Denouncing Religious Expression Squelches Freedoms
An uproar has recently occurred against Lt. Gen. William G. "Jerry" Boykin, the new deputy undersecretary for intelligence. Apparently Boykin, a three star general, has been visiting churches to profess his faith , which has enraged some secularists and special interest groups, many of whom immediately called on President Bush to fire the general.
The usual suspects condemned Boykin, including Democratic presidential wannabes Joseph Lieberman, Howard Dean, and John Kerry. Kerry, the French Democrat and Vietnam veteran, denounced Boykin's remarks as "un-American." Radical Michigan Congressman John Conyers also chimed in, "It is outrageous that someone who holds such extreme, close-minded, zealous views would be allowed such a prominent position in our military." Congress Conyers thinks those who practice their religion should not be allowed to serve in prominent positions, thus making him open minded and tolerant.
The most entertaining anti-Boykin tirade came from Howard Dean. The former Vermont Governor and current presidential candidate said, "This flag belongs to every American. It does not belong to John Ashcroft or William Boykin or Rush Limbaugh or Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson." What an astute observation! Governor Dean has obviously been paying attention in civics class. Give this man the nomination!
Among the groups calling on Boykin's dismissal are the Arab American Institute, the American Muslim Alliance, the Interfaith Alliance, and the National Council of Churches (NCC). The NCC even went so far as to compare Boykin's statements with the recent anti-Semitic remarks made by the prime minister of Malaysia. Don't be fooled by the NCC's name, as it is actually a socialist front group bearing no real relation to Christianity.
So what did Boykin say that offended so many? One of his "controversial" remarks was that the United States is a Christian country. So what's the big news there? About 75 percent of Americans describe themselves as Christians. That doesn't mean that all Americans are Christians, of course, or that the U.S. is a theocracy, but describing the America as a Christian country is a fair statement.
Boykin also reportedly described Allah as an "idol." It's understandable why this comment is offensive to Muslims, but it's also necessary to understand the context. The practice of one religion usually involves the rejection of other religions. Boykin's statement is really no different an atheist saying they don't believe in God. Such differences are fundamentals to any religion or belief. If we want to live in a civil society, we sometimes simply have to let comments we disagree with slide, instead of getting upset over every difference of opinion, especially in matters such as religion.
Had General Boykin attacked Islam simply for the sake of offending, or made genuinely hateful remarks, I would be more sympathetic to the viewpoint of his critics. But the general did not do this; indeed, he said the war against terrorism is not a war against Islam.
Admittedly, the comments are bad PR for the Bush Administration, but the reaction to them has been over the top. Some have argued that Boykin should be canned because his comments may upset Muslim nations. No doubt they are right that his comments may offend, but most of these countries are going to be upset with us no matter what we do. Removing Boykin is not going to make any difference to them. Besides, forcing Boykin to take the fall to appease foreign countries (mostly dictatorships) when he did nothing wrong would be a cowardly act, and would send a terrible message.
The basic problem that many people have with General Boykin is that he is a very devout Christian. He travels to churches, prayer breakfasts, and other religious services to share his testimony. Many secularists are inherently hostile to religion, especially of the "fundamentalist" (real of perceived) type. Attacking the general gives them an opportunity to express their own faith, the faith of secularism.
Interestingly enough, some of the same people who tried to force the military to allow openly gay men and women to serve now want General Boykin fired. Perhaps they feel that being openly Christian is more disruptive than openly gay. Maybe they want a "don't ask, don't tell" policy for people of faith as well. Or maybe they just despise religion, and want to eradicate it from the national landscape. One wonders what these Muslim nations we should be so careful not to offend would think of a gay general.
Freedom of speech, as we know it, does not exist in the military. However, to follow the general into church and monitor his statements is just silly. Harassing servicemen and women for their religious beliefs is wrong. And for politicians like Dean, Lieberman, and Kerry to advance their own political fortunes by calling on his dismissal is despicable.
John Brown is a senior in political science and history at the University of Tennessee @ Knoxville. Contact him at johnnyb325@aol.com or visit www.johnnorrisbrown.com. This column originally appeared in the November 4, 2003 edition of The Daily Beacon, available here.