West Point cadet quits, cites 'criminal' behavior of officers promoting fundamentalist Christianity
Submitted by fishyculture on Mon, 12/10/2012 - 14:46in
http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=159634
Note the update - he got an honorable discharge. I'd say he earned it.
»
- Login to post comments





Just another coward making up excuses
What a pile of crap.
Fundamentalism is the cornerstone of the Firster doctrine
If it is true that West Point encourages fundamentalist protestantism among its officers, then it is in keeping with the "Israel First" doctrine so heavily preached in American society.
Since both critical thought and Realpolitik is in conflict with American subservience to Israel, its rationale must come from the apocalyptic doctrines that Israel is the chosen land, Israelites the chosen people, and that Jesus as the messiah cannot come until the state of Israel is born.
Now that it is here, it must be preserved and indeed strengthened until it stretches from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates river, and the non-Israelite inhabitants liquidated.
Otherwise, the Prince of Peace will never come.
Such is the doctrine of the fundamentalist Firster.
Normal rational observers may note that the modern State of Israel has more in common with the idol-worshiping, acursed Kingdom of Ahab than the righteous Kingdom of David.
But don't try that argument with a fundamentalist from West Point!
"Cowards & idiots can come along for the ride but they gotta sit in the back seat!"
I'm a West Point graduate
and retired from DoD after 25 years of service. I'd like to say that this young man's story simply doesn't ring true. Unless life at the U.S. Military Academy has dramatically changed since I graduated, it's just not the case that any cadet there is forced, coerced, threatened, cajoled, or in any way pressured to conform to some religious test or standard. The same is true for the Army in general.
There are religious cadets and officers at West Point, and there are (or were when I was there) occasional public prayers at some ceremonies. No one has to bow their head, say a prayer, go to church, or do anything of a religious nature that isn't voluntary.
I might find his story more believable if he had said that a particular officer was guilty of his accusations. However, he has accused a broad swath of officers at West Point and throughout the Army. How does he know what the Regular Army is like? I didn't get from the story that he ever served before entering West Point.
If you read the comments section of that article you'll see a lot of them are from active duty and retired military who are either atheist or agnostic and are saying essentially the same thing I am - his story does not pass the smell test and there's probably something else going on that he's not telling.
IMO, the more likely reasons for his resignation are a change of heart about serving in the military and/or potential money from a book/movie deal around this controversy.
Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father
Thanks
I sensed there was more to the story.
donvino
Reading the comments....
I would like everyone to know I reject christianity for the same reason I reject statism. I reject authority over me, made up by people in costumes telling me what I should do with my life. I know most readers on this site are Christian, but you need to drop the bullying/downvote attitude towards people who do not confirm your bias. Yes, Ron Paul is a Christian. No, that does not make Christianity true. You need to quit being a mob and start acting like rational human beings. STOP DOWNVOTING people because they don't have the same religious upbringing as you. Replacing God with government or government with God is the same elixir for the same human need to be taken care of.
No train to Stockholm.
The difference between the authority of what you believe is
your God and the authority of the state is that your allegiance to your God is freely given, while the authority of the state is the authority of imperfect humans in its most arbitrary form, and most certainly NOT freely accepted. Everyone has at least slight differences in their value systems from those of everyone else. If they choose their value systems without violent coercion, how are any of these value systems the same as any values promoted by the state with violence? Jesus Christ was one of the most powerful and persuasive opponents of arbitrary human authority in history. You are confusing the arbitrary violently enforced authority of humans (including self-described "Christians") with the authority of Jesus Christ, which is an authority which is freely accepted or rejected by each individual. God has no power to rule this Earth with force, it is against his own rules.
Amen.
Really well said. Religious authority is the authority of Christ and Christ only. It is a spiritual authority to each individual alone. It has nothing to do with worldly coercion and anyone who claims it does is a liar. All worldly, corporeal coercion is just that and nothing more, regardless of whether it 'claims' an authority from God, it does not have it, never has and never will.
It's 1776 again in America
I'm with you. I'll take it
I'm with you. I'll take it one step further by saying there has never been a state without a religion to go along with it.
Well put, thanks
The original western settlers that came to this country, came here for religious freedom.
ie. They could no longer tolerate the oppressive and obnoxious (and at times deadly) authoritarians that were telling them how to think and live.
So they left Europe and came here.
To the people that are totally and thoroughly sold on any one particular version of "invisible being" - and all the other stuff that came packaged with that version:
It doesn't necessarily make you a "better" person with more of the "right" answers - it doesn't make you superior or give you the right to judge people that aren't sold on your package.
