Religion

Cadets The Crew Room
1

Quite a few of you are eager to discuss the off-topic tangent from “Time to change the cadet promise and move with the times…”, which was locked as it was off topic and no longer a “discussion of formal and serious issues regarding the Air Cadets Organisations”. I also suspected it would quickly descend into ideological slanging match. [sub][Prove me wrong][/sub]

The Crew Room is slightly more relaxed so a discussion can be allowed to go slightly off-topic. However the AUP still applies and personal attacks and the like will not be tolerated, nor will provocation.

If you want to continue the discussion please do so here, but try and keep the tone like that on Any Questions? rather than The Jeremy Kyle Show. That is to say:
[ul]
[li]-Check facts/statements for accuracy before posting,[/li]
[li]-Avoid getting personal,[/li]
[li]-Don’t post anything just to wind someone up,[/li]
[li]-Write as if anything you say might be put next to a photo of you in the paper.[/li]
[/ul]
I apologise if I am being patronising, but it is sometimes helpful to set the standard. Bear in mind that it is far easier to ban, lock or bin than it is to split and edit threads. Any questions on this or other moderating policy, send me a PM.

I have quoted some posts below for neatness. Some of them however, would not meet the standard.

[quote=“padre2366” post=8296]Well done ACO on the brilliant rewording of the Cadet Promise. That must have taken a lot of thought! Also that by making this change have Chaplains had their Article 9 rights iaw The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms breached? This stipulates that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom either alone or in community with others,and in public or in private to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

Although nothing has been said on the subject, is the way the Enrollment Service is prepared for in ACP 9 also going to change?

Where Article 9 may be breached is in relation to Matthew 28 verses 19 and 20: "Go ye therefore and teach…(v19) and verse 20 says "…Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:

So (applicable to those taking the revised promise): Chaplains will not be able to say the word ‘God’ in their enrollment service. It follows that if they omit God from the enrollment then the Chaplain should not be able to teach about God in the lead up to the enrollment, The Chaplain is therefore denied the opportunity to apply one of the most important passages of Scripture therefore Article 9 Rights have been breached.[/quote]

[quote=“MattB” post=8297]Seriously?

You honestly believe that your human rights are affected because you’re not allowed to preach to those who have specifically chosen a non-religious option? [strike]Or are you just being deliberately obtuse? [/strike] [/quote]

[quote=“padre2366”]Thanks asqncdr. It most probably would not have got anywhere. I suppose it was a bit tongue in cheek, but at times it seems that ‘religion’ has to play a back seat to some of the factions and minority groups who seem to ride roughshod over thousands of years of history and culture because it makes them feel better.
This Country does seem to have lost the knack of standing up for things it should hold most dear! If someone can appeal to the ECtJ against a deportation order because he (convicted terrorist) has a Cat and therefore has a right to have his Human Rights to found a family upheld, then why shouldn’t it be the case that where someone is prevented from being able to ‘practice Religion’ then why shouldn’t it be that a possible Human Rights violation could have taken place.
It just struck me as an idea so I thought I would throw it out there. I also was looking at recent statistical returns made to HQAC somewhere on Bader I think it was and that over 12000 had declared some kind of religious affiliation against just over 412 who had declared no affiliation. [/quote]

[quote=" Baldrick"] Padre2366: The Cat thing was an example of our lovely home secretary being a complete tool and making up legal precedents. It didn’t happen. Read some quality newspapers.
Also, the cat guy was a student from Bolivia. Hardly a convicted terrorist. [/quote]

I don’t want to have to get rid of this thread. (again) :slight_smile:

2

Regarding religion, the ACO is on shaky ground with the way it records religion. JPA (The system used by our parent service), records religion and then denomination and allows you to put any religious or non-religious belief in. Bader however doesn’t and doesn’t include a very important one “Other”. This means that as my religion isn’t on the list, I have to put “None Stated”. Surely you can see this as unacceptable. I also know that a Bader is only as accurate as the individual wo is entering it, enters it. I know that when I went through the records, the hard copy forms on religion didn’t always match Bader.
Personally, I think the individuals who modify Bader should conduct CASE (Copy And Steal Excellence) from JPA when it comes to the recording of religious data or the ACO could potentially find themselves in court for not making adequate provision in Bader for religious minorities. I know I am offended that I can’t put my religious beliefs in.
The facet that the system our parent service uses allows for the other beliefs and the ACO’s doesn’t does mean that they are not making adequate provision.

