Legal whistleblowers have not fared well lately. Benghazi whistleblower Gregory Hicks claims punishment for pointing out problems and media accounts indicate that a Department of Energy report found that whistleblowers faced retaliation as well. A Marine Corps officer who acted as a whistleblower against the Marine Corps commandant is also reporting retaliation. And it looks like Air Force whistleblower Senior Master Sergeant Phillip Monk might face a similar fate.
An Air Force investigation led by Colonel Mark Camerer concluded that Monk’s commander did not discriminate against him because of his faith-based beliefs supporting morality. The colonel’s investigation also claims that he had made false statements. This has caused leftists to cheer and proclaim that it “proves” that the armed forces do not discriminate against Christians.
But the story is not done. The Liberty Institute represents Monk and they have vowed to fight on, noting that the Air Force has not sufficiently explained why Monk’s PCS date was changed after his alleged confrontation with his commander.
Furthermore, it’s no surprise that the Air Force ruled against Monk. After all, that service is extremely tight with anti-Christian activist Mikey Weinstein and his Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
Additionally, the public affairs press release on the outcome of the investigation, along with subsequent official statements, subtly reveal that the Air Force indeed is forcing people to violate their faith-based beliefs in submission to the same-sex agenda, essentially confirming at least part of what Monk alleges. San Antonio Express-News reported the following:
Air Force officials contend Monk never voiced a religious or moral objection to same-sex marriage to his commander.
“This incident was never about religious freedom, but about command authority and civil rights,” Lt. Col. Sean McKenna, an Air Education and Training Command spokesman, said in an email. “It was handled appropriately, with a commander counseling a military training instructor for comments deemed discriminatory in nature.
“As for religious freedom, all airmen are welcome to exercise their right of religious expression as long as they don’t degrade morale, good order and discipline or damage the trust and confidence the public has in the Air Force.”So who decides when a faith-based belief degrades morale, good order and discipline? Or damages the trust and confidence the public has in the Air Force? Put another way, who decides when suppressing faith and freedom is for the benefit of, “morale, good order, and discipline”?
The Air Force press release of the investigation (the Air Force currently appears to be making it difficult for Monk’s lawyers to get the actual investigation) reveals even more of how the Air Force is part of the tyranny that is redefining what religious freedom is and when people are allowed to have it, all done under the guise of “protecting” others:
The investigating officer, an Air Force colonel, wrote in his report, “Based on his training as a first sergeant, Senior Master Sgt. Monk should have known that discriminatory remarks on the basis of sexual orientation are against Air Force Policy. He should have also known, while Air Force members do have the right to speech and religion, that right does not mean airmen can say whatever they want, whenever they want.”In other words, troops can have whatever faith-based beliefs they want—as long as the armed forces approve of those beliefs.
And this is exactly what I saw coming years ago based on the agenda the left has long pushed.
Maggie Gallagher wrote, “Banned in Boston,” in 2006 and included the following bit of information:
Of all the scholars who attended, perhaps the most surprising is Chai Feldblum. She is a Georgetown law professor who is highly sought after on civil rights issues, especially gay civil rights. She has drafted many federal bills to prohibit orientation discrimination and innumerable amicus briefs in constitutional cases seeking equality for gay people. I ask her why she decided to make time for a conference on the impact of same-sex marriage on religious liberty. . . .
To Feldblum the emerging conflicts between free exercise of religion and sexual liberty are real: “When we pass a law that says you may not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, we are burdening those who have an alternative moral assessment of gay men and lesbians.” Most of the time, the need to protect the dignity of gay people will justify burdening religious belief, she argues. But that does not make it right to pretend these burdens do not exist in the first place, or that the religious people the law is burdening don’t matter. . . .
Feldblum believes this sincerely and with passion, and clearly (as she reminds me) against the vast majority of opinion of her own community. And yet when push comes to shove, when religious liberty and sexual liberty conflict, she admits, “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.” . . .
But the bottom line for Feldblum is: “Sexual liberty should win in most cases. There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win because that’s the only way that the dignity of gay people can be affirmed in any realistic manner.”Then there was the Department of Defense itself, which over the years slowly increased its violation of the then-law that banned those with same-sex attractions from serving in the armed forces. All pretenses of following the law disappeared when both Robert Gates and Michael Mullen were Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff respectively. Mullen even boasted of violating the law, saying that he had always served with troops who had same-sex attractions. Then, to top it off, Mullen told troops who didn’t like the new law that imposed immorality on them to “get out,” if they didn’t like it. Strange that he didn’t tell them just to ignore the new law like he and his fellow leftists did when the law didn’t suit them.
And, of course, there has been the global push of the same-sex agenda, led by the United States with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton summing up the anti-faith—anti-Christian—motivation behind it all when she made remarks that included, “. . . when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” That sure sounds awfully similar to the officially released statements of the Air Force regarding Monk, doesn’t it?
Lately we have seen how Obama and his tyrannical allies have treated those who won’t fall in line with their dictates. CNSNews.com reported the following exchange with a U.S. representative:
CNSNEWS: “As implemented the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, is forcing Christian individuals and business owners to purchase health plans that cover abortion-inducing drugs. Now as a result, people are going to be able to use those federal subsidies to buy plans that pay for abortions. Do you believe, Senator, you’re going to be morally justified in voting, through the next continuing resolution, to give the administration more money to do those things?”
SEN. MURPHY: “Yes.”Again, this all sounds very similar to the decision the Air Force just rendered against Senior Master Sergeant Monk.
Then there is the news that Colorado parents are suffering through this same tyrannical redefinition of faith-based rights as they are told that the rights of a boy pretending to be a girl trump the rights of their girls.
Society has been remade. The First Amendment, indeed the entire Constitution, doesn’t mean anything any longer. Freedom and morality are under assault.
So Monk will have to fight hard if he wants to prove himself right and clear his name. Good thing he has the Liberty Institute backing him. Too bad not everyone can get such legal representation as the same-sex agenda runs rampart over American troops, freedom, and morality.