d-usa wrote:
So if the current regulations just require attendance/education from a school, then non-faith affiliated seminaries would/should qualify?

So a School of Rastafarianism could issue a degree and they would have to accept it?

 d-usa wrote:

So if the current regulations just require attendance/education from a school, then non-faith affiliated seminaries would/should qualify?

So a School of Rastafarianism could issue a degree and they would have to accept it?

 d-usa wrote:
Sounds like the way everything is setup doesn't allow for that to happen for anybody really. If there is one Chaplain assigned to a unit, then the Muslims/Protestants/Jews will talk to the Protestant Chaplain assigned to them, and the Catholics/Jews/Muslims/Buddhist will talk to the Catholic Chaplain assigned to them. So asking an Atheist to talk to a Catholic priest is no different than asking a Muslim/Budhist/Satanist to talk to a Catholic priest.

Well, I also think you can argue that some people want all the trappings of being a religion while also not wanting to be one.

I'm a Christian, but I also like sticking it to the man. So if the regs require attendance of a Seminary or Theological School I would just make a fancy School of Atheism and start issuing Masters of Divinity of Secular Humanism to everybody that applies. Just to beat them at their own game instead of forcing them to change the rule that is the same for every religion to placate somebody that is non-religious but wants religious preferences.

So a School of Rastafarianism could issue a degree and they would have to accept it?

 d-usa wrote:
I think the article listed 23% as not listing a religious preference, which I don't think is the same as no faith or atheist.

That section probably has some atheists in it, as well as agnostics, Christians without a specific denominations, and people that have the "I think there is some sort of God/being/something but I'm not religious/spiritual".

 sebster wrote:

But why the GOP felt the need to go the other way and explicitly deny the possibility of atheist chaplains... well that's just culture war nonsense.

In the military, the chaplain serves as both a religious leader and a listener - ideally one who can assist military personnel of all faiths. A frequent refrain among chaplains is "chaplain to all, pastor to some."

But according to Department of Defense data, the nation's corps of chaplains leans heavily toward evangelical Christianity, failing to mirror the military it serves.

While just 3 percent of the military's enlisted personnel and officers call themselves Southern Baptist, Pentecostal or a member of a denomination that's part of the National Association of Evangelicals, 33 percent of chaplains in the military are members of one of those groups, according to Pentagon statistics.

And the disparity could soon widen.

Data from the Air Force indicate that 87 percent of those seeking to become chaplains are enrolled at evangelical divinity schools.

The discrepancy is the result of a number of variables, including an aversion by mainline Protestant and Catholic seminary leaders to participate in military culture after the Vietnam War; changes in the military's chaplain staffing and education policies; and the popularity of online courses for chaplain candidates at evangelical seminaries.

Military officials point out that chaplains are trained to support troops of all faiths, regardless of their own religious affiliation.

"In these various roles, chaplains respect the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs," said Eileen Lainez, a Pentagon spokeswoman.

But liberal theologians and educators say the imbalance could compromise efforts to meet the spiritual needs of soldiers facing combat or the stresses of military life. And some critics go further, arguing that the military risks becoming a mission field for evangelical Christianity.

In response, Eden Theological Seminary in Webster Groves is launching its own program to train chaplains. The school is a seminary of the United Church of Christ, which is among the more liberal mainline Christian denominations. And its decision to train chaplains comes despite reservations about military involvement and objections to war.

"There's a vacuum," said Eden's president, the Rev. David Greenhaw. "And there's a general sense here that it's important to fill that vacuum."

Eden hopes to partner its chaplain track program with Webster University's counseling department, which works extensively with the military. Greenhaw said students would do theological coursework at Eden and counseling coursework at Webster.

The roots of Eden's decision can be traced back to a visit Eden professor Kristen Leslie and her graduate students made in 2004 to the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs to train chaplains there to deal with sexualized violence on campus.

Leslie, then a professor at Yale Divinity School, later filed a report saying she and her students observed cadets who "were encouraged to pray for the salvation of fellow (cadets) who chose not to attend worship" and were told that those not "born again will burn in the fires of hell."

Mikey Weinstein is a graduate of the Air Force Academy and president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which argues that a military heavily influenced by evangelical Christianity threatens to trample the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

"These are government-backed missionaries for Jesus Christ who see the military as a mission field, fecund and fertile for proselytizing," Weinstein said. "I commend (Eden) for trying to fight back."

Military officials say they are sensitive to issues of diversity and interfaith understanding.

"We look, in particular, for a pluralistic understanding or attitude," said Col. Steven Keith, a chaplain and commandant of the Air Force Chaplain Corps College in Fort Jackson, S.C. "We want you to keep your theology, and be able to work with people of different theologies. "

 Ahtman wrote:
So now you are agreeing that they must have a specific faith? You need to learn some consistency.

I never said that, because I am not for it. I am not for Chaplains in the service either. I don't think we should have a religious position in a secular organization.

 Seaward wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
So now you are agreeing that they must have a specific faith? You need to learn some consistency.

Nope. They must have a faith, not any one specific one.

 Seaward wrote:
Well, unfortunately, we can't staff the military entirely with atheists, so unless you're suggesting we just ferry everyone out of combat zones on Sundays, or arrange long-range flights off the ship, they're necessary.

 Ahtman wrote:

Your ability to read something, really anything, and completely misunderstand it at a basic level, is still impressive, even after all this time.

All hail Seaward, King of the Strawman! Supplicate yourself before his poor analytical skills and hopeless reaching reaching reaching for the most absurd interpretation of any given statement. Indeed, saying that I would prefer there not be a religious position in the military is the same, to you and only you of course, as saying that everyone in the service should be an atheist. Truly, just being able to say I've seen your work is a boon to me and those I share the tales with. Bravo good sir, bravo!

 Seaward wrote:
I assume it is one and the same, because I assume that, despite the fact that you've never shown yourself to have particularly good ideas, and plenty of bad ones, you would never go so far as to suggest that simply because one chooses to enlist in the military, they should be required to endure long stretches of time when they do not have access to religious services when the situation permits. So by saying you want to get rid of chaplains, you must be saying you want an all-atheist military, unless you like denying people in uniform the ability to take solace in their faith.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
I assume it is one and the same, because I assume that, despite the fact that you've never shown yourself to have particularly good ideas, and plenty of bad ones, you would never go so far as to suggest that simply because one chooses to enlist in the military, they should be required to endure long stretches of time when they do not have access to religious services when the situation permits. So by saying you want to get rid of chaplains, you must be saying you want an all-atheist military, unless you like denying people in uniform the ability to take solace in their faith.

To be fair, you could make the argument that religious services are just another pointless luxury. I look forward to Ahtman's crusade to remove all other luxuries and enforce a 40k-style system of discipline where every moment a soldier is not actively in combat is spent on endless drills. After all, there's clearly no need to support a soldier's life outside of killing people for their country.

 Peregrine wrote:
To be fair, you could make the argument that religious services are just another pointless luxury.

 Peregrine wrote:
I look forward to Ahtman's crusade to remove all other luxuries...