Group Preparing to Press Military for Atheist Chaplain

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: ketsuko
Ok, so athiests have their own "churches" now. They are demanding their own chaplains, and they are developing their own "prayers" to be delivered at Town Hall invocations.

They have all the trappings of religion.

At what point do we declare atheism another category of faith like all the others and stop letting them demand their way be the default in the public square, but insist that they have to share with all the rest? After all, apparently the lack of faith is now a faith the same as every other belief system in play as it seems to be adopting the trappings.

Dunno about that. From where I'm sitting, it looks like atheists just want to feel as special as any theist group. Maybe if Christians/Catholics/Mormons weren't all about being treated on a different level than the rest of society, atheists wouldn't be so hellbent on making a point.

doesn't that sound so childish to you?

especially for the intellectual, mature and logic crowd?

i find it hilarious. if they want what everyone else has, let them do what everyone else does and damn the torpedoes!

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: FlyersFan
That would be the military psychologist. They already have those in place.

I wasn't aware that a psychologist was trained to counsel in moral, ethical and spiritual matters.

yah, ok, where is the school for atheist chaplains?

how long will it take me to get ordained? 3 weeks? 3 days? online?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: AfterInfinity

Yet, there are many, many people who, when asked to do life or death situations, require spiritual guidance, support, and services otherwise they couldn't do the job asked of them. Agree with it or not, that is the facts of the matter and Chaplains have long served that purpose to take care of our religious service men and women. Demanding a chaplain for literally "nothing" is a bit silly. Like you said. Many people fight for many other things other than a religious belief system and they do not need a chaplain for that. They fight for money? We got a bursar that takes care of that.

atheists can kill with no remorse or internal questions or need to talk about it, before or after the fact.

i suppose that might sound harsh, but that's what i get from it, it's just a job.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: NavyDoc

Please see this post in response. It's a HUMANIST chaplain that is being requested, not an "ATHEIST" Chaplain.

lol, same thing.

they are just trying to find the "golden word" for legitimacy.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: windword

The first statement is flat out wrong.

WRONG!

Confidentiality and Privileged Communications

Service members and other authorized personnel may speak with a military chaplain and a chaplain’s assistant regarding any matter of conscience or a formal act of religion without fear of disclosure, in accordance with the following rules and regulations.

Manual for Courts Martial, Rule 503
A privileged communication is one made by a service member to a chaplain or chaplain's assistant that will not be disclosed in a court of law without specific permission from the service member. The parameters of the privilege are outlined in the MCM, Part III (Military Rules of Evidence), Section V (Privileges), Rule 503 (p. III-24). Service members should be aware that, to obtain the protection of the privilege, the communication made to the chaplain or chaplain's assistant must a) be made to the chaplain or chaplain's assistant in his or her official capacity; b) be intended to be a private communication; and 3) made as a matter of conscience or a formal act of religion.
www.deomi.org...

Contrast that ^^ with the HIPPA laws

(a) Standard: Uses and disclosures required by law.

(1) A covered entity may use or disclose protected health information to the extent that such use or disclosure is required by law and the use or disclosure complies with and is limited to the relevant requirements of such law.

(2) A covered entity must meet the requirements described in paragraph (c), (e), or (f) of this section for uses or disclosures required by law.

(b) Standard: Uses and disclosures for public health activities.

(1) Permitted uses and disclosures. A covered entity may use or disclose protected health information for the public health activities and purposes described in this paragraph to:

(i) A public health authority that is authorized by law to collect or receive such information for the purpose of preventing or controlling disease, injury, or disability, including, but not limited to, the reporting of disease, injury, vital events such as birth or death, and the conduct of public health surveillance, public health investigations, and public health interventions; or, at the direction of a public health authority, to an official of a foreign government agency that is acting in collaboration with a public health authority;

(ii) A public health authority or other appropriate government authority authorized by law to receive reports of child abuse or neglect;

(iii) A person subject to the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with respect to an FDA-regulated product or activity for which that person has responsibility, for the purpose of activities related to the quality, safety or effectiveness of such FDA-regulated product or activity. Such purposes include:

(A) To collect or report adverse events (or similar activities with respect to food or dietary supplements), product defects or problems (including problems with the use or labeling of a product), or biological product deviations;

(B) To track FDA-regulated products;

(C) To enable product recalls, repairs, or replacement, or lookback (including locating and notifying individuals who have received products that have been recalled, withdrawn, or are the subject of lookback); or