In regards to ACP 9, this is an antiquated document and Patterns for Life for the RAF is not push Christianity down Airman’s throats where if a Squadron Padre followed the lessons in ACP 9, he/she would be doing that to the cadets. ACP 9 needs in my honest opinion, a complete overhaul.

In these two respects, the ACO needs to look at what the RAF does and mirror it, not copy documents from the 50s, 60s and 70s.

3

[quote=“padre2366”]Well done ACO on the brilliant rewording of the Cadet Promise. That must have taken a lot of thought! Also that by making this change have Chaplains had their Article 9 rights iaw The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms breached? This stipulates that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom either alone or in community with others,and in public or in private to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

Although nothing has been said on the subject, is the way the Enrollment Service is prepared for in ACP 9 also going to change?

Where Article 9 may be breached is in relation to Matthew 28 verses 19 and 20: "Go ye therefore andteach…(v19) and verse 20 says "…Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:

So (applicable to those taking the revised promise): Chaplains will not be able to say the word ‘God’ in their enrollment service. It follows that if they omit God from the enrollment then the Chaplain should not be able to teach about God in the lead up to the enrollment, The Chaplain is therefore denied the opportunity to apply one of the most important passages of Scripture therefore Article 9 Rights have been breached.[/quote]

Great I had wanted to reply to this above post.

From Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights

'Article 9 – Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, and to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
  2. Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.’

You need to read point 2 after point 1.
In practice this means you have your freedom of religion and you are free to practice your religion however you do not have the right to ‘teach’ it to anyone who doesn’t want to be taught.

It is not the Chaplain’s enrolment, it is the Cadet’s Enrolment if any cadet doesn’t want you to say God then you do not get to say God. This is not a breach of Article 9. If you got to say God ignoring the beliefs of the Cadet to take their promise that would breach Article 9.

I hope ACP 9 is changed quite soon as the pre-enrolment chat should not be about theology. It should be about what it means to become a cadet.

4

I have done this, not for any anti-religious stance, for years and I have yet to find a 13-16 year old who has the foggiest what it actually means. I go about service, what we expect and what they can expect, except the first and second part seems to be lost on them.

In the locked thread there was an excellent, while tongue in cheek version of cadet promise, which sums up what it is and what it seems to mean in reality.

Why oh why are people dragging up Human Rights conventions. If there is one set of paperwork that needs shredding and consigning to history, it’s these. As here people use it constantly to make their own point and grind their own little axe.

5

It will always be an area of contention and GHE2 I agree Human Rights are pointless documents. Thats why I quite like the fact that the UK does not have a central source of them, allows it to be fluffy. Yes you have the EUHRC but its not fully integrated into UK law and the UK reserves the right to withdraw from it at any point, where as EU nations have enshrined it in their national constitutions etc. On any topic of opinion, protest, religion, demonstration or what ever someones Human Rights are infringed, fact of life.

Back to the Religion piece. I would not say I am religious as such but I do support religion (if that makes sense). I find people dismiss religion to easily and often miss the wider benefit and support religion provides.

I hark back to my days in training where attendance to church was classified as a Parade, therefor not optional in addition also a timetabled serial. The place in which you spent this time was optional. It was not solely for the practice of religion but more focused on reflection. When you are are in a high pressured environment that small time of peace can do wonders. It also allows you to reflect and even open up. The majority of people did attend a church and the majority were not religious, the reason being the service acted as a distraction to reflect from the daily grind.

That was the routine experience. Beyond that, the level of support religion provided to me through some extremely hard times was invaluable. I could quite simply say I would not be where I am now without it, that is I would not be in the forces and more (I am happy to give more detail to illustrate the extent of support via PM). Other people I know have also found this support of great assistance and is one of the first place I will direct someone who has a personal issue of any background or religious belief. I think its key to note that this support came from various denominations and came in the same manner and without prejudice.

Yes religion should not be forced on anyone but neither should exposure be restricted. It is a tough balance to strike but I feel that there is a benefit to a relationship between the ACO and Religion. Maybe it needs review but it should not be restricted or shunned from the organisation. I also appreciate that the above anecdotes are not overly comparable to life in the ACO but teenage life (although quite often its laughed by some on the other side) has its trials and tribulations for people dealing with it at the time and without the benefit of hindsight.

