E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
United States Marine Corps
Werewolves insignia for the VMFA 122 Fighter Squadron out of Beaufort, S.C. The Squadron briefly reinstated "Crusaders" as its name with cross-and-shield symbol, but has changed back after objections in and outside the ranks.
A Marine fighter squadron challenged on its use of the "Crusaders" name and cross-and-shield symbolism as its insignia has been ordered to reverse the decision, and to return to identifying itself as "Werewolves," the Marine Corps said on Thursday.
The news came a month after the nonprofit Military Religious Freedom Foundation blasted the use of the Crusaders name and logo — citing constitutional and practical objections — on behalf of dozens of soldiers, including Marines in the affected squadron, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 122. (See msnbc.com's original report here.)
"The deputy commandant for aviation directed VMFA 122 to maintain the unit identification as the Werewolves," said Marines public information officer Lt. Col. Joseph Plenzler. "I called down there to confirm that they have changed the tail markings, squadron patches" and other places the squadron logo appears, he said.
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which advocates complete separation of church and state, welcomed the policy change.
"This is a great victory. Lady liberty is smiling today," said Mikey Weinstein, president and founder of foundation. "We commend the Marine Corps," he said, but added: "The Marines Corps does not get a gold star for doing the right thing because they shouldn’t have done the wrong thing in the first place."
The squadron, based in Beaufort, S.C., used the Crusaders symbol from 1958 to 2008, when Lt. Col. William Lieblein pointed out that imagery invoking the Christian conquest and colonization of Muslim nations during the Middle Ages was counterproductive to the U.S. presence across the Arab and Islamic world.
"The notion of being a crusader in that part of the world doesn't float," he said, ordering the change to "Werewolves," as reported by the Beaufort Gazette at the time.
News that the Crusaders had been reinstated surfaced in April, just as world attention focused on the trial of Anders Breivik, a Norwegian who admitted to killing 77 people in a crusade against Islam and multiculturalism. Breivik brandished the cross and shield symbols in his "manifesto" and YouTube video posted shortly before his bloody rampage.
Later in April, the military announced a Department of Defense-wide review of all training materials to purge anti-Islam bias. Documents that surfaced from that review exposed materials discussing the possibility of attacking Muslim populations and destroying the Islamic holy sites Medina and Mecca.
Weinstein said his foundation had received complaints by many soldiers upset by the return to "Crusaders" and that he represented 122 military members who were prepared to file a lawsuit over the name.
"I don’t know that the Marine Corps could do anything more to fuel the cause of jihad," Weinstein told msnbc.com in April. "It will directly end up costing lives and maiming members of our military."
As of May 18, legal counsel for Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos continued to defend the use of the Crusaders name and symbolism in a teleconference with a lawyer for the foundation.
The military attorney questioned whether the cross was a religious symbol and argued that the crusades were really military, not religious in nature, according to an account of the meeting verified by Caroline Mitchell, a lawyer from the firm Jones Day, which is representing the foundation.
In a letter to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus and Amos on Wednesday, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation threatened legal action to force a change in the squadron name. It also submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for all communication and documentation related to the return of the squadron’s name from Werewolves to Crusaders.
But Plenzler said Thursday that a decision made weeks ago by Deputy Commandant of Aviation Lt. Gen. Terry Robling had overruled the squadron commander who reinstated the Crusaders logo.
Conversations with public affairs officers did not clarify why, in light of the policy change, the Marine Corps attorneys continued to dispute the issue with the foundation attorney last Friday. Nor was it clear when the cross-and-shield logo on the vertical stabilizers of the F-18 fighter jets had been painted over and other logos removed.
Maj. Will Klumpp, a public affairs officer on the Marine Corps Air Station in Beaufort, said he could not confirm that the Crusaders logo had been used.
"I can only tell you that there is not an aircraft with anything but a Werewolf within that squadron," he said.
"We still demand that those who made the decision … be fully and aggressively prosecuted so this never happens again," said Weinstein. "And we want a full accounting of how much money it cost taxpayers to change the name from Werewolves to Crusaders and back to Werewolves."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Underground gay group makes waves at Christian college
- NJ man arrested in 1979 disappearance of Etan Patz
- NBC poll: Obama edges Romney in three key battleground states
- Female soldiers sue to lift combat ban on 'basis of sex'
- 'Stash house' raid nets 131 illegal immigrants
- Video: Parents outraged over bike ride suspensions
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
The Marines addressed the group offensiveness issue (it had no valid reason as usual). But now the Minnesota Timberwolves basketball team might claim trademark infringement, again for no valid reason.
Really, now - when I was in uniform I would've risked dying for the Star and Stripes, but I wouldn't have wanted to go fight behind a cross or any other religious symbol. Sacrifice for country is one thing, but sacrifice for somebody else's mumbo-jumbo superstition is something else.
Keep religion in the church or synagogue or mosque or temple or wherever else it belongs, but don't use public funds and taxpayer resources to push it on others.
Whoever that marine lawyer quoted in the article is, he must've been exceptionally ignorant and stupid, or exceptionally disingenuous if he didn't know that the Crusades were first and foremost a religious affair :D
Hmmm, no civil rights were violated.
More PC BS! As a Retired Marine I believe all of this PC BS is going to bring our great country down.
Through our forced PC BS we are forced to show Muslims respect and dignity, what a hoot. They will kill all that do not convert to the BS Islam faith.
Come on American Citizens send a message to our Government that states Islam respect us and we will in turn respect you.
Our Soldiers are dying at the hands of the true Infidels, the Muslims period.
I have the privilege of serving alongside MRFF founder Mikey Weinstein and former U.S. Ambassador Joe Wilson on the Executive Board. We dedicate ourselves to demanding constitutional freedoms for all armed forces personnel that they may worship or not worship in line with their personal values and beliefs. Whether they be people of faith or not, no one is allowed to aggressively proselytize to our military members and force adherence to one religious doctrine.
An overwhelming majority of our clients - 96%+ at any given time are self-identified Protestant Christians who come to us for help from the extreme followers of a bible-based cult of Christian Dominionism. Yes...I repeat...MOST of our clients ARE Christians. But they are mainstream Christians who have not followed after leaders who have scripture-twisted Christianity into a militant cause that is here to force the End Times.
The ability to employ critical thinking and seeking knowledge is all but beat out of the followers of Dominionism, so I have to say, sadly, that I have no doubt a handful of these military members are unaware of the Crusades. It does not excuse the command and as Mikey stated, they are not entitled to a gold start because this - and other instances - should never have happened in the first place.
Christian Dominionism? You could shorten that to minionism- because blinded faith is enslavement without hope of salvation. Only the Father of Lies could embrace so perverted a goal as bringing the end of the world by forcing the hand of God- thereby denying the possibility of salvation to all those on the cusp of finding it.
Separation of church and state must be absolute lest we risk a return to from where we fled to escape persecution and church tyranny
Milo-2' wrote:
REPLY: 'Milo-2', your precept appears to suggest that the United States of America is a Christian Nation; a mistake that many make. It is not a Christian Nation, it is a secular nation, deliberately established as such by founders who were immigrants from Europe, or the descendents of immigrants who left Europe to seek religious freedom. Religious freedom from the domination of the Church over every aspect of peoples lives.
A little American History research will enlighten you to the fact that although most of the founders were religious (believed in God), they were not members of Christian denominations.
Because America is not a Christian Nation it is no more appropriate for a US Marine squadron to fly into battle brandishing the name "Crusaders", and the Christian Cross symbol, than it would be for them to use the Star of David symbol of Judaism, or the Crescent Moon and Star symbol of Islam, the Yin Yang symbol of Daoism, etc.
Secular means secular. Separation of Church and State applies to the US Military services just as it applies to all American public institutions. There is of course a place for the practice of religion (all religions) in the US Military, and the military makes ample provision for religious services and provides chaplains for that purpose.
However when a member of the US Military is called to action they are fighting for the freedoms of all in America to practice the faith of their choice or no faith at all.
All faiths are equal in the protections of the Bill of Rights ; but none are an 'establishment' of the State.
I think people have over the years, muddied the definition of what is separation of church and state. Each side twists it to fit their own desires.
