JBER CO orders Chaplain to remove religious message

Tod Starnes of Fox News reported today that COL Brian P. Duffy, the base commander of Joint Base Elmendorf-Ft. Richardson, Alaska, ordered chaplain LTCOL Kenneth Reyes to remove a message titled "No Atheists in Foxholes: Chaplains gave all in WWII" in a column he had written for the "Chaplain’s Corner" on the base website. The reason: "out of respect for those who considered its title offensive . . . " The column was removed within five hours after publication.

As reported by Breitbart’s Ken Klukowski, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) had contacted COL Duffy about what they described as Reyes’ ". . . use of bigoted, religious supremacist phrase" meaning "no atheists in foxholes" attributed to Catholic Father William Cummings at Bataan during WWII.

In 1954, during a speech, then President Dwight D. Eisenhower confirmed Father Cumming’s comment: " "I am delighted that our veterans are sponsoring a movement to increase our awareness of God in our daily lives. In battle, they learned a great truth that there are no atheists in the foxholes."

Allegedly, 41 airmen at JBER complained about the title to Chaplain Reyes’s column, leading to the attack by the MRFF. COL Duffy has "profusely" apologized to the MRFF for what the MRFF described as LTCOL Reyes’s "anti-secular diatribe."

MRFF is now demanding that LTCOL be punished: "Faith based hate, is hate all the same . . . LTCOL Reyes must be appropriately punished."

MRFF is atheist activist Mikey Weinstein’s creation. Weinstein has been emphatic in his hatred of Christianity. He has deemed Christians "fundamentalist monsters" who seek to impose a reign of "theocratic terror" and the gospel as "spirtual rape". He has stated publically that Christians are enemies of the Constitution and their beliefs constitute sedition and treason. This is the man that SECDEF Hodges has met with and with whom the Obama DOD has consulted with over the last four years who has further stated that there is no legal bar to suppressing religious free speech in the military.

Congress has responded with a bill providing free practice of religion in the military. The Obama Administration is diametrically opposed to such legislation.

This is an incredible assault on the 1^st Amendment and upon the faith of the majority of the troops who serve this country. LTCOL Reyes column is accessed by all who served at JBER and any who may visit the site from anywhere in the world. To believe that the title is an affront when the title plainly states it is about chaplains, military religious leaders, is simply outrageous. Apparently, COL Duffy has little understanding of the 1^st Amendment.

The current Chaplain’s corner has a piece on keeping one’s financial house in order by Army CPT James Duran: http://www.jber.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123355549

COL Brian Duffy should be sacked and transferred to Shemya Is. where his primary duty should be to stand at attention each morning, noon, and at 1700 and to shout the Bill of Rights in his best command voice to the world. Then, he should be given a brush and a bucket and told to remove the sea gull excrement from the rocks. A sentence of six months of such duty would be appropriate. This man absolutely does not understand his soldiers nor his responsibilities as base commander. He is a puppet who puts his political masters above his oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Atheists and homosexuals are the root of this malignancy in our military. This is the outcome of the liberal experiment: "sit down and shut up, if you believe in God, are a patriot, are believe in heterosexual marriage and family, believe in the sanctity of life and of the unborn, and believe that our national borders should be inviolate, that our sovereignty and our culture are to be respected.

For more information:

http://www.jber.af.mil/index.asp

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/chaplain-ordered-to-remove-religious-essay-from-military-website.html

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/07/24/Military-Censors-Christian-Chaplain-Atheists-Call-for-Punishment

http://www.frcblog.com/

HR 1913 and S909 violates the 1st and 10th Amendments

"We also need to protect those potential victims who may be the recipients of hateful words or hateful acts, or even violent acts."

—Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D, TX) in support of The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (HR 1913).

According to Rep. Jackson-Lee, a perceived slight may become a federal felony.

Worse is S 909 by Sen. Edward Kennedy and Sen. Patrick Leahy, both paragons of the left. In this bill, all 547 forms of sexual deviancy, including pedophilia, would become protected under the hate crimes gender identification definition.

Every pastor of a Christian church, or Imam of a Muslim mosque, or anyone in disagreement with the agenda of a protected group are now in jeopardy of federal hate crimes charges by perception of speech—whether written or verbal.

Any parent defending a child from leachery and the unwanted advances of a pervert could face federal charges for a hate crime against a pedophile.

There is nothing so repulsive to a Constitutional Republic as legislation that confers privilege, status, or otherwise sets apart from the body national a group for any reason.

The liberal democrat interpretation of what is constitutional has nothing to do with what is stated in the Constitution. To them, the Constitution must be reinterpreted in the context of the winds of political and social change. In other words, the Constitution is what they say it is when they are in power, not what is written.

Witness the use of the derogatory, colloquial “c” word for the female of the species by Paris Hilton to describe Miss California. For some reason, his offense is minor, but her defense of heterosexual marriage is offensive and of “concern” to the liberal press, and certainly hateful speech to Mr. Hilton, who is openly homosexual. Obviously, if one disagrees with him, he can publically insult in the most base manner without fear of condemnation. Under HR 1913, he may have cause to file criminal charges against Miss California and any who agree with her.

HR 1913 contains the threat to silence any speech not approved or otherwise agreeable to those so privileged to enjoy the benefits of HR 1913. S909 will give federal protection to the sexual deviant.

Only in this case, it is not the feds doing the charging, it will be any political subdivision that wants the money and is willing to act to support the liberal pogrom against free speech, the family, our children, Christianity, and the sanctity of the Constitution.

Once again the feds are suborning local law enforcement priorities to meet federal feel good political payback obligations to their lib supporters.

Will there be any real crime against a child, given S909 being so inclusive?

Crimes against children are just not a high enough priority in the liberal anti-family, pro abortion mind to warrant such focus and additional protection under the law.

Apparently, to the democrat majority in the Senate, and the House, there is no crime of sexual deviancy against children. Children are to be used with impunity as sexual toys.

S909 ensures that all children are now in jeopardy and that those so perverse as to attack a child sexually are protected.

What constitutes “hateful words” in the liberal mind?

Anything positive promoting family, religion, unity, patriotism, the sanctity of life, and the preservation of language, borders and culture--as so eloquently stated by Dr. Michael Savage.

It is not the idea of HR1913 that is disturbing. It is the intent of those who formulated the legislation and their counterparts in the Senate. Rep. Jackson-Lee’s comment should scare the living daylights out of all of us, but S909 should cause you to fear for your children.

This is the “change” promised by Pres. Barrack Obama?

Governor Sarah Palin and the Alaska Legislature should immediately pass a resolution reaffirming the Bill of Rights and firmly asserting the 10th Amendment rights of the State.

The federal government has no standing under the Constitution to foment such perversion of the law upon the States.