FACEBOOK
TWITTER
MRFF Demands Swift Action on ‘Jesus Rifles’
Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation is demanding prompt removing of the Bible codes on rifle scopes used by the American armed forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, and placed surreptitiously on the scopes by an evangelical contractor, Trijicon. The manufacturer, Trijicon, after agreeing to remove the Bible codes, appears to be stalling.
From ABC News:
“Shame on them forever for their impossibly slow, plodding and utterly backwards plan for correction of this national and international disgrace,” said Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF). Weinstein, whose advocacy group promotes the separation of church and state in the military, said the MRFF has received numerous messages from troops deployed in Afghanistan complaining that the Gospel inscriptions on Trijicon rifle scopes place them at added risk.
Jesus Rifles — The Resurrection
By Chris Rodda
Everybody remember those Jesus Rifles? The rifles being used by our troops in Iraq in Afghanistan that have Bible verse inscriptions on their sights? The sights whose manufacturer, Trijicon, was going to be sending the military modification kits for to remove these inscriptions? Well, this isn’t going exactly as expected.
As ABCNews.com reports, the U.S. military, in its infinite wisdom, has decided to remove the inscriptions from the sights that are in storage first, and then wait to remove them from the sights on the weapons currently in use in Iraq and Afghanistan, after the deployed units that are using them return home, a plan that completely ignores the biggest reason that the inscriptions urgently needed to be removed.
The whole Jesus rifles issue began because the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) was receiving emails and phone calls from soldiers, either already in Iraq and Afghanistan or soon to be deployed, who were worried that having Bible verse inscriptions on their weapons was a danger to the troops. While religious inscriptions on our military’s weapons is certainly a constitutional issue regardless of whether those weapons are here in the U.S. or with the troops who are deployed, the primary concern with the Jesus rifles was that they are all over Iraq and Afghanistan, providing fodder for propaganda that we are crusaders fighting a holy war. These rifles are not only being used by our own troops, but are being used to train the Afghan and Iraqi forces, as the photos in my previous post clearly show. A typical example of the emails MRFF was receiving is also included in its entirety in that post.
Now, jumping forward two months to the present, MRFF is still receiving emails and phone calls about the Jesus rifles, now from deployed soldiers asking when the hell they’re going to get the promised modification kits. Rather than try to describe these recent emails, I’m just going to post one of them in its entirety, as I did in my previous post.
Related Posts:
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=24424
Posted by Yanira Farray on Mar 30 2010, With 0 Reads, Filed under Military. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
COMMENTS
To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Veterans Today. Veterans Today said: Veterans Today: MRFF Demands Swift Action on 'Jesus Rifles' http://bit.ly/9tx4At [...]
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by veteranstoday: Veterans Today: MRFF Demands Swift Action on ‘Jesus Rifles’ http://bit.ly/9tx4At...
the constitution provides freedom OF religion NOT freedom FROM religion. ya’ll need to grow up. why demand that soldiers turn in their zeroed optics to have a few numbers scraped off when it put their LIVES in danger. besides the flag on our issued non-camouflage uniforms makes us a target far more than the obscure bible reference on our sights. and speaking as a non-Christian i’m more offended by the people making a big deal about it than i am about the reference’s being there.
You can kiss your career as even a student of the U.S. Constitution (that you are sworn defend) good-bye.
Article VI – “… no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to ANY office or public trust under the United States.”
First Amendment – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
There is no official religion in the United States.
The problem with respecting the Bible as an official U.S. document (incoherent though it may be) are clear to thinking Americans, emphatically so when Bible-laden arms are employed against Islamic nations.
Who cares if you’re offended or not, Bible codes on military arms are not constitutional, so they are being removed — the sooner the better.
The numbers are not going to get any Soldiers killed. Poor tactics and leadership get Soldiers killed.
It is sad that people want hundreds of thousands of Tax payers money to remove something that will cycle out after rotation. This time the gov.folks got it right. remove the numbers on items in storage; when a unit cycles back remove the number.
People need to spend their time and money on helping the Military folks that are in the dirt and stop wasting both on things that do nothing to help keep our people safe.
A.L. Emery III
Disabled Army Veteran O.I.F. 2003
You refuse to engage the Constitutional question because you can’t.
As for the danger to U.S. servicemen and women, the dangers of a Christian crusade against ‘Islam’ ought to be apparent.
—
Article VI – “… no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to ANY office or public trust under the United States.”
First Amendment – “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
Mr. Leon,
Addressing your Constitutional question. Article VI states in its entirety,
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. ”
Although there may be circuitous arguments on whether a high ranking officer in the military, member of the joint chiefs or other cabinet position, is an executive officer, he is neither a judicial officer, nor is he a senator or representative. Article I, sec. 6, cl. 2, states in pertinent part, “no person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either House during his continuance in office.” Since your quotation of article VI pertains to Senators and Representatives and a preceding section of the Constitution relates explains that no member of either house may be an officer under the United States, read military, your article VI argument is moot. In addition, and more to the point an inscription on the side of a rifle scope is nor a religious test. Usage of the particular rifle scope is neither a test nor requirement for being in the military or on active duty. More to the point the existence of some writing on the side of a scope cannot be considered a test if not used in some manner to determine qualifications for office. Again your article VI argument is moot.
As to your First Amendment argument, a better place to hang your hat, still misses the mark. Your quotation is better, unlike article VI you did not misquote the First Amendment in attempt to support for your argument. On its face, the First Amendment is not applicable to the “Jesus rifle” situation because Congress has not made a law establishing religion. Plain and simple there is nothing in the United States Code or Code of Federal Regulations which requires soldiers to use these rifle scopes or to maintain the Bible reference if they choose to use the scopes.
A secondary First Amendment argument might be that Congress’ appropriation to the military with which they purchased the scopes from Trijicon stands as a law establishing religion. This argument falls flat when considering that Congress no doubt made bulk appropriations to the military and it was members of the military who decided on the contract with Trijicon and not a check from Congress directly to Trijicon, i.e. Congress did not make the decision to adopt the scopes nor specifically appropriate money for the adopting. this being the case there is no direct Congressional action and therefore no law establishing religion. Interestingly, even if you accept the above argument that Congress made a law establishing religion through appropriations, the converse action also opposes the First Amendment, since the military, under the same appropriations requires Trijicon to remove the biblical reference, else no continued military contract, Congress, under the same reasoning above has made a law prohibiting the free exercise of religion on the part of Trijicon and/or its board of directors, as well as the soldiers who are in the field who might appreciate the biblical reference but will henceforth be unable to obtain rifle scopes with military verses.
Your Constitutional question is poorly phrased and lacking support. If you care to try again with better support, and a thought out argument, as opposed to prefunctory and conclusory statements, I’ll be sure to check back for your reply.