Also, the case could be made that the Werewolf insignia is a belief in the occult, therefore a religion. The werewolf insignia is therefore also in violation
You are incorrect. They came here to escape the government from telling them when, where and how to worship. Many of the colonies had state religions. The country is a Christian nation with a secular govt. A nation is not defined by its govt. but by it's people. This is why Turkey, with a secular govt. is called a Muslim country. Christians have as much right to vote for laws that reflect their Christian values as secularists have to vote for those that reflect theirs.
The Crusades were fought, as all wars are, over secular reasons ,Money. The Muslims closed the trade routes that brought the Kings and Queens their spices and silk, and were taking territory from the empires of the time as well as prventing Christian pilgrams from traveling to the holy land. The loss of revenue and luxury items sent the secular Kings and merchants into a frenzy. However they knew the average person was unlikely to support a war over silk and propagandized it into a war to save the holy land. All of the land that the Crusaders fought for was Christian or Jewish or a half dozen other religions long before the Prophet began his war to exterminate anyone who didn't convert. Only after Saladin agreed to reopen the trade and pilgramage routes did the war end.
'
Agreed myspellcheckisbroken (and so is your space bar). Both sides use it when needed and twist it in a desired fashion. The Constitution only speaks of a wall of separation so that Congress would not adopt an official religion and prevent another Church of England situation. The fact that that Congress starts each session with a prayer for "spiritual guidance" is often overlooked.
Everything has and is becoming too political correct. one of the problems is trying to keep up with all the PC BS. Freedom of speech and expression ? Hell you almost got to think 2 or 3 times before saying anything because you are more then likely going to insult someones agenda or feelings. I really wish most people would take a really hard look at what many of the founding fathers meant by separation of state and church. Like hello ,the Government would not create a national religion. Like in state mandated. But what the hell we have a National Cathedral which is Episcopalian. When are there going to be protest about that , because it is called the NATIONAL Cathedral ? I tried of all the PC BS in my life and around me.
It is interesting to see how ANY offensive comment, or idea is pounced upon by those that favor the left. We cannot say anything against the Muslims, but that can destroy our churches, disfigure women, imorision christians, and its ok. Come on America, get real, and start standing up for what this counrty means to its citizens. This political correct stuff is pushing American down the sewer.
Oh please Tom, that's garbage. Are any and all offensive ideas promoted by those that favor the right?
I thought the legal counsel for the Marine Corps Commandant was spouting even more garbage and an incredible historical ignorance. The Crusades were a military rather than a religious endeavour ? A cross is not a religious symbol? What the hell is this guy talking about? Does he have any historical perspective whatsoever? We can not and should not turn our involvement in the Middle East into a religious war. We can not allow religious fanatics or evangelicals in and around our government to involve this country in a war of religious conquest. The Kings and landed nobility of the 12th and 13th century were recruited by the Catholic Church to travel to the middle east and fight a war to return the Holy City of Jerusalem to the Christian faith. They were promised eternal salvation if they succeeded. To portray this as anything other than religious warfare is plain semantic garbage. This is NOT political correctness, it is pragmatic and historical correctness, something the average American seems to have not grasped.
If you listen carefully to the American religious right when they talk about Israel you will note that they talk about Israel and not the Jews. Israel the land, Israel the site of the Holy City of Jerusalem. As far as they are concerned the Jews can and will go to hell if they don't accept Christ and that's just fine as long as they don't surrender the City of Jerusalem to the infidel. As a nation we need to avoid the quicksand of religious conquest in the Middle East.
Milgram's Experiment.... Not only were Muslims exterminating people who did not convert to Islam, people who called themselves Christian were exterminating people simply because they weren't Christian. During the 2nd Crusade/Jihad so-called Christians soldiers were stopping at Jewish settlements in Europe and were killing everyone who was not fortunate enough to escape. So-called Christians even sold European slaves Jewish and Christian alike to finance their war. Historically people who call themselves Christian have murdered more people than Muslims, dehumanized more people than Muslims and had committed more atrocities against humanity than Muslims. And guess what, I'm a Christian, but the truth is the truth. You will know them by their fruits.
I believe that many "modern Christians" would be surprised at the number of Congregationalists, Unitarians, and "closet Diests" were amongst the signatories of the Declaration of Independence, etc. Many of them did not believe in a Holy Trinity. Many of them questioned the divinity of Jesus Christ, etc. Most of them were extremely concerned about religious persecution and the negative influence of religion on government. If we as a society could only be as forward thinking as they were. Throughout history, differences in religious beliefs of individuals have beenextremely divisionary within all societies. Those divisions have lead to intollerance, violence, rape, murder, and wars. Wars within humanity have lead back to two major causes: competition for resources and differences in belief.
For me, keeping religion out of Government and the elements that defend it (military, police, judicial, executive, legislative etc.) seems... wise...
VMFA-122 poses no threat to any church, and never will.
Being politicaly correct is so tiresome.
@Newsvine
While some of us may not agree with what Leah Burton had to say It seems pretty tame compared to the many comments. 4 pages and 235 comments with quite a few that are way out of line (comparitively speaking). At least she is part of the Org. that is mentioned in the article and added to the subject at hand. While quite a few (especially page 4) just were being stupid, rude and nasty.
@Leah Burton
Glad to here that you beieve in what you do and the Org. that you are affiliated with.
My only real concern was if the Red Cross has to change their name and symbol to operate in Muslim lands the Crusaders would really drive them crazy(er). Lt. Col. William Lieblein had the right idea to begin with. The Crusaders name and symbols would likely cost lives and create other problems in general.
When your buddy Mikey stated: "We still demand that those who made the decision … be fully and aggressively prosecuted so this never happens again," said Weinstein. "And we want a full accounting of how much money it cost taxpayers to change the name from Werewolves to Crusaders and back to Werewolves." that is really over the top and just plain STUPID not to mention one of the reasons so many people despise lawyers to begin with.
Prosecute.......Really? Hyperbole much? Is this the best that Mikey can find to occupy his time and talent? Must be really slow around the office to keep pushing this agenda. Maybe he is plannin' to become a politician.
How bout have those at fault receive a reprimand, accept an apology, and preserve your resources for fighting the evil, nefarious, dastardly and down right mean Christian Dominionism and maybe the jerks at the Westboro Baptist Church as well.
Money is tight right now for most use it wisely.
Unless Mikey wants to possibly have some splainin to do to those that contribute :)
Honestly, if anyone outside of the base notices what's on their tails and shoulder patches, they're doing it wrong.
I understand not imposing religion on the soldiers. I agree with separation of church and state. However, a werewolf is just as much a religious symbol as a cross. It may be a dark and witchy sort of religion, but it's a religion. This leads me to assume it is only Christian symbols that this group objects to which labels this religious persecution of Christians. Because being a witch/warlock sort of religion is okay - according to this group.
P.S. a Timberwolf is an actual species of animal in this country. It is not a "Werewolf" - which to my knowledge is not a real thing.
All due respect for your service, but I will have to politely disagree with you on this point.
We've had Muslims in this country for 200+ years of our history, and we have't had a problem with them until now. And we only have ourselves to blame for this--we created Al-Quaeda.
History lesson--when the Soviets invaded the Middle East we poured money and arms to the rebel insurgents called 'al-Quaeda' to fight the Soviet invasion. We had relations with Bin Laden at the time, too. But as with all wars, once the war is over (the Soviets withdrew) Bin Laden's army turned mercenary. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, Bin Laden offered the assistance of his troops to repel the invasion. Iraq chose to invite the US in and we accepted (big mistake), which offended bin Laden, and that was where the hatred of the US was born. They became fringe fighters, meshed with the Taliban, and turned that hatred toward us, and were proclaimed terrorists, which ultimately resulted in 9-11.
With Bin Laden gone, it' like cutting the head off the snake. The body may continue to exist, but not in the same force and with the same direction that it has formerly, and it will take them a long time to find another leader to unite them again (if ever.) The Taliban didn't have the strength or resources to attack us directly without the arms and stuff we supplied Bin Laden, and while a small portion of the Muslims in this world have chosen to throw their lot in with the hopeless cause (there will always be some who will fight for the underdog, it's part of human nature) the majority of Muslims in the world simply want to be left alone.
