In July, an X post captured a training slide from U.S. Army base Fort Liberty’s extremism training that declared pro-life organizations terrorist groups. The slide further labels constitutionally protected activities as identifiers of these “terrorist groups”, such as: being pro-life, opposing Roe v. Wade, having a “Choose Life” license plate, and performing pro-life advocacy or counseling.
This week, members of the House Armed Services Committee have the opportunity to question the military’s top brass about these heinous characterizations, and address the flagrant lack of political neutrality in our military so it can be immediately rectified.
Once again, the Army was caught exercising clear viewpoint discrimination in their training slides—offering that some views and religious exercise are worthy of punishment. This is unsurprising, considering the Army’s prior identification, under the Obama Administration, of “evangelical Christianity,” “Catholicism,” and “Mormonism” as forms of “religious extremism” on a list with Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and the Klu Klux Klan.
This time, after significant backlash, including a letter from members of Congress led by Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) and Representative Richard Hudson (R-NC-9) denouncing such activity, the Army engaged in damage control. To save face regarding the leaked slide, the next day, the Army stated on Facebook that, “After conducting a commander’s inquiry, we determined that the slides presented on social media were not vetted by the appropriate approval authorities, and do not reflect the views of the XVIII Airborne Corps and Fort Liberty, the U.S. Army or the Department of Defense.” Later, the Secretary of the Army disavowed the recent missteps and simultaneously revealed to Congress that the training slides in question had been used at Fort Liberty for the past seven years to train soldiers new to the post.
But, the repetitive nature of these events in the Army over the past decade, as well as the woke ideology that has plagued our nation and destroyed the careers of thousands of religious servicemembers over the past four years, make it hard to believe that the Army’s overt classification of those with a moral compass and who value the unborn as terrorists was anything but intentional.
Make no mistake, this view was reflected in past briefings given to Army personnel, such as the one given to soldiers at Camp Shelby—again under the Obama Administration. There, the American Family Association was identified as a “hate group,” even though the organization’s core values are marriage and family, morality, sanctity of human life, and religious liberty. A similar briefing given in a Pennsylvania Army Reserve unit also made clear that the Defense Equal Opportunity Institute considers extreme leftist organizations to be reliable sources for training Equal Opportunity officers.
While Fort Liberty may claim its training material was simply unvetted, consider the fact that on June 14, 2024, the Army implemented new policy guidance, AD 2024-07, on active participation in extremist activities, noting that such participation “can be prohibited even in some circumstances in which such activities would be constitutionally protected in a civilian setting.” How broadly will this administration interpret this statement?
Actions such as using the internet on a government system to access “websites or other materials that promote or advocate extremist activities” and “knowingly displaying . . . flags, clothing, tattoos, and bumper stickers, whether on or off a military installation” is prohibited under the new policy guidance. So, considering the Army’s recent interpretation of this policy, can a servicemember’s tattoo of the Latin Cross or display of the Christian flag at home now be punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice? What about an Army chaplain’s speech consistent with the tenets of his faith? If it fails to promote woke ideology, will that chaplain be discharged?
It's certainly plausible considering the long list of servicemembers who have been unlawfully punished for their constitutionally protected religious exercise by other service branches. In fact, the whistleblower who put Congress on notice of the Army’s shocking characterizations of pro-life organizations as terrorists, a First Liberty client, faces the prospect of being subjected to coercion and retaliation.
Trampling servicemembers’ First Amendment rights must never be tolerated. Perhaps military leadership should familiarize themselves with the history and tradition of not only our nation’s founding principles, but also the values our fledgling military held in high regard—religious exercise and service before self. How can we expect young Americans to answer our nation’s call if they have no sense of a higher calling? The answer is, we can’t.
Danielle Runyan is Senior Counsel and Chair of the Military Practice Group at First Liberty Institute a non-profit law firm dedicated to defending religious freedom for all. Read more at FirstLiberty.org.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member