NZ army to remove Bible citations from armaments

[ensho]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100121/ap_on_re_as/as_new_zealand_weapon_sights


Biblical citations inscribed on U.S.-manufactured weapon sights used by New Zealand's troops in Afghanistan will be removed because they are inappropriate and could stoke religious tensions, New Zealand said Thursday.

The inscriptions on products from defense contractor Trijicon of Wixom, Michigan, came to light this week in the U.S. where Army officials said Tuesday they would investigate whether the gun sights — also used by U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq — violate U.S. procurement laws.

Australia also said Thursday its military used the sights and was now assessing what to do.

Trijicon said it has had such inscriptions on its products for three decades and has never received complaints about them before. The inscriptions, which don't include actual text from the Bible, refer numerically to passages from the book.
-snip-
--------------------------------

30 years!

the kind of christians that do things like this company has done for 30 years are disgusting and dangerous. our govt. should break all contracts with this company NOW.

[MrScorpio]

1. Lets consult the Book of Armaments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk

Not for just the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch

"And the Lord spake, saying..."

[sybylla]

41. I love that Monty Python sketch

Who'd have thought it would ever come so close to real life?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

2. It's dangerous and disgusting to put a biblical reference on a scope?

Not sure I follow your logic. Can you explain?

[ensho]

3. you have heard of the holy wars, the crusades?

you have heard of seperation of religion and state. our military is state.

or are you just trying to make trouble.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

6. Some background may help.

The sight in question is the ACOG sight. The civilian version was made to military spec. Trijicon makes extremely good equipment. The decision was made to buy the civilian version of the sights instead of having trijicon retool a bunch of equipment at added expense to the taxpayer and significant delay in getting the sights to the soldiers who needed them. While I understand peoples dismay, especially given the sorry job that some papers did in reporting this story i.e. USA Today and others, I can assure you that the soldiers using these sights don't give a damn about the inscription. They are only concerned with the sights working reliably in a very hostile environment. I'm more than happy for the Pentagon to have Trijicon retool and produce these sights without the inscriptions, I don't care how much it costs. Our soldiers deserve the best equipment and the sights are made in America sounds like a win win to me.

David

[ensho]

8. quality and need are not the issue

its the audacity of putting the bible stuff on the sights which are used on guns.

and the shock that its been done for 30 years.

people all over the world have/will checked their guns for it and then find out what the bible ref. said. and then .....


and what this looks like to the rest of the world. think on that.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

13. Quality and need are definitely the issue to the troops on the ground.

Personally, I don't really give a damn about anyones opinion besides that of the troops. Again I'm more than happy for the sights to be replaced with ones without the inscription. Until then the troops should be able to use the best equipment that they have available.

David

[ensho]

16. putting religious stuff on them is the issue - not quality or need

nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

17. Then the Pentagon should not have bought the civilian version.

They should have spec'd out the sight and had them manufactured according to spec. Of course that would have been costly and time consuming.

[BeHereNow]

18. I give a damn about the inscriptions as a tax payer, a citizen and a Christian.

We, as tax payers, foot the bill for these weapons.

It is a violation of the Constitution. (Separations of Church and State)

For Bible verses to be high jacked for military purposes is obscene.
Not to mention a discriminatory practice towards soldiers of other faiths
serving in the military. There are Muslims, Jews and I'm sure other faiths serving
being issued these weapons.

BHN

[derby378]

20. +100

:hi:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

23. What weapons are you talking about?

[Deep13]

29. Trijicon rifle sights.

If you are claiming it is not a weapon, you try firing a rifle without sights of some kind.

And if it were a canteen or a belt buckle, it would be just as bad. Gott mit uns!

[Obamanaut]

31. There are the adjustable (for windage and elevation) sights that

are part of most hand held weapons. These are telescopic sights that are user installed. They might even be used to bludgeon someone if not installed on the weapon itself.

[Deep13]

35. Government issued.

The soldiers did not buy them themselves. And if the suggestion is that they are free to use the inferior iron sights if they want, I submit that it is not up to soldiers either to remove propoganda that should not have been there in the first place or to have to choose between conscience and survival.

And those flat-top A4s will not function without some type of added sight whether holographic like Trijicon or EOTech, an optical scope or the Troy iron sights. They have the gas-block M16 front sights, but nothing on the rear.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

39. Again the government didn't do its due diligence.

The government bought a civilian "military spec" product. My guess is the soldiers will either modify the sights or continue to use them as is.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

33. The rifles the ACOGs are attached to also have fixed sights.

or they are capable of having fixed sights or another type of optical sight attached.

[Deep13]

36. see my previous answer to the the last person who responded ...

...to my post.

[Obamanaut]

30. Does 'separation of church and state' appear in that form in the

constitution?

