Fischer: Ban Atheists From the Military

Bryan Fischer, always eager to make the case for the Christian theocracy he daydreams about in such vivid images that he probably fondles himself while he does so, now wants atheists banned from the military because they don’t have “America’s values engraved on their hearts.”

The United States Air Force has refused to allow a sergeant to re-enlist because he will not say “so help me God.”

The Air Force is doing exactly the right thing here. There is no place in the United States military for those who do not believe in the Creator who is the source of every single one of our fundamental human and civil rights.

Serving in the military is a privilege, not a constitutional right. And it should be reserved for those who have America’s values engraved on their hearts.

Naturally, the American Humanist Association, which has never seen a constitutional liberty it respects, intends to challenge this decision.

This case should be thrown out of court. The Constitution nowhere gives the federal judiciary any authority to set military policy. That’s reserved for Congress and Congress alone.

I would argue that it is Fischer who rejects American values and who is utterly clueless about the Constitution. This is a man who thinks the First Amendment applies only to Christians, an idea that was utterly anathema to the founding fathers. And that Constitution he claims to revere but is completely ignorant of includes a ban on religious tests “as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” That includes the military. As usual, we have a right winger claiming to love a Constitution he knows nothing about.

Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • John Pieret

    Serving in the military is a privilege, not a constitutional right.

    Except, of course, when the military needs more cannon fodder than is enlisting, at which point it becomes a duty that you can be thrown in jail for refusing to do.

  • John Pieret

    the American Humanist Association, which has never seen a constitutional liberty it respects

    Ah yes! The well-known Constitutional liberty of being forced to make religious statements you don’t believe in … or is it the Constitutional liberty to force others to make religious statements you believe in? I can never keep those straight!

  • abb3w

    Serving in the military is a privilege, in so far as the choice on whether you can (or must) is largely the government’s. However, it is also an office of profit or trust under the United States. While you do not have an absolute right to serve in the military, those who seek to do so have the right to not face the obstacle of any manner of religious test.

  • kantalope

    A privilege that Fischer seems to have not taken advantage of. Funny that he didn’t want to put his own life on the line to protect the rights god came up with.

  • Abby Normal

    Normally I prefer to respond to bigotry with information, as Ed did, or with richly deserved mockery. So this will be a bit of a departure for me. I hope I do it right.

    Fuck you Bryan Fischer you fucking ignorant fucking fuck. Just fuck you.

  • Michael Heath

    Conservative Christian Opposite Land, where words sometimes are defined as the very opposite of what they mean here in reality:

    Naturally, the American Humanist Association, which has never seen a constitutional liberty it respects, intends to challenge this decision.

    It’s common for conservative Christians to claim they are the ones defending freedom, while instead being the chief obstacle. This is a fine example of that.

  • raven

    Conservative Christian Opposite Land, where words sometimes are defined as the very opposite of what they mean here in reality:

    They have made Orwell’s 1984 into another book of their bible.

    Oddly enough, one that they actually diligently follow.

  • theguy

    Two words: Pat Tillman

    Therefore, Adolf Fishstick’s argument is invalid.

  • Big Boppa

    I would argue that it is Fischer who rejects American values and who is utterly clueless about the Constitution.

    He doesn’t know anything about anatomy either. Values “engraved on their hearts” ??? That sounds really painful and probably lethal. Wouldn’t a nice ID bracelet be more practical? Or maybe a tattoo. More permanent that way.

  • D. C. Sessions

    As usual, we have a right winger claiming to love a Constitution he knows nothing about.

    Or pretending to know nothing about a Constitution he pretends to love.

    It’s common for conservative Christians to claim they are the ones defending freedom, while instead being the chief obstacle.

    That depends on your definition of “freedom.” The Southern version has a lot to do with preserving the established order, and is completely compatible with owning slaves.

  • notruescott

    These “christian nation” bozos just kill me.

    It occurred to me the other day that the Declaration of Independence and the establishment of the US was a profoundly blasphemous act according to the xianity of the day. Kings ruled by the decree and consent of god, and the holy babble commands xians to obey them. Along come these smarty-pants founders who spit in god’s face and declare that the power to rule comes not from god, but by the consent of the governed.

    From thence comes a xian nation?

  • busterggi

    F. claims to love the bible while knowing nothing about it, why not the same for the Constitution?

  • http://www.gregory-gadow.net Gregory in Seattle

    Because only Christians (meaning, of course, the right sort of Christians) can be trusted to kill people correctly. Or something like that.

  • petemoulton

    Abby Normal @ #5: You did just fine. Those are my sentiments too.

  • http://www.facebook.com/eo.raptor.3 eoraptor

    I’m going to guess that ole Fishypants was classified 4F in the 60’s; that somehow he was denied the privilege to serve.

  • magistramarla

    Too late, Fischer:

    There are plenty of Atheists (And Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Wiccan and any other religion or philosophy that you can imagine) in the US military, even among the officers. Hang around the military as long as I have and you learn to spot them.

  • Subtract Hominem, a product of Nauseam

    As Big Boppa alludes to in 9, nobody really has much of anything engraved on their hearts. I suppose this is Fischer’s stealth argument for disbanding the US armed services. Perhaps even for dissolving all military forces everywhere.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Fischer’s right. I served with an Athiest once, and he couldn’t be trusted to turn the other cheek.

  • dingojack

    Modus — I bet he’d never get into the foxhole either.

    Dingo

  • whheydt

    Sigh… If only Fischer’s proposed policy had been in force during the Viet Nam War, probably 80% of the country would be Atheist by now.

  • howardhershey

    #13

    Only True Christians can be counted on to kill those ‘other’ people with True Christian love in their hearts. knowing that they will go to hell and thus cannot bother them in heaven by their presence. It is also Christian charity to kill the embryos that do not know sin before they grow up into sinners that don’t know Christ.

  • bahrfeldt

    They were drafting me anyway. 46 years ago I volunteered, joining the Navy to avoid the Army. My dog tags (one still on my key chain) say “NO PREF” for religion.

  • jaybee

    Hmmm, I wonder if I can play the atheist card to avoid jury doody.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    jaybee “Hmmm, I wonder if I can play the atheist card to avoid jury doody.”

    Ick.

  • jaybee

    Modus, you should check out the song “W’s Duty” written by the very talented Jonathan Coulton. For a year he wrote, recorded, and released one song a week. W’s Duty was written back when W was in charge.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm4kpWXkjAo

  • felicis

    I’ve always wondered – wouldn’t the 2nd amendment imply a right to be a part of a well-organized militia (the National Guard at least)? Independent of the ban on religious tests for office – whether such an argument would ever hold up in court, I have no idea, but when discussing whether or not to allow gays to serve in the military back in the 90’s, I thought of that as a possible constitutional argument (it tickled because the same people so against gays in the military we often very vocal about the 2nd amendment as well). I always wondered why I never heard of it being used, so I assume there is some legal reason it would fail – would any of you know?

  • dogmeat

    So… gay, Christians in the military?