Please leave the people that are NOT sold on your particular 'invisible being' package deal, alone.
True, they came for religious
True, they came for religious freedom but not so much to discontinue authoritarian rule. They became equally as authoritarian condemning those who didn't believe as they did. The original Puritans ruled with an iron fist and punished and exiled all those who went against their beliefs.
Our Founders did a truly radical thing when they created a secular Constitution for our country because the original inhabitants came here to create a theocracy that was based on their beliefs which were so heavily persecuted in England.
Blessings )o(
Slight correction...
The original Pilgrims were congregationalists - independents who were completely against authoritarianism including of the Church of England that had persecuted them. It was the second wave, the 'puritans' who founded the Mass. Bay Colony and still owed allegiance to the C of E, who set up the totalitarian theocracy. The one that came badly unstuck on its own failures of Liberty in the Salem witch trials. It is a tragedy that their flawed brand of Christianity is the one that prevailed (way more immigrants) and failed, because its failure was the failure of the New England Christian project.
It's 1776 again in America
Maeve -- I agree 100% with your first paragraph
It took however nearly 100 years (after 1790 convention) to establish a "truly" (and even then it was never "truly") secular centralized gov't.
A gov't that bows to unionized voting gangs is no better than one that is bullied by organized religion.
What made America free from the evils of European religious subjugation was the utter dependence on "civility" far far removed from the comforts and regiments of a millennial old AND the freedom from foreign invasion (those two huge oceans have granted us more freedom then guns and butter).
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
I used to get annoyed too
I remember my captain coming on the 1mc during 9/11 and giving us a "god and country" speech, turning out the christian rhetoric. Was very jingoistic and nationalist.
No train to Stockholm.
No More "isms" necessary
No More "isms" necessary
http://www.dailypaul.com/263111/ron-pauls-farewell-address-f...
"[...]Everyone claims support for freedom. But too often it’s for one’s own freedom and not for others. Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force, certain liberties.
Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited. These are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests.
The great news is the answer is not to be found in more “isms.” The answers are to be found in more liberty which cost so much less. Under these circumstances spending goes down, wealth production goes up, and the quality of life improves.
Just this recognition—especially if we move in this direction—increases optimism which in itself is beneficial. The follow through with sound policies are required which must be understood and supported by the people.[...]"
(emphasis mine)
Peace.
My name's pronounced like "see real". Its root is "Lord".
"The demand of a great people is always at the scale of its most serious misfortunes." --De Gaulle
http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty
an athiest cries fundemental christianity
how many times due we have to hear that before we learn not to listen?
How many times...
..does one need to be reminded that a person who is not a theist is an atheist, and that an "athiest" would simply be the "most athy"?
edit: thank you for the down vote. It was truly obnoxious of me to try to make us look, as a group, less bigoted and illiterate.
When I am corrected, I say "Thank you" because I always yearn to be more correct. Clearly I am an unusual sort. You Earth people -- go figure.
West of 89
a novel of another america
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/161155#longdescr
If you want to know real
If you want to know real Christianity just look at Dr. Paul´s example. It is very weird how there are these people trying to justify wars based Christian principles. That is manipulation.
And BTW, Dr. Paul is the candidate who most closely matches the principles of the Catholic faith. Pope spoke against war with Iran, ending the blockade with Cuba, end abortion, etc.
If you want to know real
If you want to know real Christianity, you look to Jesus Christ.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.
Amen
Max! Well said! :)
I doubt that Jesus would call himself a "Christian"
or say "these people here have perfectly represented me?"
If you were to give a graded rating of how Christians have lived up to the Teachings of Jesus Christ, since his demise, what rating would you give?
An A (90 to 100%)
A "B" (80-89%)
.....C, D, F
If "humility" (born sinners) makes you say an "F" then why should I EVER listen to a Christian regarding the "how to live" aspects of the man-created teaching surrounding the Life of Christ?
If your vanity (yea we're saved and are 'getting it right') says an "A" then you are saying Jesus would have no criticism of those warring-about in his name?
*&^ Constitution --- Constitutional Rationality
That's not to say that
you can't look at RP's example, because you can.
Just an FYI for my comments
Lutheranism is not Fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is Calvanistic in theology. Unfortunately, it does run smack dab into many problems, many which have been expressed by our not so religious brothers. I think that the problem with Fundamentalism is that it confuses Law and Gospel. It teaches that Gospel is Law. This of course turns off so many people and causes a big stink (as false teaching tends to do). Also, there is an inward focus toward your salvation, your good works. Of course this is horrible as no good work can get you into heaven, but the Gospel itself. Also, there are 'feelings' of the spirit, which of course is also garbage. One can have no feelings what so ever and be a true believer. In fact, feelings are bad because they might be of the Devil himself. Thus, Lutherans are content with the Word and Sacrament as the only means God deals with us. No inward fire that is supposed to consume us (and eventually creates burned out Christians who turn to atheism due to their 2D cardboard faith).
