Yes, This is Wrong, Too.

[Teallaura]

Washington (AFP) - The US Air Force has told a sergeant he will have to leave the military unless he agrees to take an oath with the phrase "so help me God," officials said Tuesday.



In the latest religious controversy to roil the air force, the atheist airman last month was denied his request to re-enlist because of his refusal to swear to God -- and he is now poised to take the military to court, his lawyer said.

source

What, seriously, is so complicated about this? The law requires parity in treatment - that's ALL. It doesn't guarantee no one will be offended, just that even one has an equal opportunity of access or is treated equitably. Simple - so legitimate religions (no, it really doesn't protect the made up crap) get equal access where access is granted and atheists don't have to say 'under God' if they don't wanna.

You'd think it was rocket science...

[Darth Executor]

Is it too soon to hope this is a part of a broader conspiracy by Christian Nationalists to hijack the US military and overthrow the US government?

[Teallaura]

Um, yes, way too soon.

[KingsGambit]

Aren't all religions made up except Judaism and Christianity? Where do we draw the line?

[Teallaura]

Aren't all religions made up except Judaism and Christianity? Where do we draw the line?

You really can't distinguish 'Banjoism' from an actual religion? Just because defining something is problematic - and that's largely why the Court has historically been loath to try - doesn't mean it can't be reasonably done or shouldn't be done. We don't have to pretend that mockery has equal footing with genuine belief, even if we regard that belief as mistaken or, as in our case, happen to know they're wrong (). This 'but where, oh where, is the dividing line' thing is foolishness. Yes, it will be difficult if not impossible to come up with a legal definition that pleases everyone but it is certainly possible to define religion well enough to meaningfully distinguish between the genuine and the fake.

How? Same way we always do - we'll muddle around until we hit the one that works. 200+ years of American politics and jurisprudence have, frighteningly enough, worked just that way.