“The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the 1st Amendment erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today). The phrase is commonly thought to mean that the government should not establish, support, or otherwise involve itself in any religion. The Religion Topic Page addresses this issue in much greater detail.”

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#church

Edited to add "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble..."

[BeHereNow]

43. The phrase evolved from the Establishment Clause /1st Amendment

The actual words, separation of Church and State do not appear
IN the constitution, but rulings from the supreme court use the
term in reference to the establishment cause.

Bottom line, the government legally can not express or impose
favor of one religion over another.

BHN

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

46. Do you think intent factors in at all?

[Obamanaut]

9. Does it really address 'separation of religion (church) and state'

or is it just that a state church will not be established?

“The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the 1st Amendment erected a "wall of separation" between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today). The phrase is commonly thought to mean that the government should not establish, support, or otherwise involve itself in any religion. The Religion Topic Page addresses this issue in much greater detail.”

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#church

And, if you are the shooter, or the shootee, would you really care all that much if the scope on the weapon had some inscription that you may not even know what it refers to?

[Mari333]

27. I see you are speaking to 'ignored'

and am glad, again, I put ignored on ignore.
anyone who would condone this is a moron.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

34. You have no idea how proud that makes me! Thanks you made my day.

:toast:

[derby378]

4. Read this and see what your take is

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=161038273&blogId=526449397

[ensho]

5. thanks for this article

nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. More than happy for the Pentagon to have Trijicon retool regardless of the expense.

Our troops deserve the best equipment and I'm sure some machinists in Michigan could certainly use a job. Sounds like a win win to me.

[Tailormyst]

11. Yes Dave it is.

When you put religious saying on things created to kill others it is dangerous and disgusting.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. I seriously doubt anyone has been killed with an ACOG. Thanks for your opinion though.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

21. Hey Dave, I decided to help you and look up what's New Zealand's signature export.

Nothing showed up. At least, nothing that has a distinctive name that can be replaced with "Freedom X".

Sorry, I tried.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

22. I would guess it would be wood or bikinis. Thanks for trying.

Although I have no idea what you are talking about.

[Romulox]

26. Flight of the Conchords?

[Deep13]

28. These are government soldiers fighting a govt.-mandated war.

It is grossly inappropriate for the govt. to be imposing religion on soldiers by forcing them to carry religious propoganda on their govt.-issued weapons. This is a plain, obvious violation of the 1st amendment. How are Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist etc etc soldiers supposed to feel about this?

The govt. claims that the war is against terrorism not Islam generally. If a soldier is killed or captured, his weapon will provide concrete proof that it is in fact a Christian crusade.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

32. The government should have done it's due diligence before purchasing the equipment.

Or they could have contracted to have the sights produced without the inscription at an increased cost.

[Deep13]

37. Very true. Though I wonder if procurement officers had any reason...

...to suspect this.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

38. They probably just thought it was part of the serial number or equipment type markings.

[BeHereNow]

45. Supreme Court agrees with you.

"When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some." Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun.
BHN

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

47. Do you think that's what happened here or did someone just make a mistake?

Either way there are very easy fixes.

[Dogmudgeon]

10. Invest in the Dremel company

Dremel: Supporting Freedom of Religion Since Trijicon Got Their Pentagon Contract"

Call it 30,000 RPM activism.

--d!

[ensho]

12. kick

nt

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

14. That's fine as long as it doesn't adversely affect the sight.

I doubt that it would they are very durable.

[Dogmudgeon]

19. Most of the quotes are on the outside, as raised text on the metal

I'm not sure about the sights, but several photographs of the external markings have appeared in the press.

--d!

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

25. Like I said I doubt it would affect the sight in any way.

Might have to repaint it to avoid glare that should be about it.

[GoCubsGo]

40. LOL!! My thought, too!

Grind it off if you can. Then, revoke the contract, and give it to another company that isn't going to pull this kind of shit.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

48. The company has put inscriptions on its products for over 2 decades.

The government is at fault not the contractor.

[aikoaiko]

24. Disgusting? People are free to express their religious thoughts on their products.

It was the governments that bought these products as is. It wasn't the manufacturer's fault.

If anything the Government should ask a few more questions about the products they buy.

[Dogmudgeon]

42. One little catch ...

... ALL government contracts stipulate, in writing, that the contracting company follow the law.

And the law says "no establishment of religion", etc.

But I have to agree wholeheartedly on product inspection.

:thumbsup:

--d!

[aikoaiko]

44. right, but the company isn't "establishing the religion", it could be the military would be.

but not the manufacturer. I'm not sure the military is either. We handed out about of cash in Iraq and Afghanistan with "In God We Trust" on it without much complaint.