Government Must Not Define Religion, Part Two

No military chaplain can be forced to violate their conscience; that’s clear in both law and Army Regulation 165-1. Unfortunately, an investigator at Fort Bragg faults a chaplain who followed his conscience and Army regulations (press release). When a lesbian couple applied for a Strong Bonds retreat, he found a substitute. For that, he was the subject of an EO complaint and a 15-6 investigation, and the investigator recommended punitive action.

It shouldn’t matter what their theology is, all endorsers and chaplains should be supporting CH (MAJ) Jerry Squires. He did his job by providing for a service he could not perform. This is how the chaplaincy operates in a pluralistic environment. No chaplain can perform every service for every Soldier. But they can provide for every Soldier’s needs. That is what happened.

Here’s the letter CH Squires’ attorney at First Liberty sent to the Commander laying out facts the investigator left out and the relevant law.

It’s time for a Congressional investigation.

It’s also time for soul-searching by liberals who condemn this chaplain for being “anti-gay” and who suggest the North American Mission Board should be removed as an endorser. They say they are for inclusivity. They say that chaplaincy is about respecting all–but they have attacked this chaplain and his endorser for merely holding that marriage is between a man and a woman, and have compared this view with racism and slavery.

The chaplaincy is based on respecting the religious rights of those you disagree with. It’s also about letting those religions, through their endorser, define what their faith teaches and what the limits of their chaplains are–not the government, not liberal chaplains, nor their endorsers, nor the peanut gallery.