vet violence of the 1970s. Armed bank robberies, PTSD massacres, weapons thefts from National Guard armories, mercenary shadow wars, and sexual violence.

And the US military, like the late 1970s, needs to worry more about the real threat of a drug-addled, anti-social or criminal "Paper Tiger" situation with weak recruitment and relaxed standards.

In 2006 VoteVets.org wrote John Warner, Donald Rumsfeld, and others and said: "We cannot overstate the corrosive effect ... lowered standards have on our military. They are hurting readiness, morale, and unit cohesion by allowing criminals and skinheads to permeate the ranks."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Christian or not, they're in for a big surprise if they've killed and think it's OK with God
Posted by: xbj on Apr 21, 2007 11:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A very big, very nasty and very unpleasant surprise.

Why does everyone coveniently forget that most Nazi soldiers thought they were fighting against "the worldwide Jewish conspiracy" to rid the world of the "Christ-killers"?

Today, it's "militant" Islam because they supposedly want to "remove us from the planet if we don't convert" when all they really want is for us to get out the HELL out of the Mideast and to take Israel and our created hell of endless war with us.

And that we'd be no different if we were in their shoes and the Chinese had bombed and invaded and DONE EXACTLY THE SAME TO US.

Why does everyone who supports the troops and supports this supposed war conveniently forget that?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nuff said Posted by: schokoprinz
» RE: Nuff said Posted by: xbj
The notion that the military is full of evangelicals is absolutely absurd
Posted by: Mojoe on Apr 21, 2007 11:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even to say that they "infiltrated" the military is ridiculous. Saying they "infiltrated" implies that their methods of entering the military were conspicuous. Last time I checked there were no laws prohibiting certain religious people from entering the military. There are not many "evangelicals" in the military. There really aren't even that many true Christians in the military. Many of the people in the military that identify as Christian are only Christian by birth and will not raise their children as christians. This article sucks, and when I read the book, I'll get back to you on it; something tells me it will suck.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Doubleplus Good
Posted by: apophenia_monkey on Apr 21, 2007 12:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, I know that everything in the world, including celebrity divorces and crop circles, are the result of a vast whatever-wing conspiracy, except that I also know that it's all caused by the Zionist Occupation Government, except that I know that it's all part of an Islamofascist cabal, except that I know that it's really a CIA conspiracy to keep us docile, except that I know it's Microsoft, McDonalds, and Exxon keeping their markets safe, except that I know that it's really the Communists after all. And, by the way, I've very nearly identified your brain frequency and will soon have you all back under government control.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Get your tin foil hat Ma. Posted by: Philip Newton
Tell me again about being pro-life
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Apr 21, 2007 2:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the hay? What happened to these bible pounding zealots and their pro-life, "it's a sin to kill" and so on act? Oops I forgot, Iraq is a Holy Crusade by Christian Armies against Muslim Infidels. Our extremists against their extremists So much for Christian Zealotry and their holier than though position on the preservation of life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Birth of the PeeCee religious freakazoid: How pro-minority chauvinists infiltrated academia
Posted by: mantra77 on Apr 21, 2007 4:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Political Correctness is a religion, i.e. a structured belief system based on faith. A religion need not have a god, although Political Correctness appears to have one. Its god is Hitler, an altogether evil god that is despised by its followers. In this respect Political Correctness is similar to the Aztec religions whose evil gods had to be appeased with constant human sacrifice. The evil god Hitler needs to be kept at bay with constant discrimination against whites.

The doctrine of Political Correctness measures everything against this god, the evil Adolf Hitler. In this religion, everything that Hitler believed in is evil, and everything that he opposed is good. This belief system condenses to two doctrines:

* Non-white minorities are to be worshipped in the morning
* The white majority is to be degraded in the evening

And is based on this one cardinal faith:

Whites are oppressors; therefore whites deserve discrimination and racism to redress the imbalance.

This faith is in turn sustained and legitimised by three anti-white racial theories:

1. The Unique History of White Evil theory
2. The Unearned White Skin-color Privilege theory
3. The White Majority Deference theory

The Unique History of White Evil Theory

This racial theory holds that “whites cannot evade history”. It is a racial theory because it justifies discrimination against a group based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone irrespective of actual participation or consent (in slavery, holocaust, etc.) and therefore denies innocence as a defense.

The Unearned White Skin-color Privilege Theory

This racial theory holds that “whites are privileged”. It is a racial theory because it justifies discrimination against individuals based on their (Euro-Christian) ancestry alone irrespective of actual status or financial condition and therefore denies innocence as a defense.

The White Majority Deference Theory

This racial theory holds that “majorities must serve minorities”. It is a racial theory because its discriminatory logic applies exclusively to whites. For example, suggesting the reverse, that white minorities in South Africa or Detroit should have not equal but superior rights is widely considered insane.

---

And to keep their evil god Adolf Hitler at bay these religious freakazoids believe they have to keep calling for more and more sacrifice: Sacrifice your borders! Sacrifice your free speech! Sacrifice your safe neighborhood! Sacrifice your children’s opportunities! Sacrifice your heritage! Sacrifice! Sacrifice! Sacrifice!

