U.S. Military to Rescind Policy Banning Bibles at Hospital

[mdgspencer]

This policy was established in September by the U.S-Army-run Walter Reed Hospital. Now it has been rescinded, the day after a Congressman denounced it on the floor of the House.
see radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/u-s-military-to-rescind-policy-banning-bibles-at-hospital.html

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Thank God the policy didn’t last long, and it sounds like it may never have been enforced. Definitely shows that the United States isn’t magically protected from the kinds of evils suffered in other countries and the need for vigilance regarding religious liberty. Under this administration in particular we are seeing that liberty undermined when they think they can get away with it.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

God Bless the action of that Congressman.

 

[bearer]

The practice of one’s faith has been under attack for millennia, and perhaps even more so today, but find it hard to understand how that policy could have ever seen the light of day. Absolutely disgusting. What is this country coming to?

God bless Rep. King for rebuking such wickedness.

 

[Khalid]

Dei gloriam!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I wornder how such a policy was put in place to begin with?

The article doesn’t mention who wrote the policy, nor the reason for it being put in place.

I going to give the benefit of the doubt to the commander running the hospital, that it was an accident.

Jim

 

[barb_finnegan]

God Bless the action of that Congressman.

Amen to that!

For once, someone in Congress is STANDING UP for Christianity, instead of denigrating it like Pelosi.

Again, this is another reason why Obama has to be a ‘one-term President’ next year…he absolutely hates anything to do with Christianity.

 

[Holly3278]

Wow. How sickening that a military hospital could include such a blatant and unconstitutional attack on Christianity in its policies!

Thank the Lord that they are changing the policy!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Amen to that!

For once, someone in Congress is STANDING UP for Christianity, instead of denigrating it like Pelosi.

Again, this is another reason why Obama has to be a ‘one-term President’ next year…he absolutely hates anything to do with Christianity.

To be fair, It wasn’t Obama who made the policy, but the hospital administration staff.

Obama most likely never heard of the policy.

Jim

 

[chevalier]

Idiots or criminals, I wonder? Sounds like idiots from the explanation but it’s extremely hard to believe they didn’t mean it that way.

“I don’t think there’s any excuse for it and there’s no talking it away,” King told Fox News. “The very existence of this, whether it’s enforced or not, tells you what kind of a mindset is there.”

That sounds more likely, though doesn’t have to be. People sometimes make very, very idiotic decisions for all sorts of stupid reasons.

Do yourself a favour, folks, don’t vote for Obama another time, no matter how cute he is or how cool it is to defy racial stereotypes by voting for him.

 

[Teelynn]

To be fair, It wasn’t Obama who made the policy, but the hospital administration staff.

Obama most likely never heard of the policy.

Jim

Probably not. I am no Obama fan, trust me, but sometimes I wonder if things get blamed on Obama like the left likes to blame Bush. This being said, I do think with all the progressives in Office at the moment, and especially in the administration, I think it gives the ***unspoken ***“go ahead” to people that are inclined that are in position of authority. Regardless, it just goes to show how much danger we are in of loosing our religious freedom. Very scary.

 

[Kouyate42]

Seriously, I’m not even a Christian and I’m very much of the opinion that this sort of policy needs to be kicked out as fast as possible. Surely even politicians understand the value of faith, especially in times of distress and illness?

 

[incense]

Well, to follow the logic on the list about the Catholic Illinois adoption service, it’s a government paid hospital. If you don’t’ want to have the government rules apply, you should go to a private hospital. So what if it costs you more money, and it’s part of your benefits. So are public schools.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Well, to follow the logic on the list about the Catholic Illinois adoption service, it’s a government paid hospital. If you don’t’ want to have the government rules apply, you should go to a private hospital. So what if it costs you more money, and it’s part of your benefits. So are public schools.

Walter Reed is where wounded soldiers go for medical treatment.

No way should they go to a private institution, especially where they’d have to pay for the services themselves.

Jim

 

[Not_Sure_1]

Well, to follow the logic on the list about the Catholic Illinois adoption service, it’s a government paid hospital. If you don’t’ want to have the government rules apply, you should go to a private hospital. So what if it costs you more money, and it’s part of your benefits. So are public schools.

Dying with last rites is a privilege, eh? We need priests in our hospitals, because we never know when death will come.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Well, to follow the logic on the list about the Catholic Illinois adoption service, it’s a government paid hospital. If you don’t’ want to have the government rules apply, you should go to a private hospital. So what if it costs you more money, and it’s part of your benefits. So are public schools.

Yes, but spiritual angst can be quite unhelpful to a patient’s condition. Its in the hospital’s best interests to have some sort of chaplain on duty.

 

[AthenaC]

It’s worth noting that such a policy is really inconsistent with the fact that the military employs chaplains specifically to minister to the spiritual needs of the armed services.

Am willing to bet it was some sort of oversight / mistake and that it was never formally enforced.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Am willing to bet it was some sort of oversight / mistake and that it was never formally enforced.

According to the article it appears it was just a poorly worded memo. The intent seems to have been to prevent proselytizing of patients.
So there was no enforcement of a zero tolerance for last rites, family’s bring religious items, etc. because it was never the intention of the policy.

 

[TMC]

According to the article it appears it was just a poorly worded memo. The intent seems to have been to prevent proselytizing of patients.
So there was no enforcement of a zero tolerance for last rites, family’s bring religious items, etc. because it was never the intention of the policy.

You are correct. The memo was aimed at care partners, which is a term used to refer to contracted medical support, not families. Also, it seems odd to me that this would be in the news now, given that Walter Reed closed a few months ago.

 

[He_Man]

Well, to follow the logic on the list about the Catholic Illinois adoption service, it’s a government paid hospital. If you don’t’ want to have the government rules apply, you should go to a private hospital. So what if it costs you more money, and it’s part of your benefits. So are public schools.

That’s laughable. Speaking as a veteran, do you think the military gets a say in what hospital they want? Heck, the entire base is publically funded. By your logic, the base chapel should have bibles removed…