(D) To conduct post marketing surveillance;

(iv) A person who may have been exposed to a communicable disease or may otherwise be at risk of contracting or spreading a disease or condition, if the covered entity or public health authority is authorized by law to notify such person as necessary in the conduct of a public health intervention or investigation; or

(v) An employer, about an individual who is a member of the workforce of the employer, if:

(A) The covered entity is a covered health care provider who provides health care to the individual at the request of the employer:

(1) To conduct an evaluation relating to medical surveillance of the workplace; or

(2) To evaluate whether the individual has a work-related illness or injury;

(B) The protected health information that is disclosed consists of findings concerning a work-related illness or injury or a workplace-related medical surveillance;

(C) The employer needs such findings in order to comply with its obligations, under 29 CFR parts 1904 through 1928, 30 CFR parts 50 through 90, or under state law having a similar purpose, to record such illness or injury or to carry out responsibilities for workplace medical surveillance; and

(D) The covered health care provider provides written notice to the individual that protected health information relating to the medical surveillance of the workplace and work-related illnesses and injuries is disclosed to the employer:

(1) By giving a copy of the notice to the individual at the time the health care is provided; or

(2) If the health care is provided on the work site of the employer, by posting the notice in a prominent place at the location where the health care is provided.

(vi) A school, about an individual who is a student or prospective student of the school, if:

(A) The protected health information that is disclosed is limited to proof of immunization;

(B) The school is required by State or other law to have such proof of immunization prior to admitting the individual; and

(C) The covered entity obtains and documents the agreement to the disclosure from either:

(1) A parent, guardian, or other person acting in loco parentis of the individual, if the individual is an unemancipated minor; or

(2) The individual, if the individual is an adult or emancipated minor.
www.hipaasurvivalguide.com...

So you assume that I'm a Christian because I don't automatically and mindlessly support the latest attempt at social Engineering and PC point making in the service? That rather narrow minded of you.

No. I assume that your mind is already made up and closed and that you don't support any alternatives to mainstream religious methods based on what you said here:

I agree. It's really about making a point by a few people, not for any true need.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: NavyDoc
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

This is how I know you didn't serve in the military.

Can I ever be forgiven?

What sort of counseling do you imagine you need as an athiest in battle.

I don't imagine I need any, since I'm NOT in battle. But there is a desire to have humanist chaplains and I'd like to support the soldiers... Also, I'd like to know what's the harm in it?

same harm as a nativity scene in the public square or "under God" in the pledge.

send these guys to the front lines, lol!! just KIDDING!

originally posted by: Blue Shift
"Atheist Chaplain, I'm dying! I've been a good person. Will I be justly rewarded or see my passed loved ones in an afterlife?"
"Nope. You'll just be dead."

lol!!

"are you serious?!"

"yep"

that was pretty funny, dude.

a reply to: windword


LOL. Your cut and paste didn't even cover your incorrect assertation--that military mental health records are not confidential and are used against members during promotion. LOL. Then you cut and paste something after a quick google search and claim it supports your allegation even when it has nothing to do with your point. You know less about HIPPA than you do the military.

Hell, post wasn't even a military reg at all and mentioned the exact same exemptions I mentioned: danger to self or others and dissemination of disease. It didn't even mention mental health or promotions at all. Did you even bother to read it at all?

And the reg you stated above that mentions confidentiality in terms if matters of conscience and religion. What you failed to read was the MCM statement that threats if danger to self and/or others is not defined as a confidential communication to a chaplain.
Heck, even the little snippit you didnt bother to read or comprehend clearly states that confidential communication to a chaplain are limited to "matters of conscience or formal act of religion." So was your intellectual dishonesty intentional or just lazy googling?

Lastly, you changed the goalposts to something else that still isn't supported. Recognizing yet another needless PC cause and calling it for what it is is not "close minded to non mainstream beliefs."

Care to share more blind ignorance with us?

a reply to: NavyDoc

BS! Prove it!

Chaplins and mental health professional do not abide by the same rules of confidentiality. HIPPA laws are NOT the same as clergy confidentiality. They are two completely different animals!

Basically, you're implying that a military psychological evaluation is protected the same way a confession to a military Chaplin is. That is just not true, and defeats the purpose of psychological evaluations.

By your logic, in the military religious people in personal conflict should see "Chaplins" and non-religious personnel should see mental health professionals. Do you see the problem in that line of thinking?

Fact is, this debate is moot, because the decision to allow Humanist preferences in the military has already been made, regardless of your ego and self assigned superior opinion.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Can I ask... What's the harm?