Why? Because The Evil God Adolf Hitler must be kept at bay! Sacrifice! Sacrifice! Lest he ARISE and BLOT OUT THE SUN!! and stomp cars with his feet! And gas Jews with his farts!! Sacrifice! Sacrifice!

And don’t you dare violate The Great Sacred Truth,

“If you go against your group interests while black you’re an uncle tom, if you do so while white you’re open-minded. Amen. If you express group interests while black you’re standing up for your people, if you do so while white you’re racist. Amen.”

-------
Bob's Riddle

All anti-white racists agree that it's ok for whites to become minorities in their own countries. All anti-white racists also agree that a Japanese person who wants to become a minority in his own country is either a traitor or clinically insane. Therefore, what is an anti-white racist? Answer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Bob's a racist. Robert Whitaker... Posted by: eddie torres
Christians?
Posted by: Gisele on Apr 21, 2007 4:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Early in the decade, mainline Protestant denominations aggressively promoted annual "preaching missions" on U.S. military bases, and in 1952, the year the campaign was initiated, nearly a hundred weeklong events were launched around the theme "Christ Is the Answer."

If the Christian Coalition aka Christian Right really believed what they said above, "infiltrating" the armed forces wouldn't be an issue...or have they decided that Christ would kill to prove a point?

It's time for members of the Protestant groups to come forward and explain why they now claim that Martin Luther "made a mistake" when he ceded from the Catholic church, why have they decided to patch it up with Mother church? The same with Methodists...now Orthodox Christianity is in the process of toppling to Catholicism, and Muslims have been approached.

What does this have to do with the article? Christianists have determined to climb into bed with politics in a permanent way, this is only the beginning of the spiral toward one world religion and one world government. The Inquisition will be looked upon as a walk in the park, sadly...America will enforce what Rome dictates.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those that believe vs those that don't believe.
Posted by: Melvin on Apr 21, 2007 8:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A couple of years ago Billy Graham appeared on TV with GW Bush at a 'graduation" of some military academy . They referred to the graduated as the "SOLDIERS OF CHRIST". So much for separation of church & state.
In my 60 years on this earth I have never felt the infiltration & intrusion of religion as much as I do now. Sad to say I must agree with an older statement that the next big struggle on this earth will be between those that believe & those that don't believe. Religious organizations,particularly the evangelists, seem to be driving a wedge between us with the the tired GW Bush cliche; You are with us or against us!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yawn
Posted by: Philip Newton on Apr 21, 2007 10:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You think it's a repeat article, but it's not -- just another paranoid rant, devoid of facts (just like the last one, or two, or three, ad nauseum).

I can't believe you people get paid to produce this mindless drech. Instead of printing unsupported broadsides against people of faith, why don't you focus on what progressives (Christian or not -- yes, we have INFILTRATED the movement!) might have in common?

That would be different.

Peace.

Phil Newton, Progressive Christian Infiltrator. (Oops! Gave it away!)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Yawn Posted by: zorro
» RE: Yawn Posted by: Philip Newton
Hmmmmm
Posted by: WhatNow? on Apr 22, 2007 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Fundamentalist John Rice, editor of the fire-breathing Sword of the Lord, neatly summed up the bellicose attitude when he wrote that, in Vietnam, America was "carrying out the command of God." The sentiment was echoed by preacher Carl McIntire, who thundered, "It is the message of the infallible Bible that gives men the right to participate in such conflicts, and to do it with the realization that God is for them, that God will help them, and that if they believe in the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, and die in the field of battle, they will be received into the highest heaven.""

Sounds like the taliban or some other fundamentalist lunatics.

So amerikas extremism is fine? but others must be crushed?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Closets
Posted by: Closets on Apr 22, 2007 9:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Despite advances in technology, the US military seems to be an institutional dinasaur. The constant mantra of patriotism in the protection of nationalism is loosing it's usefulness in a rapidly emerging global culture and economic environment. closets

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He is on the money
Posted by: dayenta on Apr 22, 2007 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Weinstein spoke at my church, and I have read the entire book. This is a Republican making these assertions, and he is quite sincere. He has presented his argument in a very convincing manner.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Faith-based regious slurs Posted by: Philip Newton
Here's an example of unhinged racism.
Posted by: mantra77 on Apr 22, 2007 11:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The gramscian Racial Extortion Coalition promotes, justifies and supports more non-white immigration in order to increase its demographic power to insure there will be:

More affirmative action discrimination in education;
More “no whites allowed” race based private scholarships;
More race quotas in private hiring;
More race norming employment tests;
More separate pool executive hiring;
More minority layoff protection;
More sensitivity training;
More minority promotion networks;
More “no whites allowed” contract set-asides;
More minority-only tax breaks

And ever more racist discrimination slammed onto the backs of my children for being white and only for being white.

If this isn't unhinged anti-white racism, then what is?

