Comments on: PENTAGON TO CHANGE CHAPLAIN POLICY

By: Buck Hicks

Buck Hicks — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Since the military works hard to represent all recognized religions I am not sure the ACLU would have a case anyway let alone a winnable one.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

For one thing, the very idea of a "recognized religion" violates the whole premise of the Establishment Clause. Instead of establishing a single religion, it just establishes an acceptable range of them--basically, those that follow the Judaic god. Plus, the military is funding churches and paying clerics with taxpayer money. Now, granted, we fund chaplains for both Houses of Congress, too. But this certainly wouldn't be permissible in the public schools.

I don't know if this has ever been challenged. The only rationale I could see that would be of any merit is the standard military exceptionalism argument: the military gets a wide berth around the Bill of Rights with regard to its members if they can make a good justiciation in terms of good order and discipline.

And, while I'm generally no fan of religion, let alone taxpayer funded religion, I think we can indeed justify military chaplains on public policy grounds. Spiritual guidance and the other functions performed by chaplains are actually rather important, especially during long deployments and/or combat.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

There was controversy a few years ago because the Army was allegedly subcontracting a Wicca clergyperson to provide services in an isolated area of Ft. Hood.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Fort Hood Wiccans article

By: Backcountry Conservative

Backcountry Conservative — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Chaplaincy Changes
James Joyner points to a New York Times article discussing that the methods for receiving endorsements of chaplain candidates by religious bodies is under review....

---