Its funny that all the atheists on here are hammering Christians using the arguments from the Radical Reformation they so hate. They uphold the Radical Reformation as THE symbol of Christianity while of course ignoring all other Church Bodies. (the three others are Lutheranism, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy). I, of course, oppose the Radical Reformation.
That said, I cannot support forcing a guy into worship service. If such is the case, you only make him more of child of Hell (Jesus' words in such an instance).
May the LORD bless you and keep you
May the LORD make His face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you
May the LORD lift up His face unto you and give you peace
Follow me on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/Burning_Sirius
I'm a Sermon on the Mounter.
I'm a Sermon on the Mounter. Don't care much for the rest of the labeling/religious bs.
I do not practice religion
much these days. I grew up Catholic though and I have always loved the sermon on the mount.
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth is my favorite quote from the sermon.
jrd is still here... kinda in a weird sort of way. She also just might be the happiest girl in the world because she got exactly what she wanted which was a perfect summer wandering playlist.
You have just made the Sermon on the Mount a law
Congrats. You turned pure Gospel into something people must obey.
That is how Luther and I would view it.
May the LORD bless you and keep you
May the LORD make His face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you
May the LORD lift up His face unto you and give you peace
Follow me on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/Burning_Sirius
Really it's just a philosophy
Really it's just a philosophy of how to treat others, and conduct one's affairs with respect to eternal consequences. I don't waste my time on doctrinal mumbo jumbo, in fact I wont read Luther and I certainly won't read anything they sell in a 'christian bookstore'. I just read the words of Christ and say 'I want to be like that'.
Well of course
The Law in its summation is best explained as 'Love your neighbor', but the Sermon on the Mount was not Law, it is Gospel. Lutherans divide Law (commands) and Gospel (promises). Each article of the Sermon on the Mount are promises, not commands. To do so places a bar so high that you will despair and fall away from the faith.
How can you command someone to be 'Poor in Spirit', or 'Be a Peacemaker', God only blesses those who are and who among us is not Poor in Spirit to begin with.
Doctrinal 'mumbo jumbo'. Heh, you just created your own Doctrine. That is Post-Modernism for you. That is your true philosophy, moralistic therapeutic deism.
Luther himself preached Christ word. Our Doctrine is called the 'normed norm' that is it is normed by the 'norming norm' of Scripture. That is the Book of Concord, our Confession as Christ taught us to Confess.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KawiCcExOYQ
May the LORD bless you and keep you
May the LORD make His face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you
May the LORD lift up His face unto you and give you peace
Follow me on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/Burning_Sirius
It is written: And to the
It is written:
I've never heard of this 'book' of Concord (Nicolaitanes) before.
Christ is the teacher not Luther. I read Christ's words, not man's.
Huh
I wonder if Jesus would instead condemn your doctrine as it is very hypocritical. I will bring my Confession to the judgement seat of Christ. False teachers and false doctrine will be judged accordingly.
The Book of Concord consists of:
The Small Catechism
The Large Catechism
Augsburg Confessions
The Apology to the Augsburg Confessions
The Smalcald Articles
The 6 chief parts of Lutheranism are
The Creed, The Lord's Prayer, Repentance, Baptism, Office of the Keys, Communion
That is the summary of it all. Pray tell, which of these is a doctrine of Satan? Nothing about Lutheranism involves Satan whatsoever. Americans are not the only Christians. American Christianity has and will always be a minority of crazies. In that I mean, you denounce doctrine while at the same time advocating new doctrines. Our doctrines are the doctrines of the Apostles.
Note, modern Lutheranism does disagree with many things Luther stated (often in private), but where Luther was right we stand with him as a Confession of Faith.
I already explained that The Book of Concord is the normed norm by the norming norm of Scripture. Your piece of writing is a doctrine again. You should really stop contradicting yourself. You sound like a hypocrite.
May the LORD bless you and keep you
May the LORD make His face shed light upon you and be gracious unto you
May the LORD lift up His face unto you and give you peace
Follow me on Twitter @ http://twitter.com/Burning_Sirius
If you're accusing me of
If you're accusing me of following the words of Christ alone, excluding all catechisms and confessions and man-made articles I happily plead guilty!
It is written:
It is also written: