September, 23 2010, 04:17pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Joe Conn, Rob Boston or Sandhya Bathija
202.466.3234
202.466.2587 fax
www.au.org
Army Must Cancel Evangelistic Event at Fort Bragg, Says Americans United
Church-State Watchdog Group Demands Military Officials Drop ‘Rock The Fort’ Event Featuring Franklin Graham Ministry
WASHINGTON
An
evangelistic rally jointly sponsored by U.S. military personnel and evangelical
Christian churches and ministries violates the U.S. Constitution and must be
cancelled, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
The
"Rock the Fort" event at Fort Bragg this weekend targets both military
personnel and adults and children in the surrounding community for conversion
to Christianity. This clearly violates the separation of church and state,
attorneys with Americans United informed Army officials in a letter
today.
"It's
not the Army's job to convert Americans to Christianity," said the Rev. Barry
W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. "This event is totally
unacceptable and must be canceled.
"It
is particularly shocking that the military would join forces with Franklin
Graham," Lynn continued. "Graham has expressed utter contempt for Islam,
Hinduism and other faiths. When our military joins hands with him, it sends
exactly the wrong message to the world. Our military defends a nation that
includes people of many different faiths and some who follow no faith at all."
"Rock
the Fort" is being sponsored by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association
(BGEA) in conjunction with Fort Bragg chaplains and local churches. The current
CEO of the Graham Association is Franklin Graham.
In
addition to evangelizing soldiers, officials at Fort Bragg have invited members
of the surrounding community to attend the Sept. 25 event, which will feature
Christian music and sermonizing. Special emphasis will be placed on
evangelizing children.
The
Graham Web site contains a quote from Fort Bragg Chaplain Antonio McElroy who
said, "I think we are trailblazing here in many ways. I don't think there has
been an outside concert of this magnitude with an organization like BGEA and
our chaplains partnering with local churches to come together for one purpose -
and that is to glorify God and share the Gospel of Jesus Christ."
The
Graham site also tells partnering churches, "The Rock the Fort outreach is
designed to channel new believers into your church, so you can encourage them
to further spiritual growth. The future of the church lies in reaching and
discipling the next generation."
On
June 2, a letter from the chaplain's office at Fort Bragg was issued to local
churches. The letter, signed by Chaplain David Hillis, urges clergy to take
part in the event and notes that it will take "the Christian message to all of Fort Bragg and the
surrounding community!" The letter goes on to state that the event is "evangelistic
in nature" and that it "will conclude with a clear Gospel message."
It
is unclear how many churches received this letter, but given its evangelistic tone,
it's unlikely it was sent to any churches outside of the evangelical Christian
tradition.
"The
Army has no business entering into a partnership with evangelical churches to
help them win new members," Lynn said. "I urge Army officials to stop this event
and make sure no more take place. In addition, the military must end its
relationship with the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association."
In
today's AU letter to Secretary of the Army John McHugh, Americans United Legal
Director Ayesha N. Khan wrote, "The military's participation in a religious
event designed to proselytize soldiers and the community departs of the Army's
obligation to maintain 'official religious neutrality.'
"'Rock
the Fort' is not an event designed to minister to the needs of soldiers unable
to otherwise access religious services; rather, it is an event designed to
proselytize soldiers and community members into the worship of Jesus Christ,"
Khan continued. "The Army has, thus, overstepped the constitutional line by
sponsoring the event."
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.
LATEST NEWS
Alliance of 60+ Groups Demands Farm Bill That Rejects False Climate Solutions
"There's no way around it—we have to actually cut fossil fuel emissions," said Food & Water Watch.
Mar 16, 2023
Dozens of climate action, Indigenous rights, and public interest groups on Thursday announced an alliance that plans to engage with lawmakers ahead of this year's congressional debate on the Farm Bill, calling on them to pass legislation that rejects carbon offsets, carbon markets, and other policies that perpetuate a planet-heating agricultural system.
Food & Water Watch convened more than 60 groups including the Farmworker Advocacy Network, the Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN), and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), all of whom have been disturbed in recent months by the passage of "at least three pieces of legislation that promote carbon offsets and dirty energy, propping up corporate ag interests and factory farming."
As Congress prepares to debate the Farm Bill, which is passed every five years and includes a range of nutrition, agriculture, forestry, and conservation policies, lawmakers must "transition away from false solutions to the climate crisis," said the alliance. "Carbon trading and offsets are inherently flawed and allow fossil fuels to continue polluting. Therefore, related carbon trading corporate-backed schemes have no place in Farm Bill legislation."
The groups are calling for a Farm Bill that will "further biodiverse, regenerative, sustainable agriculture and food systems; reduce fossil fuels and pesticides in farming practices; and promote a community-based food system that is more resilient to climate change."
"Flawed policies promoted under the guise of 'climate smart agriculture' threaten to entrench the polluting status quo, and worsen the climate crisis."
In such legislation, they said, lawmakers must exclude carbon offsets—tradable "rights" that allow purchasers to claim credit for an activity that removes carbon from the atmosphere or prevents emissions. The groups said the Farm Bill should reject:
- Soil offsets, which store carbon in soil and remain "underdeveloped, inconsistent, and unable to accurately account for differences in carbon storage related to specific climates and geographies";
- Forest offsets, which include forest protections that proponents claim prevent future deforestation, but which critics say "mask true emissions reductions by claiming sequestration and biodiversity gains"; and
- Methane offsets, which proponents claim can "tackle the methane emissions from animal waste—typically cow or pig manure—using either separation equipment or anaerobic digestion."
Offset proposals are "incompatible with sustainable agriculture and may drive further consolidation of farms and agribusinesses," said the organizations, adding that the methane offset approach "wrongly supposes that significant methane emissions from farms are inevitable, as well as ignores the litany of co-pollutants from farms poisoning the air and water of nearby environmental justice communities."
As the Center for American Progress (CAP) said in a report about fraud in the market last October, there is mounting evidence that "many carbon offsets do not actually represent permanently removed carbon or avoided emissions."
In some cases, forests targeted by carbon offsets have been logged or burned or, "conversely, were never at risk of being deforested," reported CAP. Some businesses have also purchased 40-year contracts to protect forests, rendering the offset unvalid because carbon can remain in the atmosphere for a century.
"Carbon offset markets are fatally flawed," said Ben Lilliston, director of climate strategies at IATP, on Thursday. "The scientific consensus does not support them. They are riddled with fraud. The economics don't work for anyone, least of all farmers and landowners. The urgency of the climate crisis demands that we put this failed experiment aside, and focus on what we know can benefit farmers and the planet."
Jim Walsh, policy director for Food and Water Watch, said carbon markets and offsets are driven by "wishful thinking" that is "fanciful at best."
"Flawed policies promoted under the guise of 'climate smart agriculture' threaten to entrench the polluting status quo, and worsen the climate crisis," said Walsh. "Real climate action in the Farm Bill means breaking up factory farms, decoupling conservation programs from the private sector to directly serve the public good, and putting a stop to the Big Ag monopolies trampling our climate for private gain."
Food and Water Watch suggested carbon offsets and markets aim to help businesses and policymakers avoid making "real climate progress."
The alliance also said the Farm Bill must not include public funding for methane digester technology that "perpetuates pollution and contamination and continues abuses in dairy and meat farms," conservation programs that include carbon credits sales and trade, the overuse of pesticides, and policies that encourage farmers to produce as much as possible even as the practice depresses prices and allows "agribusiness companies to buy raw materials at far below cost, while farmers struggle to pay mounting bills."
The groups said they plan to attend congressional briefings and meet with lawmakers to urge them to pass a Farm Bill that:
- Respects and uplifts traditional Indigenous knowledge (TIK) in regard to farming and ranching practices;
- Broadens opportunities and support for BIPOC farmers and low-income communities to grow their own food;
- Invests in and improves existing conservation programs to help transition farmers to more ecologically based agricultural practices and systems;
- Broadens opportunities for small and medium-sized farms to access crop insurance and increases safety net funding;
- Emphasizes the importance of building biodiverse, healthy soil;
- Ensures fair competition and treatment in the agriculture sector to ensure better living wages for all farmers and farmworkers;
- Decouples conservation programs from the private sector to directly serve the public good; and
- Tightens and enforces antitrust laws to prevent further monopolization and consolidation of the food system.