There was a great deal of outrage after 9-11 worldwide and practically everyone condemned these militant radicalists for what they did. However, our actions after 9-11 haven't really endeared us to the world; invasion and occupation of various Middle East countries in search of Bin Laden was fringe, at best; looking for WMD's that didn't exist was a PR disaster. What we need to do now is acknowledge that the hunt for WMD's was a mistake brought on by poor judgement and withdraw from the middle east ave for embassies and advisory help ONLY where we are asked, and accept a refusal if another sovereign state declines. we shouldn't continue to force our presence where we are obviously not wanted or needed.
War is good for business, but peace is also good for business. Some of our greatest technological advances have been discovered in wartime, but practical applications that benefit all mankind only come in peacetime.
It's time for peace.
Werewolves is simply a better name than Crusaders.
Simple.
Of course the name was also changed for a BS reason. But beyond that, Werewolves basically monkeystomp silly tin men who get themselves killed in a desert. Done.
So the name pokes the Muslims in the eye - not the smartest thing to do but MEH.
Here's the important subtle bit you are all missing: the more insidious part of this story is the evangelization of our troops. Brainwashing individuals to go to war in the name of "our god" is the problem here. It makes it way too easy to start the next war or continue the current one indefinitely if you make it about "my god is good and yours is bad so I'm gonna kill you".
Read up on the army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) test. Here's an excerpt of a story about it:
If you fail the "spiritual component" of the test, you're not exactly disqualified from the army, they just make you take "remedial" instruction.
Apparently the army has figured out that this works so well for the people trying to kill us, that they have decided to employ the same tactic to justify our wars. If that doesn't scare the s#!t out of you, you are either christian or braindead.
"The military attorney questioned whether the cross was a religious symbol and argued that the crusades were really military, not religious in nature"
My jaw dropped when I read that. You've gotta have some big "attorney-style" balls to make such a statement with a straight face.
Aw, dude. Yeah, you're befuddled. Sorry, I'm gonna have to answer this one.
The earliest mentions of werewolves/Lycanthrope come from ancient Greek mythology where a man named Lycaon was turned to a wolf by the god Zeus because he sacrificed his son and served his remains to the Gods (isn't there a bit in the Bible where Abraham was commanded to do something similar by God? except the biblical ending was a bit different, but still, I have issues with a God who subjects mortals to such caprices of whim.) Herodotus, Ovid, Virgil and Pliny The Elder are all classical authors who wrote about this legend. (if you know anything about classical literature you'll recognize those names.)
Mentions of werewolves crop up in Ancient China, Europe, Africa, and Central America and man-wolf shapeshifters even crop up in Native American and Mesoamerican (Maya/Aztec)folklore. While I have no doubt that it probably cropped up in ancient Druid culture, the idea of 'werewolves' being associated with 'witchcraft' didn't happen until the rise of the Roman Catholic Church--they said those who were excommunicated by the church would become werewolves, and since those were the days when witches were excommunicated, the negative association began.
In other words, a werewolf is as much a symbol of the Christian Religion as the red cross/shield symbol of the Knights of the Holy Trinity and the Crusades.
And as a former Catholic (now Wicca) myself, yes, Wicca/paganism is an established, formally recognized religion by the US government. The government issues officially-approved religious jewelry for those military enlistees of different religious persuasions and a pentagram is among their offerings--along with the Christian cross, the Star of David, etc.
Unfortunately if I want off work on a Wiccan holiday it's leave without pay, as opposed to Christian holidays like Christmas and Easter, which are paid holidays. However since Christmas is our Yule and Easter falls right about the time as Beltane, (Christians stole their holidays from the ancient pagans) I don't have much of a problem with it.
Oh, and...though I've formally left the Catholic church behind, I haven't turned into a werewolf!!
Ahh yes, another one of the GOP or Gods Only People missions. I remember Sarah Palin saying the Iraq war was "Gods Will".. The military, under the GOP have become a Crusading group of soldiers. Sorry to say that but the facts are the facts. Religion is rampant in the military and people are out killing in the name of God and Jesus while wearing the military uniform.
I served during the first Gulf War stateside at NavHosp Portsmouth, Va and saw the babble thumpers coming home from that war. The holy rollers were present then and now and especially after 9-11 (which was led by OUR government http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0iImMhJSuY) actual undoctored footage) US Commercial Jets have colors and markings. US Military planes are GRAY!
Winestein is the problem, not the Marines.
The purpose of the moniker is supposed to be aggressive and intimidating. If Muslims find 'Crusaders' with a shield and cross logo intimidating, then it has served it's purpose. Just like the names of football teams are supposed to show fighting strength, power, intimidation. Next thing you know, the Bears will be called "Dust Bunnies"
WOW, there is so much wrong here.
First: Crusaders were a group historically known as bloody and ruthless invaders to the Middle East (they were mostly French, German and English). Sending them against a Middle Eastern country as our war representatives isn't just not PC, it's F-ing stupid and reckless.
Second: Werewolves come from mythology, not theology. Saying they are a religious symbol is like saying a leprachaun is as well. Furthermore, it has never been an actual faction of humans (see above) so it doesn't hold the same conotations.
Third: Read the autobiographies of the founding fathers (Specifically Adams, Franklin and Jefferson) and you will confirm that only 1 of the founding fathers practiced Christianity. The rest condemned the use of Christian philosophy as a basis of law. It was the Puritans who left England to escape pursecution in the 1500-1600s, not 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was drafted or 1786.
Lastly: MILO, I would like you to know that there are Muslims who serve in our military (Marines included). Muslims who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, killed and died for the Stars and Stripes. If you believe respecting that is PC BS than you dishonor yourself and what this country SHOULD be standing for.
A quick bit of research on scumbag "Mikey" Weinstein reveals he isn't for religious freedom, he's against Christians. His history of hatred for Christians goes all the way back to his academy days.
OK, Mikey, you've had your 15 minutes of fame, can you please crawl back in the slime you came from?
Sounds like a lot of QQ over Mikey Weinstein.
Doesn't matter. Werewolves was fine and still is. Crusaders is just not as good a name. Oh yeah, and the whole cross thing too. If you are a Christian, act like one and get over it.
To all that call Crusaders "invaders": learn your history!
The entire Levant was part of the Roman (later Byzantine) Empire from 64 BC until it was invaded by... the Muslim Caliphate around 635 AD. Given that Christianity was tolerated in 313 AD and made the official religion of the Roman/Byzantine kingdom in 380, it was a Christian land for 245 years.
So: Crusaders were the DEFENDERS against an agressors, not the agressors themselves.
In case any of the anti-Muslim folk out there actually think that destroying these cities is a good idea, let me tell you how it would backfire. First, one of the five pillars of Islam states that all Muslims are to make the pilgrimage to Mecca and/or Medina at least once in their lifetime if they are able to. Pay attention to the words if they are able to. IF you destroy these cities, then they won't be able to make a pilgrimage to them. If they aren't able to make a pilgrimage to them, then they don't have to. If 1.5 billion Muslims and growing don't have to make the pilgrimage then that just makes it easier to be Muslim.
Second of all, nothing, NOTHING, draws people to a cause more rapidly or readily than a martyr (see Jesus Christ and the Christian martyrs). IF you destroy these cities, not only will the people that died in them become martyrs, the cities themselves will become martyrs for the cause of jihad! Look back at history when Texans used the warcry "Remember the Alamo!" Do you really want all 1.5 billion Muslims burning the rest of the world to the ground screaming "Remember Mecca!" or "Remember Medina!"?
Destorying these two cities would backfire HORRIBLY.
@Crystal-252415
"Next thing you know, the Bears will be called "Dust Bunnies"
You mean they're not...........Don't they play against the Cleveland "Cupcakes" ?
Milo-2, you've got 8 suspensions in your history. They're pretty spaced out, but still - start following the rules or be banned. You're suspended for a month for violating #5 of the Code of Honor.
