Who else thinks the AF is going to get burned on this one? - Airman denied reenlistment for refusing to say "so help me God"
"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."
I have never forced anyone to say those words when administering the oath nor have I had anyone require me to say them when I was reciting the officer's oath of office at my commissioning ceremony and subsequent promotions.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20140904/NEWS05/309040066/Group-Airman-denied-reenlistment-refusing-say-help-me-God-
EDIT:
The AF ended up changing course (rightly so according to the DoD legal review).
http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20140917/NEWS/309170066/Air-Force-nixes-help-me-God-requirement-oaths
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Secretary-Hagel-letter-9-10-14.pdf
hGþ$ #)§ÎÃÔò&ÅæÖã'~ÞCÄO«(é5ÞTâCeÂÊo#ßHÛ^Hé§ÐmY+ü§gA+S*ùýæKÎ~gkHp+N0`;cn`BCvÜùÜbYïéáãèá ZX|ÂÖúv»hWsLÖjÃüG?}L3K _Z,ºEIM3eÄEÆÞ:ÍaE;KÛ~FuÜOL?9Úc ÙåsßÈ#»Óm;U(05ÊlkyBAGè{ åózH)§_5¶
http://www.onenewsnow.com/perspectives/miscellaneous/2014/09/12/air-force-cant-use-oath-to-disqualify-atheist-sergeant
Air Force can't use oath to disqualify atheist sergeant
The U.S. Constitution makes it clear: American atheists are not and should not be barred from serving their country through military service.
On a side note though, I also disagree with the Airman altering an official document. THAT was not his choice to make and if C2 pursues action then I can't blame them on ONLY that point.
If an officer is out of uniform, the NCO should take the officer aside and explain to the officer he is out of uniform. He need not do this in front of the other troops as this would diminish the officer in front of the troops and violate the concept of maintaining good order and discipline and show a certain level of disrespect for the rank structure.
The NCO need not "correct the officer". Instead of correcting, he should "inform the officer" about the officer's deficiency -- at which point the officer, if he were wise, would thank the NCO for doing so, and the the officer should take whatever actions are necessary to correct his deficiency.
I agree with MAJ Carl Ballinger that it is NOT the NCO's job to correct seniors. If the NCO is a good one, he will tactfully inform his seniors of problems. He would avoid doing so publicly, if at all possible.
Do you see where I'm coming from? Correcting juniors vs tactfully Informing peers and seniors; Praise in Public, Criticize in Private; Maintaining good order and discipline; Respect for chain of command; Exercising good judgment... << These things all factor in regarding how one should respond to a given situation and should guide the NCO's manner of speech and actions.
As to the example given by MSG (Join to see), you ABSOLUTELY have an obligation to stop / prevent the commission of a crime or breach of security and that trumps whatever that individual is wearing on their sleeve or collar. But even then you should be tactful and professional.
EXAMPLE: "Sir, I believe you may be attempting to remove classified material from the SCIF. I'm going to have to ask you to set your briefcase down and step away from it." If they refuse, you take progressively more authoritative actions. "Sir, if you attempt to leave the SCIF and walk out that door, I will have to stop you and have you arrested." If the officer ignores and walks out, you call and get others' attentions. "Stop him, he may have classified info in that briefcase." And if they are dumb enough to make a run for it, you tackle them.
The absolute wrong thing to do would be to tackle the officer in the SCIF and get in a fight with them -- especially if it turns out they didn't have what you suspected on them!
FWIW.
NOT: "Hey Major WTF! You're out of uniform!!!"
Of course, there was a time when I was a PFC working my post at the gate at Camp Henry in Korea when a 1LT attempted to exit wearing an earring (in civilian clothes). At the time doing so was a violation of the SOFA agreement, so I stopped him and told him to take it out. He pulled his ID card out to show me his rank, but I told him that if he left he would be apprehended, and that I'd be happy to call the duty officer. He paused, but ultimately decided to take it out. Of course, I was in the Military Police at the time, so again, context. :)
I am so sick of this PC, it has gotten to the point that people do things like this not becasue of conviction, but becasue they know they can get away with it.
We are a military that serves a country that was founded on God, we have a voluntary Military dont you know! Your choice to come in, so get with the program Airman!
This country was most definitely NOT founded on god. It was founded on a desire for self-rule and has a constitution written mostly by a Deist (Jefferson was definitely NOT a Christian)
As someone with command authority, you don't have the ability to change someone's personal opinion on a matter or another person. However, you do have the resources to make sure that whoever is now "out to get him" doesn't get him. That is, of course if he were actually in your unit. Given your blatant stance on non-religious people who demand equal treatment as "trouble makers", he is already on your bad side. You don't even know him and yet you seem to think he is a trouble maker, indignant, a bad Airman, just wants attention, already had problems in his unit, or any combination of these and other labels that has been placed on him. Why? For asking that his religious views are treated like any Christian's? For trying to exercise his first and sixth amendment rights in the face of unlawful and unenforceable regulations? The perception I have is that you are insinuating in your comments that you would not protect him from those who would harbor ill will toward him based on his difference of beliefs. I don't know your command history or anything else about you so all I have to go on is your posts. But if it were me in a command position, I would refrain from passing judgement on how I would handle the situation- theoretically of course.
For the record, I haven't violated my oath. We are simply debating an issue in a forum where people are encouraged to discuss their opinions. If we were at a commanders call or we were in your office, it might be a different story.
Air Force Instruction 36-2606 spells out the active-duty oath of enlistment, which all airmen must take when they enlist or reenlist and ends with “so help me God.” The old version of that AFI included an exception: “Note: Airmen may omit the words ‘so help me God,’ if desired for personal reasons.”
That language was dropped in an Oct. 30, 2013, update to the AFI. The relevant section of that AFI now only lists the active-duty oath of enlistment, without giving airmen any option to choose not to swear an oath to a deity.
“Reciting ‘So help me God’ in the reenlistment and commissioning oaths is a statutory requirement under Title 10 USC 502,” Air Force spokeswoman Rose Richeson said Thursday. AFI 36-2606 “is consistent with the language mandated in 10 USC 502. Paragraph 5.6 [and] was changed in October 2013 to reflect the aforementioned statutory requirement and airmen are no longer authorized to omit the words ‘So help me God.’”
The first part is just as important as the second part, and the Air Force is a part of the DoD, which is a department of the Executive Branch of the US Government..... so it is Government respecting an establishment of religion by imposing religious-based requirements for continued service.. Anyone with a brain can see it's a clear violation of the Constitution, and you don't need a law degree to do so.
I said this 5 times in my career, it was never a problem and for the record I'm not a christian. The Army, Navy and Marine Corps still allow affirmation for those who wish to omit God. this is a very bad precedent for the Airforce to try and set....
SERIOUSLY?
Sir, once someone says "I don't discount the possibility it was engineered as a planned act by a MAAF member with prior knowledge of the organization," it starts to wander rather close to asking about a conspiracy in actions, or deeds. The fifth definition of conspiracy on http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy is "any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result." Since there was no collusion to commit a crime, Sir, it doesn't fall under the criminal law definition, but it's still a viable interpretation of "it was engineered as a planned act."
Have a fantastic day, Sir.
Dictionary.com - The world's favorite online English dictionary!
The world's most popular dictionary and thesaurus with definitions, synonyms, antonyms, idioms, word origins, quotes, audio pronunciations, example sentences and Word of the Day! Look up the meaning of words, slang, phrases, idioms, and abbreviations in our free English Dictionary, Spanish-English Dictionary, Legal Dictionary, Medical Dictionary and more!