"This Farm Bill represents the greatest opportunity in a generation to position American agriculture as a solution to the climate crisis," said Jason Davidson, senior food and agriculture campaigner at Friends of the Earth. "But we cannot do this through carbon markets and offsets underpinned by decades of failure, or through more handouts that further entrench Big Ag's stranglehold on our food system. We need Congress to pursue strategies that support farmers in building a truly regenerative, resilient and equitable food system."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Rachel Corrie 'Lives On in All of Us,' Say Palestinians 20 Years After IDF Killed Activist
One Palestinian journalist said the slain American activist "became a worldwide symbol of freedom and a source of inspiration for everyone who dreams of a world of justice and peace."
Mar 16, 2023
Palestinian rights activists on Thursday remembered the life and legacy of Rachel Corrie, the American human rights defender who was crushed to death by an Israeli military bulldozer on March 16, 2003 while trying to shield a Palestinian home from demolition in occupied Gaza.
"Rachel was 23 when she was killed. She could have satisfied her conscience by protesting against global injustice in a demonstration in America or by calling for a boycott of the aggressors," Palestinian journalist and activist Ahmed Abu Artema—who is from Rafah, where Corrie was killed—wrote for Mondoweiss.
"But her high sense of morality was not satisfied with these symbolic gestures," he added. "Her conscience would not rest without complete involvement, without standing side-by-side with us. That's why she came to Palestine."
Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestinian politician, scholar, and activist, called Corrie "an icon of resistance, freedom, and self-sacrifice."
"Palestine is forever grateful," she added. "Always in our hearts. Rest in love and peace."
Corrie, who hailed from Olympia, Washington, was a volunteer with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a Palestinian-led group resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestine through nonviolent direct action.
"No amount of reading, attendance at conferences, documentary viewing, and word-of-mouth could have prepared me for the reality of the situation here," Corrie wrote to family and friends on February 7, 2003, adding that she had "very few words to describe" what she saw in Gaza.
"An 8-year-old child was shot and killed by an Israeli tank two days before I got here," she said.
"I feel like I'm witnessing the systematic destruction of a people's ability to survive," Corrie told a reporter two days before she was killed.
On the afternoon of March 16, Corrie received an urgent call from ISM activists telling her to rush to the home of Samir Nasrallah, a pharmacist who lived with his wife and three children near the Egyptian border in Rafah. Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops were in the process of destroying homes in the area and ISM activists feared the Nasrallah's residence was next, as it was one of the few houses left standing in the area.
Corrie hurried to the home, clad in a fluorescent orange jacket and carrying a megaphone. As the IDF's American-made Caterpillar D9R armored bulldozer approached Nasrallah's home, Corrie stood in its path and was fatally injured. She was rushed to a nearby hospital, where she died.
Corrie was not the last ISM activist to be killed or seriously wounded by Israeli forces. A month after her death, 21-year-old British student Tom Hurndall was shot in the head by an IDF sniper as he attempted to rescue Palestinian children from an Israeli tank that was firing in their direction. The shooting left Hurndall in a coma; he died nine months later in a London hospital.
IDF officials denied intentionally killing Corrie, despite court testimony from army officers that Corrie and other activists were legitimate military targets who were "doomed to death" for resisting Israeli occupation forces.
An IDF investigation concluded that Corrie had not been crushed to death by the bulldozer, despite an Israeli autopsy that concluded her death was caused by "pressure on the chest with fractures of the ribs and vertebrae of the dorsal spinal column and scapulas, and tear wounds in the right lung."
The IDF called Corrie's death a "regrettable accident" while blaming the ISM activists for their own harm because by "placing themselves in a combat zone."
Efforts in the United States by Corrie's family, activist groups, and U.S. Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) to achieve accountability and justice for Corrie bore no fruit.
