Combat Bibles??

I saw this over at Balloon Juice:A combat bible??

I asked The Google about combat bibles. The paid link was this. Am I alone in being fascinatedly worried about the fact that there are 13+ bibles with camouflage and American Flag covers on them? Remember yesterday's post about the unfortunate confluence of biblical and constitutional literalism...well, here it is in cammies, ready to fight.

I also came across this link. It goes into a bit of detail about the "problems" this company had with "spearation of church and state" issues and being able to put military logos on bibles. But they are proud to distribute them to service-members for free. Another fun part:

Each Holman Christian Standard military Bible features:

--Special Presentation, Dedication and Records sections for Military Personnel
--Words of Christ in Red
--An Introduction to the Holman Christian Standard Bible
--Explanatory Notes
--The Plan of Salvation
--The Pledge of Allegiance
--The Star Spangled Banner
--The Oath of Allegiance for Enlisted Personnel
--U.S. Armed Forces Code of Conduct
--Battle Hymn of the Republic
--America the Beautiful
--Onward Christian Soldiers
--Where to Turn (Scripture Readings for all Occasions)
--So Great a Faith (The story of Jesus and the Centurion)
--The Apostle's Creed
--The Nicene Creed
--Testimonials and Encouragement from Officer's Christian Fellowship
--History of the Armed Forces
--Symbols & Logos
--Quotations, Prayers and Inspiration from:
D.L. Moody
George Washington
President George W. Bush
General George S. Patton
Captain Eddie Rickenbacker
Jimmy Stewart
and others
--Plus Additional Material Specific to Each Branch of the Armed Forces

Wait a minute. Did I read that right? Among what I would expect (Jesus' quotes in red, the Nicene Creed, etc.) there are also clearly American- and service-oriented pieces in there. In and of itself it's no big deal. But in the bigger picture of our discussions in the last few posts here and on Streak's blog, this is clearly a part of a pattern.

I am not banging on religion, especially in the service ("...no such thing as a foxhole atheist..."). When I was deployed, we didn't get bibles and nobody gave them to us. The Chaplain was someone you saw when you had a personal problem. Services were Catholic, Protestant, Muslim and Jewish, not Catholic and 79 different protestant services.

Something has changed, culturally, within the military. Prayer used to be personal. A couple guys had bibles; one was about to enter a seminary. We didn't have daily prayer circles. Our officers, when they hung with us enlisted guys, had plenty of other stuff to talk about. But when did the military become the enforcement arm of the evangelical wing?

Read more...

Deregulation

A lot of calls for "deregulation" of certain industries has led, with some predictable regularity, to disaster. To the top of the mind comes the big bank fiasco of the last 2 years; left to their own devices, certain institutions will default to greed, which will normally cause some sort of giant disaster. The giant disaster yields regulation of the industry in question. Then, after a generation has gone by that has forgotten why that industry was regulated, the industry in question becomes deregulated. And so on.

That said, I fail to see how regulation could have stopped the oil blowout in the Gulf.

I have seen even some elected officials in Florida talking about the "under-regulated" off-shore oil drilling industry is at fault for not preventing this disaster. They point to Brazil and Norway as having a requiorement that their oil rigs use some other form of remote switch to shut off the oil flow should something happen to the on-site switch like the BP rig.

But would that have saved this? Would any more regulation have saved this disaster, short of simply not allowing for any off-shore drilling at all (which is where we are headed)?

Read more...

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Admiral Mike Mullen, in his Twitter post from yesterday: Stand by what I said: Allowing homosexuals to serve openly is the right thing to do. Comes down to integrity.

Admiral Mullen's longer quote:

"Speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do," the nation's top military officer told the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens. For me personally, it comes down to integrity -- theirs as individuals and ours as an institution."

Here is a litany of other supportive quotes from opinionated bloggers we have all read before.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (Ga.)

"In my opinion, the presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would very likely create an unacceptable risk," he said, putting homosexuality in a category with "adultery, fraternization and body art."

I do have to respond to that. All of my tattoos...both shoulders, both ankles, and my entire back, I obtained while serving in the Marines. Senator Chambliss, if homosexuality is in the same category of acceptance as "body art," as you say, then I would dare say the military fully accepts and even encourages it!

And that takes me, as a guy who has served and been deployed, to my point: this was a bold move by the top U.S. military commander, and it was the right move. In fact, I think Admiral Mullen sums it up best:

"Sort of a fundamental principle with me . . . is everybody counts," he told the senators. "Putting individuals in a position that every single day they wonder whether today's going to be the day" -- that they are kicked out for being gay -- "and devaluing them in that regard is inconsistent with us as an institution."

Yes. That. What he said.

Sullivan sums up how I think members of our own military will take a lifting of the ban: "This, in my view, is the ultimate reality behind all this: when the ban is lifted, it will be the biggest non-event you can imagine."

And now, of course, member of the GOP are doubting and criticizing the military's direction. I should note, in all fairness, that Admiral Mullen's quote was, as he points out, his own personal opinion. But in making that statement, he made clear his intention. Former Defense Sec'y Powell and current Defense Sec'y Gate agree. In fact, the only one who didn't thus far is the Marine Corps Commandant, General James Conway. Now, as a loyal Marine, I do love my commandant (well, not in that way...). But the Marines, in which I am inordinately proud to have served for 8 years, are the last branch that still doesn't allow women in ground combat roles. So that's kinda where we come from on that.

I applaud Admiral Mullen's statement. This is the right way to go. We've all seen examples of the total fucking idiocy of the don't ask don't tell policy.

Read more...