It's unnecessary and redundant. There are, last I looked, 101 different belief systems that different troops have. Not all of them have a special chaplain. And 'atheist' or 'secular humanist' isn't a belief system anyways.

Every chaplain is required to help every soldier. That's what they are there for. Every psychologist is there to help every soldier. That's what they are there for. In the very remote instance that an atheist might have a spiritual question or issue, they can go to the chaplains who are there .... Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, Hindu .... it's all there.

The requirement to be a chaplain in the US Military is a master's degree in religion. Chaplains have to be able to help people of all faiths, so that is the requirement. Find me an atheist with a masters degree in religion who wants to be a chaplain, then you'll have a candidate.

Last I saw, there were 101 different faiths in the US military. The chaplains have to be able to deal with them all. And atheism or 'secular humanism' isn't a faith.

originally posted by: windword
Can one walk into Chaplin's office and talk with someone without an appointment?

It depends on the level of extremity. Most chaplains I worked with wanted an appointment. If there was an emergency then that would change the situation.

Is the same kind of access as a service member has to a Chaplain also as easily accessible and available to see a psychologist?

Same answer as above. When our chaplain office worked with the psychologists, they pretty much handled things the same way.

Are Chaplin conversation held in confidentiality? Are service men and women's psychological records held to same standard of confidentiality?

It's pretty much the same. Or it was when I was in the Army.

originally posted by: windword
Does a Chaplin keep written records on who they counsel, the issues discussed and an opinion, evaluation or recommendation regarding recovery or therapy?

Chaplains don't have 'recovery or therapy' issues. But they can keep records. I had to have a security clearance because I was handling personnel records as a chaplain assistant and they were confidential.

Chaplains are there in a special way for people of faith. Any faith.
They deal with faith based issues.
Last I saw there were over a hundred different faiths in the military.
'Special Chaplains' for each faith isn't needed.
Atheism or 'secular humanism' isn't a faith.
Psychologists are there for everyone with or without faith.

The request is absurd and unnecessary. Not to mention the fact that a person can't get a degree of divinity in 'atheism' or 'secular humanism'. And a chaplain has to have his masters of divinity degree in order to be a chaplain. That degree is necessary because they receive spiritual training AND training on how to counsel people, etc etc. Johnny Yahoo, secular humanist, can't just walk in off the street and be a chaplain. It doesn't work.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

BS! Prove it!

Chaplins and mental health professional do not abide by the same rules of confidentiality. HIPPA laws are NOT the same as clergy confidentiality. They are two completely different animals!

Basically, you're implying that a military psychological evaluation is protected the same way a confession to a military Chaplin is. That is just not true, and defeats the purpose of psychological evaluations.

By your logic, in the military religious people in personal conflict should see "Chaplins" and non-religious personnel should see mental health professionals. Do you see the problem in that line of thinking?

Fact is, this debate is moot, because the decision to allow Humanist preferences in the military has already been made, regardless of your ego and self assigned superior opinion.

Prove it? LOL. You are the one making outrageous claims about something you have ZERO experience and knowledge of.

You stated :

A person's psychological profile can be accessed and scrutinized by other personnel. It can be used for or against them in reviews for promotions, assignments and in criminal procedures.

A flat out lie. Even for criminal investigations, medical records would require a warrant, just like anywhere else and no, they are not "accessed and scrutinized by other personnel"--that is illegal unless you are a healthcare professional assigned to their case. As is using them for promotions and assignments. Let me say it slower: THAT. IS. PATENTLY. UNTRUE. Even the few stuff you could Google did not support this claim.

LOL. This is all part of a preconceived belief system and I find it rather ironic that a self-proclaimed atheist believes so much stuff without any evidence.

Even the regulation YOU cut and paste says that chaplain confidentiality only applies to "matters of conscience and religion." It is not a blanket amnesty for anything and, you obviously have a difficult time with reading comprehension, don't you?

NO, by my logic, the military already has all these bases covered and does not need any more silly special interest demands.

It is true that mental health counseling are just as protected as religious counseling and that religious counseling does not have the blanket protection and confidentiality that you thought it does. The very stuff you cut and paste and presented yourself says exactly that. I'm sorry that the truth does not fit into your preconceived and ignorant notions of how things are done.

The decision hasn't been made, so the discussion is still a valid one. As for ego there isn't one and I see that as a bit of a cheap shot form someone who obviously has failed to prove his point. As for superior knowledge: no #, Sherlock--someone with a quarter century in the system is going to have superior knowledge to someone who hasn't spent a single day in the system. My opinion is, superior to yours in this regard because I have lived decades in a system that you haven't even seen once in real life and my opinion is based on fact and experience and knowing the rules whereas yours is just based on your belief of what you think it is even though you've never been in it.

a reply to: NavyDoc

I don't know if you're lying to me or to yourself.

By law, any medical professional MUST notify authorities if they think that a "patient", which is what someone immediately becomes when they step into a psychologist's office, if they appear that could be harmful to themselves or others, or have admitted to committing a crime.

A chaplain is not.

A psychologist's diagnosis is critical to finding mental health and behavioral issues that can help identify illnesses and syndromes, such as PTSD, organic imbalances and suicidal tendencies.

Chaplains do not make diagnoses' or share the "confessions" that they hear.

a reply to: FlyersFan

I've always thought of an atheist (or non-denominational) Chaplain was called...a bartender.

They listen to all sorts of problems, and don't keep records of any conversations to boot.

a reply to: TDawgRex

HAHA! So true! AND.............we used to ask each other, "Are you going to church after this?", referring to our local haunt. We'd put the events of the day up on the "alter of alcohol" and confess our sins to each other and rejoice in our blessings!

Good times! Bad times! I've had some of those!

Just an FYI........

Viewing our nontheistic demographic in 2012, we found 0.5% self-identified as atheist or agnostic. While this may seem low, The Atheist religious preference was ahead of all responses except Christian or undetermined groups. The largest individual religious preference was No Religious Preference (see note below) at nearly 23% of the military. “Unknown” was the fifth-largest at 6.2%. After Twelve Christian selections (including two for no denomination), Atheist is in the #15 position. 88 different religious preferences, including 73 Christian denominations and all non-Christian denominations, fall below Atheist. We deserve and need support just as all service members do.

Chaplain support showed a Christian majority as expected, but the reality was that Christians fill nearly 97% of all chaplain billets while representing less than 70% of the general population. It seems that these Christian chaplains are especially willing to stand up for military service, and they should be applauded for serving. It may also be that Christians are given special privileges in Chaplain accessions while others face regulatory challenges. In addition, most “minority” religious groups like Jewish, Muslim, and LDS are overrepresented, per-capita, in the chaplaincy. Catholics are underrepresented and enjoy special emphasis in recruiting and military media. Atheists and humanists have no dedicated chaplain support or even attention in chaplain training despite being a relatively large minority in the general population. MAAF seeks to do our part by endorsing humanist chaplains, if the military will accept candidates.

- See more at: militaryatheists.org...

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

I don't know if you're lying to me or to yourself.

By law, any medical professional MUST notify authorities if they think that a "patient", which is what someone immediately becomes when they step into a psychologist's office, if they appear that could be harmful to themselves or others, or have admitted to committing a crime.

A chaplain is not.

A psychologist's diagnosis is critical to finding mental health and behavioral issues that can help identify illnesses and syndromes, such as PTSD, organic imbalances and suicidal tendencies.

Chaplains do not make diagnoses' or share the "confessions" that they hear.

Actually I just mentioned that several times. By the very post you provided us, that I quoted again, confidentiality is only granted in the following conditions:

Service members should be aware that, to obtain the protection of the privilege, the communication made to the chaplain or chaplain's assistant must a) be made to the chaplain or chaplain's assistant in his or her official capacity; b) be intended to be a private communication; and 3) made as a matter of conscience or a formal act of religion.

I love it how you, when you fail to prove your point because of lack of knowledge, start calling people liars. Are you incapable of thinking or are you just stupid or what? The instruction provided above demonstrates the limits of what a chaplain is to consider "confidential."

a reply to: NavyDoc

NO! I HAVE proved my point. You have not made or proven yours!

The confidentiality enjoyed in a religious capacity is NOT the same as in a psychological setting. PERIOD!

HIPPA laws and those that govern the military clergy are NOT the same. To believe they are is to believe a lie.

You have continuously suggested that, your opinion, religious personnel should have access to chaplains in order to discuss matter of personal moral conflict, while atheist and agnostic personnel need nothing more than, and should be satisfied with mental health professionals to evaluate and diagnose their mental disorders. Apparently, you fail to see the disparity here!

Since the military has allowed "Humanist" as a religious choice, it only follows that a representative in the Chaplains office must be forthcoming.