Don't smear everyone in a religion.
crlanc - Unfortunately, you seem to be confusing Catholics and Christians. Prior to both "Holy Wars", Christians, Jews, and Muslims shared the Holy City in peace; and afterwards, local Christians once again returned to the area once the threat of conversion or death was removed. Historically, Christians have been forced to follow Catholicism or be charged as a heretic, which was the basis of those original American settlers seeking religious freedom….freedom from persecution by the Catholic Church. In short, if not for the Roman-Catholic Church, there would have never been any “Holy Wars”, so please try not dumping all Christians in this power hungry group. Real Christians are not so power hungry or place so much importance on traditional religious doctorate. In fact, very few Christians would ever place birth-control issues above caring for the poor, yet the Catholic Church is condemning nuns for doing just that.
The traditions of man make void the word of God, and the Catholic Church is a prime example.
m.
jHARN - Your facts need... um... facts.
1) The whole point of the Crusades was to force open the Holy Land. Prior to the First Crusade, Jerusalem had been closed to Christian pilgrims. After 450 years there simply WERE no Christians "sharing" Jerusalem as they'd all be forced to convert to Islam or die. If by "local Christians" you mean the Byzantines, they couldn't have done squat without the Crusaders, as they were often fighting on 3 fronts at the same time!
2) The Puritans fled the Church of England, not the Catholic Church. Only Maryland was a Roman Catholic colony, and it was hardly exclusive. Most all of the immigrants that came to America came for financial purposes first. Else how do you explain the millions of Poles, Italians and French (among others) that remained Catholic after coming to the US?
3) By the time of the colonization of America, Protestantism was already well established in Europe via the Council of Worms in 1521. So you're over 150 years off in terms of Papal power.
4) Roman Catholics are real Christians. So are the Orthodox, Copts, and any number of other creeds.
5) The Roman Catholic Church is one of the biggest relief organizations for the poor on Earth.
Wienerstien needs to get a life. Hey maybe we can put his ass on the front line and then we will see how worried he is about some cross reference , he thought might be offensive. What a moron
It is not just another "PC" issue. Having the squadron call themselves "Crusaders" while serving in the Muslim world is just painting Al qaeda recruting posters on every jet. The previous commander had recognized this when he ordered the change to Werewolves in the first place.
Sometimes the best approach is the most direct approach. Unless I missed the memo, the last word I had was that the Marines mission is to "find, fix, engage, and destroy enemy forces". The Marines have a long and proud history of fighting low intensity, unconventional wars. The Marines wrote the book on "small wars", they have a well documented grasp of the concept and prosecution of these types of conflict. I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I am very experienced in the subject. The notion that anyone should care about how the enemy feels about what names we assign ourselves is ludicrous. The use of the name Crusaders being restricted because it might cause unease is equally insane. And if religion is so poisonous why are there chaplains, religious services or the invocation of God used in ceremonies. There's a wise axiom that tells us how we lose our way "You can't know where you're going if you forget where you came from". Surrender your history at your peril.
RT, If we were fighting a full-scale, all out war like WW2 I might agree with you. What we are fighting is more like what any metro police force deals with when they have to wade into a hostile crowd to pull out a few violent agitators like recently happened in Chicago at the NATO summit. In such a case, they move in quickly, pull out who they need and then get out which minimizes the violence and casualties on both sides. You can quietly go into the bear cave and pull out the bear you are after or you can first smear yourself with honey and then poke every bear with a stick to piss them off while you look for the bear you want. You may get the bear either way but the first way is much less wear and tear on the bear hunter.
RT, the creation of additional enemies from the ranks of neutrals is the tactic of an idiot.
That's why the decision was made: to avert pointlessly expending the lives of Americans for the sake of some fool's idea of pride.
The protection of one's home on any scale is a noble calling, and I honor Marines and other servicemen for their willingness to serve as I did- but throwing lit matches at a powder keg is neither bravery nor virtue- just madness.
Rules are rules, Moe. The Constitution is very clear on the separation of church and state, while basic common sense tells us that marking our marines as "crusaders" in the Middle East is just a bad idea.
I'm with you, RT... The symbol is more of a "warrior" image than a religious one. This is PC crap plain and simple. Religious propaganda? Really? I don't think they were dropping bibles on them. Here's a thought, instead of whining about some symbol painted on the rudder of a fighter jet, how about directing that energy toward something worthwhile, like the economy, the national debt, etc.... you know, real problems. This is just one more nail in the pussification of America coffin. It's a sad time when we have to worry about some other country's or religion's feelings. Yes, by all means, let's not upset the big bad boogey man al-qaeda. BOO! Ahh, The Good Ol' USA, now becoming the nation of the offended and where it pays to be the victim.
Part of Weinstein's quoted impetus for his legal crusade was his notion that there was nothing worse the USMC could have done to incite jihad then to paint these images on their planes and wear similar patches on their uniforms...I guess a bunch of armed and armored non-Moslem "infidels" roaming around an Islamic country, who, along with killing their stated enemies periodically killing innocent citizens - accidentally or not - via firefights, bombardments, drone strikes, etc. particularly after Bin Laden has been killed...does nothing to inspire local folks to consider jihad.
Anyway, he wins his case and now he calls for a crinimnal and financial jihad / crusade against the folks who painted the tail flashes and sewed the patches?!
You won, get over it jackwad!
I am a Marine veteran, although I was not an Air Winger. I did serve in combat as a heavy machine gunner. Right or wrong in the eyes of civilians doesn't matter two shakes in combat. If I piss my enemy off enough that he comes gunning for me, then he is easier to find and eliminate! I say let those who fight do their job and quit worrying about what the enemy thinks. In case you haven't noticed they ARE already trying to kill our Marines and Soldiers. I hope all enimies of the U.S rot, and the sooner the better!
RTColorado - Who told you that the entire Afghan nation, Muslims, or Islamist were the enemy?? This was supposedly a "War on Terror", or terrorists. By your logic, everyone is the area are the enemy, and our supposed policing of the population is in reality an occupation of enemy territory. Unfortunately, this is exactly the type of thing the locals feel is happening, and your suggestion is that the locals should just "suck it up" is simply irresponsible.
Toasty - Although I wish it were true, the concept of separation of church and state is little more than that and actually nowhere in the Constitution. With the 1st Amendment, this issue was addressed, yet it wasn’t until 1947 that the provision was consider applicable on the state level; where some states opposed teaching evolution. In fact, this battle is still being waged by “intelligent design” groups and is far from over.
Werewolves Vampires tooth fairy Elves whatever as long as it does not offend anyone. I am actually offended by werewolves as they destroy and wreak havoc every full moon. I say those Devil dogs have the right to call themselves whatever they want. I always liked to sing" Onward Christian Soldiers" when emptying a magazine. Remember what Memorial day stands for.
Peace.
...... Toasty McGrath is a fool .... just because someone percieves this as religious, does not make it so .... maybe you and the others actually think that now these same guys are really warewolves ?
Freedom? Where?
You're implying they have freedom of expression in the military; that's false. Ever hear of "Separation of Church and State"? The military is part of the state.
They had no right to impose religious propaganda on the rest of the squad. They should demote whoever approved that symbol for use.
Do you also object to the Moslems bombing Christians in Iraq, or killing Christians in Indonesia and the Sudan - the Moslems consider it freedom of expression. When have you ever heard an Moslem Imam condenm 911 or any of the other atrocities commited in the name of Allah - to be fair the Christians have their fair share of questionable behavior. But you liberals only condemn the Christians, why is that?
Oh give me a break. I can tell you right now, years before we started to engage in the middle east these names were used and NOBODY cared. Also NOBODY sat there and looked at the name Crusaders and put it into the terms that you are all up in arms about. How does the name Crusaders infringe on the separation of Church and State? Are they delivering a sermon? Are the imposing a belief system on anyone? Are the forcing folks to convert to new religion? The answer is NO to all of these because its a NAME!!! And before you call me a repug or whatever stupid play on republican you enjoy, I am not one as I believe the political parties in this country are truly loathsome at this point in time. Find another cause to go after, there must be better uses of your time.
Well said Ben.
I'm sure there are plenty of unreasonable fundamentalist that would be upset about that Ben. That's not worth anyone getting killed over...
People in the Squadron have to wear this insignia. A cross with the name crusaders is a religious symbol plain and simple.
@ atelier, i have a problem with the US bombing mosques also. Like we did with a drone strike the other day. I'm waiting for someone on the right to start bombing here on the American soil and then blaming the Muslims or whatever. The KKK and the white hate groups, which always rear their ugly heads when the Dems have the Presidency, did it under Clinton, OK City ring a bell will be the ones to start that war here. They can't stomach the fact a black man is in their White House!
But I guess you don't have a problem with that. I'm also waiting for the war to be brought to America. under Romney its a reality. If we invade Iran, China will invade America. They are going broke. We owe them over $1.4 Trillion. They love Iranian oil and if we invade, our gas prices will double or triple and China will be choked off of their lust for oil. China will be looking for oil, who has oil and lots of it? Alaska does. Who is close to Alaska and an ally of China and NOT the US? Russia, why I can see Russia from my front porch.
The GOP don't see the ramifications of a war with Iran.. Too bad most Americans can't see the bigger picture about the GOP and their goals for America, which is total destruction of our nation..
atelier...
"Do you also object to the Moslems bombing Christians in Iraq, or killing Christians in Indonesia and the Sudan - the Moslems consider it freedom of expression. When have you ever heard an Moslem Imam condenm 911 or any of the other atrocities commited in the name of Allah - to be fair the Christians have their fair share of questionable behavior. But you liberals only condemn the Christians, why is that?"
You mean, christians bombing muslims in Iraq, right? How about christian serbians slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent muslim farmers in Bosnia? Or Christian crusaders invading and then killing tens of thousands of muslims in the middle eat over the last two millenia?
How about this - if you want a perpetual war, make it a religious war and put crosses on all military equipment. If you want wars based on achievable goals, leave religon out of it entirely. As a prior service member, I can tell you that not all soldiers are christians and the whole point of a military unit it to be a unit and get things done. Leaving religon out of it goes a long way towards accomplishing that.
Atrlier - I oppose murder for whatever the reason. Just because brain-washed Muslims commit evil acts in the name of their God does not give us permission to do the same. Otherwise, we are no better. Sure, terrorism has changed our views on the threat level, but for those in this region, terrorism is a daily activity, I hardly think they need a lesson in.
I'm sure Liberals around the world have a problem with how other nations behave, but understandably, they are more concerned by how our nation behaves. Not really rocket science.
Frankly, as long as those leathernecks are willing to lay down their lives for MY country and MY freedom, I don't give a damn what they call themselves! A hero by another name is still a hero and God bless 'em for their sacrifice!
CRUSADERS wow how insensitive!!! why don't these little do gooders go and defend the rights of muslim women or gay muslims or women who are persecuted or murdered for being to western!!!! leave the worlds best fighting force alone(i was one) the people who do this @!$%# probably never were in the military ought to mind thier own business instead of trying to bust the USMC 's balls.
I agree, we should do as little as possible to upset the extremists(do they like that term?) and make them dislike us anymore than they already do. I think, to save our troops lives and to keep anymore of them from getting hurt we should get rid of the "separation of church and state" (which, by the way , doesn't exist officially anywhere but libs[don't star jumping up and down sounding the republican alarm, I'm a pround Democrat who wishes the libs would give my party back] imaginations) and convert to muslim. then we can all go to europe and force our religion or death upon any infidel who dares stand against us. WAKE UP!!!!!! They hate us not for our beliefs or our schools or our movies or tv shows or even because we're fighting them. They hate us because we have a different God than them. You wanna convert? go ahead, maybe you can talk to them about separating their church from their state.
Sorry, atelier. I'm not going to play your mindless little games where you try to redirect me to some other bogey-man. We're talking about the marines here.
Another insane example of political correctness.
It is not just another "PC" issue. Having the squadron call themselves "Crusaders" while serving in the Muslim world is just painting Al qaeda recruiting posters on every jet. The previous commander had recognized this when he ordered the change to Werewolves in the first place.
Right now we are fighting a few thousand terrorists. Want to fight a few million? Give them the notion that we really ARE Crusaders, intent on destroying their lands/faith/holy places ... that ought to do it.
A political correction of insanity, actually. If you dig inflicting risk on others for the sake of misplaced pride, why not do yourself up in blackface and strut through Harlem on a Saturday night, singing "Mammy" in a suicidal reprisal of Al Jolson? I'd pay good money to watch that....
It's not about PC. Remember when George DA Bush said, "Bring it on"? You don't do that when the other guy is looking for the smallest reason to kill you.
Yes yes, better not make the enemy mad at you, he might try harder to kill you. . . Wussies.
Following the Constitution isn't political correctness. It's, you know... The LAW.
This does not support the Constitution. It is in direct violation of the princple of free speech, freedom of religious expression no matter who finds that expression offensive, and the seperation of church and state which forbids the govt. from directing how when or where people express their faith.
The groups suit states quite clearly that they want the name removed because they and the Muslims will find it offensive.
If we have chhange things just to please our enemy, we have already lost.
DOWN WITH PC BLOWHARDS.
The point, Omnipotus, is that it may well encourage people who are not trying to kill us to do so. Radical Middle Eastern Imams are telling their listeners that our involvement in the region is a replay of the Crusades and must be resisted on that basis. Having a unit known as the Crusaders gives the Imams credibility.
"This does not support the Constitution. It is in direct violation of the princple of free speech, freedom of religious expression no matter who finds that expression offensive, and the seperation of church and state which forbids the govt. from directing how when or where people express their faith."
One of the first things you lose when you enter the military is the full range of freedoms. But, hey, maybe things should change. Here are some other unit names that should be allowed in the military: The Evangelists, The KKK Boys, The Child Rapers, The Hitlerjugend, The Coprophagians, The Fighting Atheists, The Jihadis, The Jesus Fu ckers, etc.
Screw the military's mission or ability to keep order in the ranks. It's freedom of expression, man!
Hey Brad,
It would be better to fight a few million. Trying to kill the "few Thousand" terrorists hidden amongst the population is a lesson in futility. All it will accomplish is what we have today... US Forces dying a few at a time, unable to protect themselves because of the stupid rules of engagement (more PC BS). Bring on a few million, at least we could fight and possibly end this thing. It will happen sooner or later, maybe not in our lifetime. As long as we (the USA) are addicted to their oil, we will be in the middle east. If we would make energy independence a top priority, we would not even have to be there. But, that is another discussion......
MIGLRAM -- There is no free speech in the military. Soldiers fall under an entirely different code of law (UCMJ) for good reason (so they don't do stupid stuff like put crosses on our military equipment).
The name Werewolf violates the constitutional rights of practising Lycanthropes, so the Marines must find another name. Hey, this makes about as much sense as this appeasement garbage over the word Crusader!
Ed-NavDoc...it's obvious why the
MarinesJarheads need to use names in addition to numbers for their squadrons...they have trouble with numbers. Hell, most of them can't spell their squadron nick-name (half of them can't read or write). Don't believe me...ask any sailor.Again, Milgram:
im sure you would be happy if they called themselves the Black Panthers.
Only if we were fighting the KKK
Mikey Weinstein....Says it all!
Yes he does!! He says we are afraid of what islamists will do to us if we offend them. Guys like that make me sick.
Weinstein says to much! The offense has been noted and changed back to the previous logo and team name. Yer he wants a full accounting including prosecution! For that he has lost all my respect. The Marines quickly complied with his request, now he thinks he is king. Those Marines are fighting for your rights Weinstein, the got over zealous in their quest. So back off you dirt bag and let the men do their job. Listening to your nutty further requests would deprive this nation of competent and much needed protectors of your freedom. Even if it cost one million dollars to make that conversion it works out to less than a penny per citizen, not even counting the undocumented. I gladly give up my penny to allow our soldiers to make a victimless mistake. Weinstein get a life!
Before you criticize the man for his last name, you may want to learn something about him. His family has served the military for 130 years. How long has your family served cunical?
Weinstein isn't doing this to piss off the military. If you read up on the man's history, he's doing it because the loves the crap out of the US Armed Forces and he is concerned that they are being evangelized and brainwashed. You can read his bio here www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/about/michael-l-mikey-weinstein/. In case you don't feel like reading the whole thing, here's an excerpt:
What you left out of the biography is his rabid hatred of Christianity. He doesn't give a damn about religious freedom as long as he can give Christians a black eye.
Oh ferchrisakes. These idiots are forcing people to bow down to the insane politics of Islamist militants. God I despise all the PC creeps. Nuke the jihadists and be done with it!
Fallout travels on global winds. Nuke 'em? Not on my watch. If you must, drop a 20-ton KEW from orbit. Just insure the metallic signature matches that of a nickel/iron asteroid.... at which point, the resulting glowing crater becomes a completely deniable "act of God".
Mark, they're "forcing" us to bow down to the Constitution.
Alright, use Daisy Cutters or something bigger. No fallout that way. If you value your freedom to cry about how we fight for it, then leave how we fight up to us. Do not interfere or you could easily loose that freedom when your PC BS forces us to loose yet another war.
No toasty, they are forcing us to bow down their secular religion. The beleif that humans can solve the problems of the world and that there is no God, is just that, a belief based on faith with no evidence to support it. And plenty of evidence to refute the idea that humans can solve these problems.
And this belief system has killed more people in war in the last century than all the wars before put together.
I'm not an Islamist, and I think "Crusaders" was a foolish identification for all the reasons listed in the comments on this board. There goes your theory.
Sorry Milgram, but the Constitution is the final say on government matters, and it's pretty clear.
And really, if secularism is a religion then "not collecting stamps" is a hobby.
Although Mr. Weinstein appears to be so concerned about the cost to change the name, he is demanding full and aggressive prosecution. Does he somehow believe that prosecutors and defense attorneys will agree to do so pro bono?
Weinstein is a crybaby with money, that is all. He should face the real danger from these islamist creeps and then talk, but he won't. Too scared, I'll bet. Probably an old draft dodger.
I agree that this part is over stepping to the max. They won their battle, they should just go home and celebrate not attempt to persecute those they have defeated. Personally I think going back to the Crusader was a bad idea just on the face of it, but Marines tend to take traditions very seriously, so the change could of just been some one in the squadron wanting to go with its history. Not out to cause trouble or make a statement.
The Marines agreed with your argument, Mr. Weinstein, now move along.
I would like to know why, any one would listen to a grown ass man still going by MIKEY ?. No onea crap before this war so why now ? . Did he see a chance to get on the news and in the paper, and grab his 15 minutes of fame ? . I bet he is a BIG PUSSY and has NEVER been in the military. But like some people who have no clue, what its like to be in they tell the people in the military how to run it .
Because we have the Establishment Clause, 0311.
Howdy,
27 year vet here and disgusted with folks thinking the change back to werewolves is "politically correct" and slights at German names. Personally, I'd have picked a name other than werewolves to begin with, but the fine tradition of vmf-214 Black Sheep... go with the flow. They put the kibosh on the Navy squadron that used the Playboy symbol awhile back. I agree that returning to the "crusaders"... although the F-8 was the Crusader... is a poor choice. Later on in my military career, I was disappointed in the amount of religion that was brought into the Navy/Marine Corps. The CNO was hosting "prayer breakfasts", officers were given time off to attend "promise-keeper" rallies. There probably are no atheists in fox holes, but "official" sanction of religion and religious icons in unit regalia should be taboo. I'm sure there were members of the squadron that protested through channels, but felt hounded by superiors who apparently lack command perspective. America is, and should be a melting pot of cultures, religions and races. Anyone who thinks otherwise is welcome to their opinion, but would be more at home in a more totalitarian regime, or religious state. The founding fathers should have made the bill stating: "freedom from religion"... but they wouldn't have gotten it past the conservatives of their time. I will support any person's right to stand before God on Their Own... not interpreted by the words or preachings of others. Other persons should have the same respect. The US Military is not Christian, or Jewish, or Moslem, or Hindu, or anything else... it is green, and blue and colorblind. It has a job to do. Let's not muck it up with prejudices.
Well said, sir.
And thank you for your service.
As a 23 year vet (and currently still in), I think, sir, that you're an idiot!
Bruce, as a six year vet, I thank you for your articulate and thoughtful post. Wish there were more like it on this page. There are far too many in this country who seem to think "it's the land of the free as long as you think/look/worship like me". They see stories like this and think it's all "PC nonsense" but, in this case, it's about the safety of our troops in the Mid-East as well as about recognizing that non-Christians in that or other units might not enjoy serving under that symbol.
I believe Bruce from Texas made a valid argument here. So jwilson1234...why do you say he is an idiot? Please expound on your reasoning otherwise some of us may think that the idiot moniker is on the wrong person.
Thanks to every single person (even if I don't agree 100% with their posts) that posts here and served our country past and present. I sincerely appreciate your efforts and sacrifices.
Precisely! Thank you!
Ahmen, good post
You served longer than I did, Bruce- so your opinion on the topic carries more weight than mine does- the weight of experience. I agree regardless. Great post.
The whole point of the name was to irritate the enemy. But it turns out the enemy is us.
I agree with you 100%. The enemy is from within.
jwilson1234, keep it to yourself, that's not a contribution. If you think someone's an idiot, ignore them and respond to someone you think more of. You're suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
I was stationed with VMFA-122 when they were known as the Crusaders. I will always consider them the Crusaders.
I was stationed with VMFA115 The Silver Eagles, VMFA232 The Red Devils and VMFA 451 The Warlords during the time VMFA122 was the Crusaders. To me they will always be the Crusaders.
You can call them what you want. But they are the Wolverines today and from now on.
Haha Toasty, you sound like a petulant child. You forgot to tack "nya nya" onto your sentence, but we can all hear it in your meaning. Semper Fi
Semper fi.
You really do sound like a child.
VMF 122 became know as the Crusaders when they transitioned to the F-8 Crusader Aircraft back in I believe 1958. They were named after an aircraft. The last of the true gun fighters.
We are taking this political correctness to ridiculous levels.
Why do you hate the constitution?
Really? You got hate the Constitution out of that?
@Bruce
34 year retiree here. Just so you know the separation of church and state doesn’t say that religion is forbidden in government functions. It doesn’t prohibit time for promise-keepers or prayer time. What it states, quite clearly, is that government will make no mandate as to a religion of the state. In other words it doesn’t prohibit any religious activity. It simply stops the government from creating or demanding adherence to a specific religion.
Uh, GOYSD? You contradicted yourself within the same paragraph.
While you are correct that the Constitution does not prohibit religious activity- in fact, it guarantees the freedom to worship however one so chooses- the framers of that document believed fervently in separation of church and state in all matters. James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution and a devout Christian clearly express his belief that when religion enters into politics it is to the great detriment of both. Jefferson went so far as to write into the Constitution of Virginia a clause that specifically prohibits any religious "litmus test" to hold office.
I understand that the Crusaders is a name with a long military history. It is however a fact that we are enmeshed in multiple conflicts in an area of the world where that term has a much longer and extremely negative history. Both Presidents Bush and Obama have gone to great lengths to avoid using the word so as to avoid giving our enemies the opportunity to re-enforce their propaganda against us. Why does it not make sense for the military to do likewise, especially in a conflict where our only hope of success is to win the hearts and minds of the civilian population?
@ Hartvig...
Because the military is a fighting machine, not a political one. If the politicians would let the military do their job, it would not be such a mess in the middle east. First and foremost, we should not be over there. What about 9/11 you say? Well, we invaded Iraq and they had nothing to do with 9/11. They were Saudi's. Win the "Hearts and Minds"?? You mean like Vietnam? How did that play out? Not very good.... We learned absolutely nothing from that "police action". We are repeating it in Afghanistan today... When will the USA learn that you can not purchase friends?
crymeariver313
I'm completely on board with you about Iraq- I spoke out against our involvement before we ever put a boot on the ground and was called a traitor, a coward and a fool. And yes, it was politicians who divided our forces and allowed Bin Laden and Al-Quida to escape in Afghanistan. The ugly truth however is that we are there, at least for the time being. Anything that fuels the notion that it is as conquerors only serves to broaden support for the people that are trying to kill our troops. Does it make sense to further antagonize the civilian population and give them even more reason to turn against us?
I haven't even commented yet on how disturbing this must be for our troops who are Muslim or of middle-eastern descent.
Wrong name at the wrong time in the wrong place.
political correctness, and cowtouing to the muslim world.. are you kidding me??? get real-- do you think they would care a rats ass how we feel???
It's cowtowing to the First Amendment, Harry.
Toasty: Your a %&$##@ idiot. If you do not like the Constitution leave my country. We will make you traitors pay. SOON
You can't call him names, but I agree with your sentiment Paul. Completely.
Sorry Paul, but the Constitution is very clear about the separation of church and state. It's absolute.
Toasty tell me EXACTLY where in the constitution it says "separation of church and state"?
I have read it and specifically the first amendment and I have in 25 years after constitution class YET TO FIND IT.
waiting........waiting........waiting....
GUESS WHAT IT DOES NOT EXIST YOU IGNORANT BLOWHARD.
All it says is that the state (USA) shall have no established STATE SPONCERED RELIGION.
In past historical sense like the church of England. Where they were very similar to the islamic country of Iran in the percecution of ANY OTHER religion in that country.
The framers wanted to prevent that, while allowing the free expression of an individuals religion or to have none at all.
It is ignorant putz like you that keep telling the lie of constitutional freedom from religion (aka seperation of church and state).
So again I challenge you
WHERE EXACTLY DOES IT STATE SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IN THE CONSTITUTION?
Truth, That is the truth!!!!!!!!!
Right here, Truth:
It's the first sentence in the First Amendment. Frankly, I can't understand how you missed it.
In the words of Thomas Jefferson the first amendment was included in the constitution to provide "an absolute wall of separation between Church and State." Can we agree that he ought be recognized as quite well informed on the intent of the framers of the constitution?
The government owns the aircraft that the crosses were painted on, painting a cross on a government owned killing machine is totally of bounds and ought reasonably offend followers of the constitution as well as the followers of The Prince of Peace.
Surely only someone who had attended law school would be capable of the mental gymnastics required in asserting that a cross and references to the crusades are not religious in nature.
Toasty David Barton is not a historian. Barton holds no formal credentials in history or law, and scholars dispute the accuracy and integrity of his assertions about history, accusing him of practicing misleading historical revisionism, "pseudoscholarship" and "outright falsehoods".
Who is David Barton and why are you talking about him? I gave you the words of James Madison.
I'd rather they were called Henry the Moslem blood drenched Lionhearteds than denigrate our culture for theirs.
How is following the constitution "denigrating" our culture?
Explain, exactly, how insulting islamist enemies is against the Constitution please.
Cute, Omni. Childish, but cute.
The only child I see here is you toasty.
Name calling instead of responding like an adult with adult discussion is the example of childness.
So do you have a response or just show us your a name calling fool
Toasty, Truth is right. First you went with the "do not insult" BS and when that didn't fly, you went with the "seperation" BS and when you could not defend that you did what you always do and started the childish name calling. Next time have your mommy help you.
Just because you guys have never read the Constitution is no reason to throw temper tantrums. It's pretty easy to remedy:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html
what is truly funny is that you all attack each other for being childish and name calling, and then you do it yourself.....
Good deal... I seem to have touched a nerve. Glad that y'all are thinking. Knew a Crusader pilot who went through flight school with Randy Cunningham. What were the Squadron commander's thoughts about changing? Those are command decisions and I hope that the commander is studied... If he was bringing back the F8, then he should have thought about a new logo. As far as religion and the military... my last few years were in the reserves... and we weren't real happy when folks would take off 50% of their reserve weekend for proselytizing... and get paid for it. Good points all. I just hope that anyone with an opinion, also has served in the military. Congress is full of folks that have opinions, power, and haven't served a day of active duty... by the way, they also get Top Secret clearances without background checks...
Hope you post often, Bruce. Thanks.
Well said!
"Good points all. I just hope that anyone with an opinion, also has served in the military."
Bruce, I appreciate your comments and your thoughts, but this line of argument really strikes me as infuriating. This is a democracy in which civilians' taxes pay for the military, civilian leaders direct the military, and in which the military is presented as an organization that represents all Americans on the world stage. Civilians have every right to share their opinion on how the military is run and what values it is expressing.
I consider myself a liberal, but I do see this as an example of political correctness gone too far. The Crusades were 1000 years ago. After that period, if memory serves, Islam conquered large parts of Europe and established was a known as the Caliphate. Are we expected to rewrite history to expunge all of these historical events? Should we recall Eisenhower's book about WW2 in the European Theater (Crusade in Europe) and reissue it under a politically correct title? Shall we also recall Mark Twain and remove the racial words? Give me a break.
It's the thought that counts. That's why the squadron has a logo in the first place. So the fact that it happened 1000 years ago doesn't matter. What matters is the message that's being sent now. (And, by the way, the events that caused Shia to split from Sunni and Protestants to split from Catholics happened that long ago too. And if you asked any of those groups, they would say that it's still very relevant.)
And the thought is evil. The thought is, "People who look and think like me are gonna kill people who look and think like you." That's exactly the same thought that al Queda and the Taliban have. If you have that thought, then you're evil too.
(And ... I served too - although unwillingly. I was almost the last person drafted during the VietNam era.)
(Finally ... Bruce from Texas ... You have done the near impossible. You have given me one reason to regard Texas in a slightly better way.)
CAL USA... you have to realize that much of Islam is about 800 years behind the time. Their Imams
are driving an extreme conservative interpretation. How would you like it if your minister could order your execution based on your personal view of whatever scripture you read?
I demand that the government stop serving Crescent rolls at any civil or military affair. The crescent is a symbol used by Islam and it offends my religious beliefs.
See, anyone can be a politically correct ID10T.
If Islam became a theocratic state without national boundaries and then invaded America, I'm sure anything resembling a crescent, a curved sword, or any other symbol reminiscent of Islam would become vanishingly rare. Sauerkraut became "Liberty Cabbage" in WWII- "Hamburger" was "Salisbury Steak", and so on, and so forth. Hey- I suppose an Islamic invasion could happen- but there's so very many more of us than there are of them. The martyr-to-victim ratio better be pretty high, or they'll run out of bodies before we do. Talk about "passive aggressive"...
Plus they'd have a pretty big @!$%#ing ocean to cross... And the most powerful military that has ever existed to contend with.
Save them the trouble. Nuke Mecca and Medina.
I guess they would have to stop serving hot-cross buns.
Paul could you do me and the rest of us reasonable people of New Mexico a favor and drop the NM from your name. You are an embarrassment to our state,please move one state over to the east or west, your thinking will be more at home in those states.
Holy Crap, I just ate one...am I in trouble ?
@ Bruce,
So you have a rant dependant on your reserve time? Really? I dont think so.
Also what is your comment quoted here supposed to mean if anything ? "Congress is full of folks that have opinions, power, and haven't served a day of active duty... by the way, they also get Top Secret clearances without background checks"
I certainly hope that if you ever really served(which I'm starting to doubt due to your security clearance BS) that you never got beyond cleaning the shi++ers.
When I first saw this link I thought it was going to be a cheesy indy B-film preview. Now I see its the other side of the "Jewish space zombie" saga. The MRFF idiots are just as bad as their enemies on the other side of the town square. Both of them try to force their beliefs on people.
First, as a Marine, I am pretty sure not a single damn one of the members of VMFA-122 really gave a rats behind what their squadron logo was aslong as it was not a peace sign,flower, or something not congruant to a warfighters mentality so I am pretty sure the MRFF were acting on their OWN behalf and not the Marines.
Second, the whole sensitivity to other cultures is just a bunch of BS. If a squadron of F-18's are flying in force in an area where the name Crusaders is offensive due to historical happenings...then they are probably going to be really pissed at us due to our reason of being there is to bomb the hell out of them in retaliation for some retarded terrorist attack.