1 Like
6

Good thing tangents are allowed in the crew room.

So Human Rights legislation, personally I think this is something that we should be proud of. As there are so many people so much more eloquent than me I would quote the late Lord Thomas Bingham to make my point

[b]The rights protected by the Convention and the Act deserve to be protected because they are, as I would suggest, the basic and fundamental rights which everyone in this country ought to enjoy simply by virtue of their existence as a human being.
Let me briefly remind you of the protected rights, some of which I have already mentioned.
The right to life.
The right not to be tortured or subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The right not to be enslaved.
The right to liberty and security of the person.
The right to a fair trial.
The right not to be retrospectively penalised.
The right to respect for private and family life.
Freedom of thought,conscience and religion. Freedom of expression.
Freedom of assembly and association.
The right to marry.
The right not to be discriminated against in the enjoyment of those rights.
The right not to have our property taken away except in the public interest and with compensation.
The right of fair access to the country’s educational system.
The right to free elections.

Which of these rights, I ask, would we wish to discard? Are any of them trivial, superfluous, unnecessary? Are any them un-British?
There may be those who would like to live in a country where these rights are not protected, but I am not of their number[/b].

7

Thank you to all those who replied to my thread. As I said it was slightly tongue in cheek and as such was not expected to last long. I was interested in Baldrick’s statement saying that the ‘cat’ thing was made up and never happened and then goes on to say the person it involved was a student from Bolivia? (case was actually heard in 2011 in the Supreme Court, The Lord Nueberger of Abbottsbury PC presiding), the cat was a fact mentioned by Defence Council in an attempt to mitigate their clients reasons and not the whole reason for the person who was an illegal immigrant being granted leave to remain (point taken not a terrorist)). Pamela was quite right about Article 9 clause 2 again it is one of these two edged swords by protecting one group you do risk not being able to protect another. But anyway thanks for the time you have taken. I am happy to let this fade into the night.

8

You know what they say, avoid discussions on Religion, Politics and Sex!

All that is likely to happen is that we’ll end up with those who have deeply entrenched opinions arguing their points against each other. The previous thread on the changes to the Cadet Promise had some excellent posts on why God or any other random Deity is irrelevant to the ATC; cadets join us for the quasi-Military training that we provide, they don’t join for any spiritual experience.

Of course, we aim to encourage our young men and women to be good citizens, but that has absolutely nothing to do with religion and you don’t need to associate spiritual beliefs with any discussion on morality.

9

[quote=“cygnus maximus” post=8500]You know what they say, avoid discussions on Religion, Politics and Sex![/quote]So, what do people think about this law on gay marriage?
:wink:

10

I am going to suggest something. Just as servicemen and women either make an Oath (religious - and you get to choose from a selection) or Attestation (Secular), should we not just have a selection of Cadet Promises that can be glued over that page in the 3822 and the Cadet chooses which one, based on their religious/ lack of religious conviction.

The Scouts Association, in their training material, give their staff a selection of Promises and say they are to use the appropriate one for the Scout in question.

This really would not cause any problems or much of a burden to HQAC. They could be written in an afternoon. I think cadets should have the option of a religious promise if they so wish as that adds conviction to their promise.

Religious Promise

“I, Cadet Full Name, hereby solemnly promise on my honour to serve my Unit loyally and to be faithful to my obligations as a member of the Air Training Corps. I further promise to be a good citizen and to do my duty to my God/Goddess/Gods/Goddesses/Gods and Goddesses (delete as appropriate) and the Queen, my Country and my Flag.”

Secular Promise

“I, Cadet Full Name, hereby solemnly promise on my honour to serve my Unit loyally and to be faithful to my obligations as a member of the Air Training Corps. I further promise to be a good citizen and to do my duty to [strike]God and[/strike] the Queen, my Country and my Flag.”

11

[quote=“incubus” post=8502][quote=“cygnus maximus” post=8500]You know what they say, avoid discussions on Religion, Politics and Sex![/quote]So, what do people think about this law on gay marriage?
;)[/quote]

I think its unlikely to have any impact on the ATC :wink:

12

[quote=“PurfleetShiba” post=8503]Religious Promise

“I, Cadet Full Name, hereby solemnly promise on my honour to serve my Unit loyally and to be faithful to my obligations as a member of the Air Training Corps. I further promise to be a good citizen and to do my duty to my God/Goddess/Gods/Goddesses/Gods and Goddesses (delete as appropriate) and the Queen, my Country and my Flag.”

Secular Promise

“I, Cadet Full Name, hereby solemnly promise on my honour to serve my Unit loyally and to be faithful to my obligations as a member of the Air Training Corps. I further promise to be a good citizen and to do my duty to [strike]God and[/strike] the Queen, my Country and my Flag.”[/quote]

That is exactly what we do have, two promises, one mentions god, one omits God. All contained in the ‘‘shiny’’ new ACP20.

13

[quote=“green monkey” post=8506]
That is exactly what we do have, two promises, one mentions god, one omits God. All contained in the ‘‘shiny’’ new ACP20.[/quote]

So who will be administering the variations of the promise? The Padre?

I’m guessing that there are a good proportion of ACC members who, like me, do not see the value of religion within the ACO. I’m not ‘Padre bashing’ by the way, but this then leads me to ask what role the Sqn Padre actually has, if any? Don’t get me wrong, most of the Padres I’ve come across have been stars and very dedicated to the cadets, but if we’re saying that we can take or leave the religious bit, what value will these people add?

14

I think there is still a tremendously important pastoral role that they play. They have far superior training (and often manner) in such things, and provide someone outside of the usual CoC for the cadets (and staff) to turn to in times of trouble. Indeed, in times of trouble even those who do not align themselves to any God may find help in padres and religion.

To qualify what I’m saying; I’m not religous, and like you I see no part for religion in our organisation, but I do firmly believe that padres have a place here, much like they do in the parent service. Yes, we don’t see the trauma that the troops do, but people still go through a lot of bad things and padres are of great help.

15

I would say that the cadet staff would discuss which promise the cadet wanted to do and then inform the Padre which was to be used.

ACP 9 as it is, in my humble opinion, has less worth than the Patterns of Life that RAF Padre’s teach all Phase 1 and Phase 2 trainees. The Padre is there for welfare, as a member of staff who is not staff but has a proper chain of command and training so that if the cadet is having issues, at home or at cadets, he can listen and help deal with things. Plus, there are elements, such as Remembrance parades etc that require a religious element and the Squadron Padre can fulfil that role.

We are to mirror our parent service and all of their trainees have padre’s hours so the cadets get them.

Excuse the use of he, not being sexist.

16

i do agree, but part of military life is exposure to religion

(note the use of exposure to, not teaching of)

each annual camp i have attended Sunday morning we have visited the communion, “God” is mentioned in the attestation, padres are readily available to one and all, at home or on detatchment/deployment

with what is offered to the Cadets much if not all is available as a regular, HQAC looking at what the regulars do and “Cadetifying” it so it is suitable for the younger audience.
i dont feel to use the “military training” argument is valid if we pick and choose which bits we include based only on personal opinion.

for example some completely disagree that Cadets are permitted to go shooting, as it “encourages gun culture” …but does that stop our activities?
others disagreeing the teaching of fieldcraft as platform for “training soliders”

i have no problem with Padre’s being included in the ACO or as an active part of the Sqn life…what i disaprove of is the preaching

Green Monkey has it spot on.
i have seen on average once a year a situation where a padre has been the most appropriate person to deal with an issue , and been able to deal with situation far better than most Staff. that to me is argument enough for me

17

Well said steve679. I intend putting in more church parades at my squadron, as I think the Christian values (notice - not organised religion) offer more than some of the anti- God rhetoric that has been stated on this site.

18

You’re not too worried about keeping cadet numbers up then? :wink:

19

We have reduced the number of Church Parades to the main events. This has help to increase our numbers. I would say that other religions have as good if not better values than Christianity too. We had a situation before the staff at our squadron changed significantly where all cadets were expected to do a monthly church service, including the Muslim cadets. That has now been stopped and any service we attend, with agreement of the padre must be inter-faith.

20

Basing this on the bold is pure infrerence and conjecture. As someone who works with data and reporting thereof, you need to have tried the “old ways” for a significant period say 18 months, with the new situation in order to be able to safely say what you have said. You need to do a lot of R&D before making such bold claims.
Why did the staff change so significantly? Is it a change of CO or same CO and others changed. How long has this been the situation?
What was the squadron strength like prior to the change and I mean the previous 3-4 years, to ascertain if the regular church parades had a significantly detrimental effect on sqn numbers. How many cadets from that period of regular church parades still remain on the squadron strength now?