Constitutional Law, Politics, Religion, Society

Air Force Bars Atheist From Reenlisting Unless He Signs And Orally Repeats an Oath To God

1280px-Oath_of_enlistment_·_DF-ST-91-07705150px-Seal_of_the_US_Air_Force.svgThere is an interesting case of religious freedom that has arisen at Creech Air Force base in Nevada where an unnamed airman has been told that he will not be allowed to re-enlist because he does not want to take an oath including the words “so help me God.” He is an atheist and, for obvious reasons, finds the words objectionable. Curiously, despite that fact that he clearly does not believe in God, the Air Force wants him to swear to God as a condition for his serving his country. It is not only a violation of this constitutional rights under the First Amendment but an offense to the many atheists who have served and continue to serve our country.

The American Humanist Association has complained to the Air Force Inspector General that the rule not only violates First Amendment but also Article VI, which bars using a religious test as qualification to any office or public trust of the United States.

The Air Force insists that they have no leeway because the oath is contained in a statute. Notably, however, the Air Force used to allow airmen to omit the words but changed the policy during the Obama Administration. The old version of Air Force Instruction 36-2606 included an exception: “Note: Airmen may omit the words ‘so help me God,’ if desired for personal reasons.” The change in 2013 requires that even atheist be forced to swear to God as a condition for service.

In this case, the airman simply crossed out the phrase “so help me God.” He was told that who have to both sign a statement swearing to God and then recite those words.

The statute, 10 U.S.C. 502, states:

§502. Enlistment oath: who may administer
(a) Enlistment Oath.—Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
“I, ____________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

Notably, if this goes to court, the airman would not be required to swear to God on a bible as an atheist. Instead, he is allowed to attest that his testimony will be true under an alternative to the religious oath:

If any person of whom an oath is required shall claim religious scruples against taking the same, the word “swear” and the words “so help you God” may be omitted from the foregoing forms, and the word “affirm” and the words “and this you do under the penalties of perjury” shall be substituted therefor, respectively, and such person shall be considered, for all purposes, as having been duly sworn.

The refusal to accommodate the religious beliefs of this service member is deeply disturbing and contravenes core American values. He should challenge the rule under the Declaratory Judgment Act in federal court. He will then doubly serve his country in standing against not just enemies from without but those within our country who refuse to respect the religious or non-religious views of all citizens.

Source: Air Force Times as first seen on ABA Journal

850 thoughts on “Air Force Bars Atheist From Reenlisting Unless He Signs And Orally Repeats an Oath To God”

  2. Olly – if I have this right, the video argues that the morality belongs to the society. So, the Morality Police are actually operating on a valid principle.

  4. Annie,
    Wow!

    The instructor in your video is arguing validity of laws are based on a certain moral authority. He identifies three possible sources for Moral Authority:
    1. Religion
    2. Intellectual – ration or reason
    3. Natural origin – certain laws in nature.

    “To natural law theorists: If a law conflicts with morality; morality wins and that law should be disobeyed.”

    “How do we determine which particular morality is going to be imposed on everyone?“

    “From a Natural Law perspective…What is Law? Law is a behavioral code that is sourced in a particular morality”

    The morality he is speaking of is whatever the “homogeneous” society determines it to be.

    In the video, he never mentions rights. It is impossible to discuss (well he has proven that untrue); it is intellectually dishonest to discuss Natural Rights Theory without mentioning Natural Rights. It is the point of the theory, the basis of our DoI and our form of government.

    Perhaps the Nuclear Option was the real shot across the bow for a true Democracy. Vote early, vote often, if you end up with that form of government.

    Perhaps the Professor would weigh in on this subject. What are the opinions of other bloggers?

  7. Most atheist I know have no problem being around folks that believe in something…. Those that have problems with atheist basically have problems within there own wiring..ll

    1. AY wrote: “Most atheist I know have no problem being around folks that believe in something…”

      That really depends upon both the atheist as well as the one who believes in something.

      Many years ago, I was invited to speak to an organization at the University of South Florida about my work with the homeless through a non-profit charity I had founded. The organization that invited me was made up of about half communists and half socialists. I was friends with one of the leaders of the group who was an atheist and a communist. We cooperated in doing some social work together. He was impressed with our progress in helping people and invited me to his group to speak. At the time we were having problems with the local authorities because they expected us to get permits, and if we shared food with someone, they wanted us to buy insurance that was prohibitively expensive. Sometimes we applied for permits, but because they required a 10 day advance application, we did not always do that. In a nutshell, we basically ignored the local laws at times and did what we believed was right. We told them that we were protected by the Constitution and that their city ordinances were not valid laws. Often police cars would lurk at street corners with policemen video taping us. Sometimes unmarked cars and guys in suits were video taping us. I was told they were FBI. One day a local policeman said if I was there next week doing what I was doing, he was going to arrest me. Later he denied ever saying it. That was the first time I learned that policemen sometimes lie. Eventually they did start arresting us. I was the first one arrested. We eventually suffered many arrests, over 18 arrests in six months, for trying to help the poor.

