Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Langston on August 13, 2009 at 7:43am

You know, it's great that there was so much interest in this.

Anyways, i FINALLY sent off my response e-mail to this publication today. Here it is:


Concerning PS, The Preventive Maintenance Monthly, Issue 679, June 2009, pages 27 through 34:
I was wondering when PS was going to publish PMCS lessons and information that are lodged in the context of other holy texts such as the Qur’an, the Talmud, the Taoist Daozang, the Book of Mormon, the Diamond Sutra, the Guru Grant Sahib, the Hindu Vedas, the Hindu Smitri, the Jainist Satkhandāgama, or the Rastafarian Kebra Negast? Or any other text besides the Bible? The story of David and Goliath originates in I Samuel of the Holy Christian Bible. Using this story, even for educational and illustrative purposes, is a bias in favor of Christianity by a government publication. Has a story involving legendary events or grand characters from a different holy text other than the Bible ever appeared within PS? Perhaps a Buddhist or Sihkism or Shinto figure is forthcoming in a later issue? To display one, simply because a maintenance lesson can be illustrated thereby, is to display to all that the material is acceptable according to one’s own religious views. Using the argument that it reflects the main religious bent of American citizens, or that it is a reflection of a religion which played a large part in American history is no proper defense, for the simple reason that your selection is exclusionary.

Furthermore, what grounds do you have to not include a story from the struggles of other armed forces throughout history? The story itself has nothing to do with America or the U.S. Armed Forces. So why not publish a similar depiction but with German or Russian armed forces? Or perhaps Italian or Turkish armed forces? Or some other cultural story lacking in religious regard?

That the story of David and Goliath was selected and allowed to pass the review and approval process is a reflection of America’s embrace of and history with Christianity, and a subtle yet passive, partisan endorsement of the religion itself when no other religious material appears from other holy texts or religious traditions. The lack of any other non-Christian religious material speaks volumes to this. And even if you were to go on to include other religious material, you would find yourself too inundated to provide a fair representation, which is what is called for in this case. And though your use of this story seems to not violate any notion of separation of church and state, such a violation here is not necessarily the primary concern. Even though there isn't really any religious content (that is, nothing that stresses Judaism or Christianity as the true religion(s), or proselytizes on behalf of those religions) and, considering that many Bible stories are used in contemporary culture in allegorical fashion, the fact of the matter is that it creates a certain perception.

The military is big on perception, such that it is informally said to be “Nine-tenths of the law”; here you have created the perception of favoritism, religious bigotry, and either preferential or ignorant discrimination. That is, I’ve no doubt that either your ignorance of other religious texts or your own religious beliefs (or perhaps even a lack of religious tolerance and a lack of regard for religious pluralism) lead to this story being selected and published. Nevertheless, a government publication should avoid the obstacles that this issue is laden with by sticking to its normal theme of publication, which is secular. Imagine an alternative letter you might have received had you included a story from one of the above mentioned holy texts, but no others: do this, and it might help you put things in perspective a bit.


2LT Joseph Adam Langston
MS, Platoon Leader

• ▶ Reply