-------
Bob's Riddle

All anti-white racists agree that it's ok for whites to become minorities in their own countries. All anti-white racists also agree that a Japanese person who wants to become a minority in his own country is either a traitor or clinically insane. Therefore, what is an anti-white racist? Answer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well said, Mr. MacLeod ! Posted by: LeftWright
Birth of the Christian Zionist: How pro-semitic bigots infiltrated Christian doctirne.
Posted by: mantra77 on Apr 22, 2007 12:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sorry about the accidental off-subject post just above. I'll make up for it with this one for those who don't know where Christian Zionism (another synthetic slave religion like PeeCee) comes from.

Christian Zionism is ENTIRELY based on a FORGERY, The Scofield Reference Bible. This heretical text has been the best selling bible in America for decades.

Start quote

World Zionist leaders initiated a program to change America and its religious orientation. One of the tools used to accomplish this goal was an obscure and malleable Civil War veteran named Cyrus I. Schofield. A much larger tool was a venerable, world respected European book publisher--The Oxford University Press.

The scheme was to alter the Christian view of Zionism by creating and promoting a pro-Zionist subculture within Christianity. Scofield's role was to re-write the King James Version of the Bible by inserting Zionist-friendly notes in the margins, between verses and chapters, and on the bottoms of the pages. The Oxford University Press used Scofield, a pastor by then, as the Editor, probably because it needed such as man for a front. The revised bible was called the Scofield Reference Bible, and with limitless advertising and promotion, it became a best-selling "bible" in America and has remained so for 90 years.

The Scofield Reference Bible was not to be just another translation, subverting minor passages a little at a time. No, Scofield produced a revolutionary book that radically changed the context of the King James Version. It was designed to create a subculture around a new worship icon, the modern State of Israel, a state that did not yet exist, but which was already on the drawing boards of the committed, well-funded authors of World Zionism.

Source: We Hold These Truths Ministry

-----------

Bob's Riddle

All anti-white racists agree that it's ok for whites to become minorities in their own countries. All anti-white racists also agree that a Japanese person who wants to become a minority in his own country is either a traitor or clinically insane. Therefore, what is an anti-white racist? Answer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God in Uniform
Posted by: NoPCZone on Apr 22, 2007 12:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I served 8 years in the United States Army and despite my personal faith, never sought the use of chaplain services. I was not alone. A minister/priest/imam/rabbi in uniform holding any rank is a compromise to their faith and to any concept of impartial dealings relative to faith or military matters.

I oppose the very concept of the uniformed services sponsoring chaplains of any faith- much less commissioning them as officers. A faith teacher in uniform is a contradiction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Right On Posted by: Philip Newton
dick
Posted by: rtmyth on Apr 22, 2007 1:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
History shows that nothing is more effective at inciting people to eagerly kill each other than religious differences.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Big Lie At Work, Once Again
Posted by: sofla100 on Apr 22, 2007 4:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From my Army experience, I also never used a Chaplain and always saw them as a contradiction. If Religion teaches not to kill, then how does religion justify an organization whose purpose is to kill? If it is supposedly ok to kill if it is a "just war", then that also makes no sense. How, fighting in Iraq, 12,000 miles from America, are you defending the homeland? I mean, it is not exactly like someone is landing troops in New Jersey. If it is justified by the cliche "the war on terrorism," this also seems to make no sense. Bush has clearly shown us how "the war on terrorism" can be used to justify all kinds of dubious things. So, back tp square one, and I believe Chaplains are there as institutional cover, as veneer, to mask the true intentions and behavior of the military. And, the more extreme evangelical stuff, when it does occur, is a means to cover over an increasingly absurd situation that the military finds itself in. Fighting a war of conquest, not of defense, in a far off land - but, still trying to keep the cover of moral justification. The big lie at work, once again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mountain out of mole hill
Posted by: mangell on Apr 23, 2007 6:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Aren't Christians, in general, just more patriotic and conservative, hence attracted to the military?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But seriously....
Posted by: igoeja on Apr 25, 2007 5:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I say good riddance! Let them die (hoping and praying) for the idiot scum they put in power. Too bad some decent poor folk looking for an education will die along with them.

But seriously, there have been several NY Times articles showing an exaggerated influence of christianity in the Air Force academy, and it is likely that one would find the typical authoritarian and conformist types, e.g., the religious, in military service.

P.S., This post was written in a way to inflame even liberal sentiments. Intelligent people do not take posts like this too seriously....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

signpost:
Posted by: tom cady on Apr 26, 2007 1:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it looked so easy, our heritage beckoned
the nation was, after all, christian
and so they began their crusade marching toward theocracy
and as they plodded the children wailed “are we there yet?”
and god whispered back “you're going the wrong way”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No such thing as a "Christian Soldier"...
Posted by: Carl Street on Apr 27, 2007 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War and Christianity are totally incompatible -- Here are the worlds of Christ Himself:

If a man strikes you, turn the other cheek
Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called children of God
Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword
Whatever you do to the least of my bretheren, you have done it to me

Anyone who claims to be both a Christian AND a soldier is both a liar and a heretic. Matthews gospel of the final judgement is clear and unequivocal -- those who assault their fellow man will burn in hell for all eternity.

Obviously, anyone who would favor war and conflict must necessarily either be a complete fool willing to accept damnation to satisfy their blood lust; or they are NOT a believer e.g. a true Christian.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement