Major faiths no threat to U.S.
Q: What is the proper role of religion -- and personal religious belief -- in the U.S. armed forces? Should a particular religious affiliation disqualify someone from active military service? How far should the military go to accommodate personal religious beliefs and practices?
The U.S. already has a legal position and a long tradition of separation of church and state: personal faith as well as no faith are a personal matter. It also has a long tradition of providing military chaplains as well as prison chaplains. Since we have no established religion, the various faiths of our military personnel should be and have been represented.
Should a particular religious affiliation disqualify someone from active military service? Why? No major faith, including the five major world religions I have studied and taught, threatens the safety and security of the U.S. or its citizens. Religious extremists of any faith are a threat but they should be treated as any other extremists, religious or non-religious. Regrettably, despicable acts like the Ft. Hood murders, as senior military like General Casey have stated, should not become an occasion for some questioning the right and indeed need to have Muslims in the military. A psychologically disturbed mass murderer should not be seen as representative of mainstream belief and practice. Muslims, like followers of other faiths, have served and died for their country, and been awarded our highest awards - medal of honor, purple heart etc.
The U.S. military should and does make an effort to accommodate personal religious beliefs and practices: providing chaplains, places and occasions for rituals, etc. On the other hand, it should not accommodate those who would wish to proselytize.
By
John Esposito
|
November 11, 2009; 10:58 AM ET
Share This:
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Hasan's calculated distortions of Islam |
Next: The Torah, the Army, and the troops
Posted by: abhab1 | November 17, 2009 5:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I see that John Esposito is the founding director, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Georgetown University and is Professor of religion, international affairs and Islamic studies. Very impressive.
He can try until he's blue in the face to promote understanding between these two religions. It all boils down to this fact: Christianity is a gospel of Love; Peace; and Forgiveness through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
Islam is a religion of Terrorism; Jihads; Anger and Violence.
Muslims are the descendants of Ishmael, Abraham's son by the slave woman, Hagar.
Here is what the Lord had to say about Ishmael:
Genesis 16:10-12 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude. And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction. AND HE WILL BE A WILD MAN; HIS HAND WILL BE AGAINST EVERY MAN, AND EVERY MAN'S HAND AGAINST HIM; AND HE SHALL DWELL IN THE PRESENCE OF ALL HIS BRETHREN.
Some things never change.
Posted by: nikosd99 | November 16, 2009 10:10 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Yes -- but the 14, 374 terrorist attacks worldwide over the past eight years weren't perpetrated at random by members of diverse world religions. They were executed by radical Muslims, every one (Stillwell).
There is a problem folks.
Sure individuals of all faiths commit atrocities, however Islam is currently the major problem.
Posted by: aspacia | November 15, 2009 4:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"Yes -- but the 14, 374 terrorist attacks worldwide over the past eight years weren't perpetrated at random by members of diverse world religions. They were executed by radical Muslims, every one (Stillwell).
This fact refutes your claim Esposito. These terrorist attacks we done in the name of Islam.
Posted by: aspacia | November 15, 2009 3:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Edzed,
How about we wager that 10 out of 10 missile strikes by occupying terrorist Nations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine or even Pakistan now will involve killing innocent women children and elderly mostly of Islamic faith? How much have you got?
Posted by: yasseryousufi | November 12, 2009 2:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment
There have been many comments since the killings at Fort Hood that emphasize that Islam is "peaceful." Would any of these apologists care to make a wager? I will bet that at least nine of the next ten terrorist actions (shootings, suicide bombings, etc.) will be perpetrated by muslims. Any takers????
Posted by: edzed | November 11, 2009 4:32 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"A psychologically disturbed mass murderer should not be seen as representative of mainstream belief and practice."
How many "pschologically disturbed mass murderers" that use the same justification for their acts does it take to call the basis for the justification into question?
It is not that Islam is a problem in itself but the inherent misogyny that easily arises from that religion resonates with male loners and the divisive nature of the religion can provide self justification for mass murder.
Posted by: edbyronadams | November 11, 2009 11:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Twitter










Esposito asserts:
“No major faith, including the five major world religions I have studied and taught, threatens the safety and security of the U.S. or its citizens.”
I call replacing the US constitution with a primitive Islamic law (Sharia) whether by deception or the sword threatens the well being of the US and its citizens. It will shape us in the image of the likes of Afghanistan and Sudan and if that is not a threat of the worst type I know not what is.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/columnists/rdreher/stories/DN-dreher_09edi.ART.State.Edition1.4235f88.htm