Third, I really wish the GOD tribe and the "There is no GOD" tribe would stop stop hanging out on their soap boxes, forcing me to listen to their rhetoric, and let me have my own damn beliefs
Well said
Wait wait wait... the religious are always touting FIRST. There is no soapbox when something is seen as wrong. Secondly, if people touting on their soapboxes changes your belief, that is YOU who let that happen. Soapboxing does nothing or has no effect of your "own damn beliefs" unless YOU let it...
What is next in this day of political correctness. Should the Marine Corps be forced to change the lyrics in the Marine Corps Hymn because it contains the name of a place in the muslim world.
Why would a geographic name be politically incorrect?
Oh, someone will be offended by it!
Someone always is.
Yeah, but let's face it; that's a stupid reason to support Dixon's stupid argument.
@ Christopher-4047527,
Agreed my friend, my relgion was how fast i can arm and time my 50 cal. However I'm sick and tired of the liberal asshats that hide behind the "I thank you for your service" comments while still trying to explain to me what the constitution "really" means in their god-hating smarter-than-us attitudes.
The Constitution is pretty clear in its meaning. The separation of church and state is absolute under the First Amendment. There isn't much explanation required.
Not true. It is liars like you that keep up the lie. The "opinion" of some judges say that. All the Constitution says is the government shall not start a religion BUT it cannot the prohibit the practice of religion either. And GOD does have a place in the public square and debate. Prayer in school is legal. We will eventually find our judges to make it so.
Uh, Paul? The Establishment Clause is pretty clear:
Sorry kiddo, but you're wrong.
Again toasty you are full of BS
It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".
Those are the EXACT WORDS
It does not say "seperation of church and state".
I am willing to buy you a dictionary so you can see (for example) Establishment is not the same as Separation.
Toasty, you should really work on your reading skills. The idea of seperation of church is not contained in the Constituion.
You guys can't honestly be that stupid. I literally JUST showed you it. I mean, I dare you to come up with a BETTER definition of "separation of church and state" than "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Hey toasty you must subscribe to gobel's (hitler popoganda minister to be accurate) line "tell a lie often enough people will think its the truth"
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
I looked up each and every word in it (I will not fill a post with each word definition) and no where do the words SEPARATION OF CHRCH AND STATE APPEAR IN THEM.
It states clear as crystal the congress cannot make a law stateing a "church of the USA/spagetti monster/whatever name" or prohibit AKA STOPPING YOU from free exarcise of whatever or none at all religion you choose.
So again where are the WORDS APPEAR IN DIRECT QUOTE in the constitution or where do THE DEFINITION OF ANY OF THE WORDS YOU QUOTED FROM THE FIRST AMMENDMENT (AS SEEN IN THE WEBSTERS ENGLISH DICTIONARY) HAVE THE "SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE" APPEAR IN IT?
I now have quoted historical facts as the the will, thought process and meaning of the first amendment as it relates to religion by the founding fathers.
I have PROVEN the definition by websters dictionary what the words mean.
So you are an ignorant PUTZ that thinks if he wishes, stomps his feet, and blows more bs than a congressman that YOUR WISH WILL BE FACT
Guess what, no matter how hard you try you cant make a car be a grapefruit no matter how much you wish it could be.
BTW the same supreme court you may use as a source (NOT THE CONSTITUTION) as a "seperation of church and state" ruling was the same one that also said slavery was legal in the USA for over 100 years.
So do you have ANY ADULT PROOF of your contitutional theory or wll you continue to be a name calling ignorant child?
The very definition of "the separation of church and state." Well done, Truth.
Again, the Establishment Clause. You haven't even read it yet, apparently.
So now that you feel we should overturn it, you have admitted that the separation of church and state IS a constitutional principle,
I do:
It's the same as all the liberals quoting "freedom FROM religion" instead of "freedom OF religion"! What does it really say about all of us? It's all about who's side of the fence are you on! "A nation divided can not stand"! Enter the "One World Order". Is that what you all want? I'm STILL proud to be an American..."God shed His Grace on thee..."!
So... How do you get the freedom of religion without the freedom from religion? I'm not sure you thought of this...
Ok toasty I see I presumed too much in thinking you were telling the truth when you CLAIMED TO READ THE CONSTITUTION.
So I gave an example to see if you are what you say or a big BS blowhard.
The constitution example I gave on slavery (if YOU HAD ACTUALLY READ THE CONSTITUTION) showed that untill the bill of rights was changed blacks were considered 2/3 of a man for population (which controlled the number of representatives in the house) and had ZERO RIGHTS. The supreme court had to rule slavery legal until the law was changed.
Hardly the same and you had to stretch to unbelievable lengths to try (and failed) to justify your position.
Now I am forced due to your deliberate continued attempt to justify your position by using BS OVER FACTS.
Here is two KEY WORDS you try to say ARE THE SAME BUT NOT
SEPARATION (in separation of church and state) is defined as
1: the act or process of separating : the state of beingseparated
2
a : a point, line, or means of division
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/separation
Establishment (as establishment of religion)
1: something established: as a : a settled arrangement; especially : a code of laws
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/separation
Note the basic definitions are NOTHING, NO WAY, OR EVEN REMOTELY THE SAME IN EITHER EXACT WORDING OR SPIRIT.
Note also instead of wasting space with the entire post from websters dictionary I posted the EXACT links of the definition of the words.
The expanded text only goes to show what a BS blowhard you (and others like you) are and you dont let a little thing like FACTS get in the way of your view.
I admit it took me a while but I figured out what your issue is. It is the basic idea sigmend frued said..."sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".
To make it simple for you. You can look at a pig and try to convince/argue/ect its a dog the reality its still a pig.
Again you have yet to answer my basic question.
WHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION IT SAYS (IN CLEAR WORDING NOT YOUR INTERPRETATION) SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
Lastly (to dumb down to your level) an example of clear idea and intent was outlawing alcohol (prohibition) then recinding that law to make it legal again.
So basically, you admit that the Constitution draws a separation of church and state, but you feel it should be repealed. Okay, at least that's an argument. I mean, I can't see the First Amendment being repealed any time soon, but okay.
we need some crusaders then we are being threatened the Islamic hordes
Another fundraising stunt for Weinstein! Will probably up his salary soon.
"We still demand that those who made the decision … be
fully and aggressively prosecuted so this never happens again," said
Weinstein. "And we want a full accounting of how much money it cost
taxpayers to change the name from Werewolves to Crusaders and back to
Werewolves."
What a total jag-off
This is more war on religion and Christians. Crusaders are a historical group and not a Holy Bible sanctioned activity, you won't find them mentioned in the Holy Bible. World History is populated with the governments and the resulting wars and rumors of wars, that are symbols of leadership, symbols of nations with laws and authorities, and symbols nations of people that defend against trespass of their laws that are the people. It is wrong to ignore the reality of the world we live within and we just see symbolism attacked for the sake of appearances without knowledge.
Religion has been at war with secular (or the freedom to think freely for oneself) way before this assumed war on religion. Religion is supposed to be personal, not injectable to an institution that represents all and not a individual sect. But when crusaders, the term is back with a shield and cross, what does it really imply then? Religiosity! Which should not be something promoted on military equipment.
Sorry JB, but we live in a secular democracy under the First Amendment to the Constitution.
No! It is a Republic based on Judeo/Christian values. You do not understand the Constitution. Read it for a change and try to keep your opinions intellectual instead of emotional.
Like I said, a secular democracy. And I have read the Constitution, and it clearly doesn't say what you think it says. In fact, I'd suggest you read it.
Paul From NM,
The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli article 11 "As the Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion . . ." was unaminously approved by the congress at that time. Look it up in the Library of Congress (try the online documents as well). Our government was not founded on Judeo/Christian as you claim. Clearly, you do not understand the constitution.
Actually, that language was used for the same reason that the Crusader name was removed. Fear of the Muslims that were attacking the US and to allow them to save face after the Navy and Marines gave them some trouble. The statement was disavowed by Congress but deemed necessary to stave off a war.
The Crusades and Crusaders were a barbarous affront to Christ. Does anyone think Christ would have approved of the Children's Crusade? They achieved nothing but infamy and their own destruction They are the reason "Christians" aren't welcome in some places to this day.
Really Milgram, and are you next going to argue that Congress disavowed the First Amendment too?