Chaplains Corp for Firefighers Challenged

[Toto]

Oh why did this otherwise good article have to start with that old bromide about no atheists in foxholes?

Firefighters File Suit Over Chaplains in their Ranks (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/26/national/26FIRE.html)

Six California firefighters have gone to federal court seeking an end to the chaplain's corps of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention, saying it impermissibly mingles church and state.

The middle-level officers brought the lawsuit earlier this year, saying that the chaplain's corps, run by an evangelical minister who is also a senior official of the department, was almost exclusively Christian and had improperly injected religious faith into a government organization.

[fromtheright]

What is wrong with having Chaplains whether in the military or for firefighters, a group of people whose job it is to provide comfort to those engaged in a profession in which their lives are endangered, whether that comfort is from a Christian, a Muslim, or a Satanist (contrary to some conservative brethren, I have no problem with various faiths, including Satanism, represented within the Chaplaincy)?

[PandaJoe]

Well, in the case of soldiers, they might not have access to a church representing their religion. But why would firefighters need anything of the sort? If they need religious support, can't they just walk down the block to the local church? Why pay so they can have their own personal chaplains?

[RufusAtticus]

FTR,

One of the issues is how the chaplin corps is organized, which is different from the military.

"The plaintiffs say that unlike chaplains in the military and most other public safety organizations, the California forestry chaplains mix religious ministry with their day-to-day duties as firefighters or supervisors. Military chaplains are ordained in various denominations and serve only as religious counselors, not as combat troops. They are outside the chain of command and have no authority to promote or assign troops."

In other words, you can object to having a chaplin evangelize you, but it might cost you a promotion.

There are also questions of whether firefighters need a chaplin corp. Prisoners are behind bars and soldiers are confined to bases and thus they don't have the same freedom of mobility that firefighters have. IIRC, such contraints are the primary reasons why the courts have upheld the constitutionality of spending public money on chaplin corps.

Also it seems that unlike the military, there are no strong anti-proselytizing guidelines for the firefighter corps.

[fromtheright]

Rufus Atticus,

You and Panda Joe offer excellent responses to my question. I wasn't aware of the difference in the way other Chaplaincies are organized from the military's. Also, you're both right about the difference in availability of chaplains. I'd be interested in hearing a defense on that issue from the proponents. Thank you both.

[Seeker630]

I am retired from a large police agency. We had a departmental office of chaplains. But they were all volunteers, and unpaid. They were always available to members of the Department, but their primary purpose was to respond to the victims of large disasters, not just Dept personnel. They simply worked out their own rotations and operated "on call" as needed. The only financial support they got was office space, and it was not permanently staffed. They had no clerical staff or anything like that. I never heard about any proseletyzing incidents at all.

[Godless Dave]

Originally posted by fromtheright
Rufus Atticus,

You and Panda Joe offer excellent responses to my question. I wasn't aware of the difference in the way other Chaplaincies are organized from the military's. Also, you're both right about the difference in availability of chaplains. I'd be interested in hearing a defense on that issue from the proponents. Thank you both.
We need more debaters like you!

[Jewel]

Originally posted by Seeker630
I am retired from a large police agency. We had a departmental office of chaplains. But they were all volunteers, and unpaid. They were always available to members of the Department, but their primary purpose was to respond to the victims of large disasters, not just Dept personnel. They simply worked out their own rotations and operated "on call" as needed. The only financial support they got was office space, and it was not permanently staffed. They had no clerical staff or anything like that. I never heard about any proseletyzing incidents at all.

IMO, that's how it should be for all government agencies with exception to military bases.

[Deacon Doubtmonger]

For more on this issue, see this fine atheist website -- especially the author's essay "A Firefighter Speaks Out," which is PRICELESS!

http://www.freethoughtfirefighters.org/

Deacon Doubtmonger

[Toto]

Suit Challenges Firefighter-Chaplains (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-chaplain17jun17,1,2547872.story) {LA Times requires free registration}

[Toto]

State Forestry Agency Ends Chaplain Program (http://www.latimes.com/la-me-chaplain7sep07,1,6207164.story)

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection has eliminated its official chaplain program after six state firefighters filed a lawsuit against the department earlier this year.

. . .

According to last week's directive, employees still may invoke moments of silence at department events, but they can introduce religion only in their off-duty hours. Firefighters may volunteer to minister to others, but cannot wear their uniforms while doing so or receive any state funding for religious duties or training.

To keep religious services available, the department is negotiating to transfer the 2 1/2-year-old chaplain program to the firefighters union.

CDF spokeswoman Karen Terrill said the department and plaintiffs came to the agreement amicably in the interests of improving the work environment. The department also will pay the plaintiffs' legal fees, which come to $45,500.