While Corrie once wrote that she felt protected by "the difficulties the Israeli army would face if they shot an unarmed U.S. citizen," there were no such difficulties, just as there were no repercussions after Israeli warplanes killed 34 American sailors and wounded 173 others during a 1967 attack on the USS Liberty—an attack numerous top U.S. officials believe was deliberate.
In 2012, an Israeli court ruled against Corrie's parents, who had sued the IDF, with the judge claiming the activist's death was the "result of an accident she brought upon herself."
Former U.S. President Jimmy Cartercondemned the ruling as a confirmation of the "climate of impunity which facilitates Israeli human rights violations."
"Rachel's case was cast aside by Israel's colonial courts. But Rachel won," Abu Artema wrote Thursday. "She became a worldwide symbol of freedom and a source of inspiration for everyone who dreams of a world of justice and peace."
"Israel may have killed her," he added, "but Rachel Corrie lives on in all of us."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Enraging Workers, Macron Bypasses Parliament With 'Nuclear Option' on Retirement Age Hike
"What the government is doing makes people sick of politics. It should improve people's lives, not destroy them," said Rachel Keke, a leftist in France's National Assembly.
Mar 16, 2023
Amid protests against French President Emmanuel Macron's unpopular plan to overhaul the country's pension system, his government on Thursday chose the "nuclear option," opting to use a constitutional procedure to force through reforms, including raising the retirement age from 62 to 64, without a vote in the lower house of Parliament.
While the proposal passed the Senate, the upper chamber of Parliament, 193-114 Thursday morning, "reports indicated that the ruling party, which lost its overall majority in elections last year, was a handful of votes short" in the National Assembly, which led to an emergency Council of Ministers meeting about triggering the Article 49.3,
Le Mondeexplained.
After announcing the government was invoking executive privilege, French Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne "faced scenes of anger and unrest in the National Assembly," reportedPolitico. "Far-left lawmakers belonging to the France Unbowed party booed and chanted the national hymn the Marseillaiseas far-right National Rally MPs shouted 'Resign! Resign!'"
Using the controversial procedure to push through the plan is risky for Macron—founder of the Renaissance party—because it allows members of Parliament "to submit motions of no-confidence within 24 hours," Politico added. "While the government has survived motions of no-confidence in recent months, the stakes are much higher this time around. If a majority of MPs vote in favor of a motion, Borne's government would be forced to resign."
While multiple opposition groups in Parliament may respond with no-confidence motions, Marine Le Pen's far-right National Rally party has already pledged to do so.
"It's a total failure for the government," Le Pen told reporters of the Article 49.3 decision, calling for Borne's resignation. "From the beginning, the government fooled itself into thinking it had a majority."
Socialist Party chief Olivier Faure also criticized the approach, saying that "when a president has no majority in the country, no majority in the National Assembly, he must withdraw his bill."
Fabien Roussel, head of the French Communist Party, declared that "this government is not worthy of our Fifth Republic, of French democracy. Until the very end, Parliament has been ridiculed, humiliated."
MP Rachel Keke of the leftist party La France Insoumise stressed that "what the government is doing makes people sick of politics. It should improve people's lives, not destroy them."
Former French presidential candidate and MP Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who launched La France Insoumise, tweeted: "It is a spectacular failure and a collapse of the presidential minority. United unions call for continued action. This is what we are going to focus on."
French trade unions have led national demonstrations and strikes against the overhaul since January. While protesters were oscillating "between rage and resignation" earlier this week, they filled the streets of Paris on Thursday, and "the leader of the CFDT labor union, Laurent Berger, announced there would be new protest dates," according to Le Monde.
The General Confederation of Labor (CGT) said in a statement that "this reform is unfair, unjustified, and unjustifiable, this is what millions of people have been asserting forcefully for weeks in the demonstrations, with the strike, and in all the initiatives. These massive mobilizations are supported by a very large majority of the population and almost all workers."
"The only response from the government and employers is repression: requisitions, police interventions on workplace occupations, arrests, intimidation, questioning of the right to strike," the confederation added. "We won't let it happen! What the CGT denounced as unfair yesterday is even more so today! This can only encourage us to step up mobilizations and strikes, the fight continues!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.