Sighting The Bible: Military Contractor Found Adding Biblical Citations to Weapons

ABC has a truly bizarre and disturbing story. Brian Ross reports that a military contractor has encoded hidden New Testament Bible passages on high-powered rifle sites. The contractor is Trijicon, which apparently confirmed the practice.

The biblical references appear as, in one case, 2COR4:6 — an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: “For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”

The company received $660 million under a contract to supply 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps. It has other contracts with the Army.

U.S. regulations prohibits proselytizing of any religion. Moreover, such additions to military equipment should violate the contract which presumably did not ask for biblical citations with gun sights.

The use of biblical citations will only reaffirm the view of many that the U.S. went into Iraq and Afghanistan on a “crusade.” This view was magnified by Bush calling its a crusade and later citing Biblical passages to convince other leaders that this was a worthy, if not divinely ordained, effort. His subordinates appeared to keep Bush in a Biblical mindset by adding prominent quotations from the Bible in reports on the war, here.

In my view, this raises serious legal questions that should result in a review of this contract. As a minimum, the contractor should have to pay for the removal of the citations. We have to able to trust contractors not to carry out their hidden or religious agenda as part of a contract with the American people. Just imagine if these were citation to the Koran. If the company wishes to proselytize it should do so with theocratic governments. Perhaps the Swiss Guards that the Vatican need a few sights and citations.

For the full story, click here.

388 thoughts on “Sighting The Bible: Military Contractor Found Adding Biblical Citations to Weapons”

  1. Well I’m glad for you then.

    But I don’t recall anyone specifically referring to you. Although you did mock the divinity of the Gospels which is in and of itself an example albeit a minor one of religious intolerance, most of your comments however were ambiguous at best so I’m not sure what your point is.

    If you’re just trying to tell me that “you” are tolerant of people’s beliefs then thank you.

    I’ll put your name down in the book of the not-damned. 🙂

  2. Maybe you miss my point. Accepting people who they are regardless of what they are is what the Democratic party used to be like. In 89 is factioned and splintered.

    That was when Eye of Newt was speaker. I had a brief stint with Jim Wright before the Contact on America came about. Maybe I was to you to realize what was going on. But as far a I knew it was grass roots. None of this side show stuff.

    It matter not what a persons religion is to me. It matters to me who they are as a person.

  3. Here, I thought of a way to phrase it simpler.

    You know how we’re always giving the republicans sh$t for lumping all or most Muslims into one stereotype?

    Well there you go.

  4. If that’s the goal, then by all means keep it up.

    If not then you might want to consider dusting off the old tried and true democratic principle of religious tolerance.

    And maybe try giving diversity a kick in the pants or two.

    Just to wake it up.

  5. You keep on telling and showing the Christians that they’re not welcome within your ranks and you’ll find more and more leaving your ranks.

  6. AY, you’re completely missing the point and I don’t know how to make it any clearer. It doesn’t matter what someone thinks about your belief with regards to your commitment or faith.

    However if that person mocks and ridicules your beliefs and those beliefs are sacred or important to you then one thing is pretty certain.

    You and that person aren’t going to be bosom buddies.

    And that means divisiveness.

    And the last thing the democratic party needs within its ranks right now…is divisiveness.

    Do you understand?

    You keep trying to make this about me as if I am bemoaning my faith being picked on.

    Its not.

    As I pointed out a few dozens times now its about driving off the masses. You may not know this but there’s more Christians in the Democratic party than anything else. But the most vocal group in the democratic party are the atheists. At least that’s what we see from Jon Stewart (a by his own definition, “non-believing Jew) to Bill Maher (an extremely vocal atheist).

    All one has to do is watch “Real Time” one time to see the non stop lambasting of Christians. I’ve seen him tell liberal ministers in a dismissive tone that their faith was fairy tales and the audience erupts with laughter. What do you think that looks like to staunch liberals or progressives who’s faith is central to their life?

    Sure many blow it off and vote with the democrats anyway. Sure “some” do. But more and more there is a fallout and liberal Christians are pulling back and reevaluating their affiliation to a party in which they are seen as ignorant children who believe in a magic man in the sky. And worse, called that.

    So as much as you want to make it appear that this debate was simply about my hurt feelings over having my beliefs mocked it was not.

    It was about a little old liberal principle known as religious tolerance, and the devastating effect the abandoning of this principle will have on future elections.

  7. If you have a belief one way or the other (whether it be catholic, Jewish, atheist, Buddhist, Taoist, christian, agnostic, capitalist etc)


    you and everyone else around you is better for it, (You don’t impose your values on me or my beliefs and you accept me the way that I am and I accept you the way you are)

    does (can)it really matter what someone thinks of your belief?

    As each is accepted for whom they are?

    This is not hard to explain, maybe to understand in practice.

  8. Well I’m indebted to you Mike. There’s no doubt that you brought civility back to the discussion. Your presence was a calming one for everyone and that’s pretty good.

Comments are closed.