      Anyway, one man in the group was someone who promoted the atheist group on campus. He looked like quite the atheist evangelist on campus, inviting people to their atheist meetings and passing out literature to people to encourage them to be atheists and to become “Free Thinkers.” As I was speaking in front of this classroom, and describing our difficulties with the Tampa police who did not like us working downtown with the homeless, and how we navigated those problems, he became enraged at me. He got out of his seat in the back of the class and ran up the aisle to attack me. He was screaming, “the reason for your problems with the police is because you talk about God, God, God… I am so sick of it.” He was swinging wildly like a mad man and jumped on me clawing and scratching. He literally tore my shirt to shreds so that I could no longer wear it. Two other men came to my rescue and pulled him off of me.

      The interesting thing to me was that the event split the group up. Half the people in that group thought the atheist was justified to attack me. Half the group did not. Some of those who thought the atheist wronged me were atheists too. So it is not so easy to stereotype whether atheists will get along with theists or not. Some do. Some don’t.

      2. david – it appears from your post that you were not arrested for helping the poor but for not getting the proper permits.

        1. Paul wrote: “What do you bet that I and you again will be the only ones singled out yet again for violation of the civility rule. Just guessing….”

          Yup. They charged me with: “Advocacy without a permit.”

          1. Sorry for the misquotation there Paul. The copy key didn’t take and it posted the previous clipboard and I didn’t read it over.

            Paul Schulte wrote: “it appears from your post that you were not arrested for helping the poor but for not getting the proper permits.”

            Yup. They charged me with: “Advocacy without a permit.”

    1. Laser wrote: “There should be a high school class of Legal 101 (would make better clients and less filling up of the courts).”

      Good idea, but if the class teaches legal theory from the writings of John Locke, William Blackstone, Thomas Jefferson, and others who acknowledge the Creator, expect the ACLU to sue the school district for violation of church and state. They will argue that it is unnecessary for Natural Law Theory to reference a Creator, and teaching such alternatives to a more secular Natural Law Theory along the lines of Thomas Hobbes violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Just like creationist theories are censored from public school, and only atheist evolutionary theories are allowed by law into the science classroom, only specific legal theories that do not reference God or morality will be allowed. People will still have to rely on private education to do the job that public education is not allowed by law to do.

      1. david – there is a high school class called Street Law which deals with the rights of students, both civilly and criminally. Fun course. Taught it once.

  13. http://youtu.be/g40tEbAyi0U

    Olly, I also found this one to be very instructive. I’d love to have mini law school classes here by the weekend bloggers who are lawyers. Wouldn that be fun? I think we ALL need to learn a bit more legal theory.

  14. If people leave voting lines early that is on them. It is not voter suppression. I have stood in the rain to vote. I have stood in temperatures over 100 degrees to vote. I take no pity on the weak of heart.

  15. Paul (and I am picking on you),

    Of this (apropos named Air Force) thread, the plane is yermm’ing over ye head.

    Your point is obtuse to the issue of the fact an oath is invalid,
    ——————————————————————— if its not sacrosanct!

    Otherwise – it t’ain’t an “oath” (but – instead – arbitrary/capricious bantering).

    When (if ever) I get the money back Pitten’s fleeced me of;
    I intend to sue for the removal of G-d pledging.

    Separation of Church & State is either absolute;

    or it isn’t!

    N’est-ce pas!

    1. Laser – I do hope you get your money back, but I am not going to hang by my thumbs until then.

  18. Atheists having to walk into a church to vote!!! Call Freedom From Religion, stat!

  19. DBQ, I had the distinct pleasure of going to both the Wi. and Ca. DMV offices a couple years ago. Middle of the month can be a good time to go to DMV. Beginning and end of the month are bad. When I first was a PI you had to go to the DMV and run license plates and DL’s in person. They then set up a computerized system that was a cl@terf@ck. Salespeople always sell the govt. shit nobody else would buy. The State paid, I mean TAXPAYERS PAID over $100 million on a system that crashed all the time. After 4 years of hell we paid again for a system that actually worked. Just like Obamacare.

    1. Nick – the longest I waited in line was the DMV just to get a new license plate because my old one was plastered with renewal stickers.

Comments are closed.