Catholic priests in military face arrest for celebrating Mass

reply to post by MrSpad


No, sorry, I don't believe it does. I appreciate the information though for employees. A contract does not guarantee the government or any one client exclusivity to an individual's time and talents, unless that was by prior agreement and compensation. They don't own these priests they merely have contracted with them previously. The Fed's authority in this situation, is an illusion. If other priests or citizens can go into a venue made available on a base, these folks would be free to accept other contracts utilizing the same venues.

buster2010
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Your posts get more and more ridiculous the more you have to justify this.

Actually your is because you are the one that is expecting the government to give special rights to people based on nothing more than religion and just one religion at that. Personally I have no problem with a person wanting to work for free if they want to let them.

The government cannot do this because it would be respecting the establishment of religion.

Looks like you read my posts about as well as you read the article, that is, not at all. My post specifically addresses this and states there should be no special rights given. How about you go back and read and try again.

TKDRL
Anyone trying to get onto a base without permission will be arrested. Why would it be any different for church people?

Because they have full clearance to get on the base that is why? Your post has nothing to do with the topic at hand. No one is saying every priest should be able to go on any base they want.

Sestias
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Well, that's what you get when you listen to Fox News all the time.

Did you know that Fox viewers are actually more ignorant of the real facts than the average non-viewer?

I suggest you get a little courage up, and listen to say, PBS NewsHour or hell, get really brave and watch (gasp) MSNBC?

Even CBS (which is right-leaning) is less biased. Try that if you really can't bear to hear the other side.

Awesome, so then you are saying this is a giant lie. Please show me some of your acceptable news sources that prove this to be a lie. If you can't find it on any of your acceptable sources, what exactly does that say about them? Here are more sources. This is a proven fact. Wonder why I can't find it on MSNBC?

www.milarch.org...
dailycaller.com...

ETA: By the way, don't act like you know me, you don't I never watch FOX news or go to their website, it happened to be on at work and it's one of the only sites carrying the story. I usually read BBC news, or CNN. But i guess it's easier for you to dismiss what you want to be untrue than face hard facts.

MrSpad
Why would they make exceptions for some contractors? If you think is going to happen you do not know the military at all. Just like any employer they will not let you work of the clock for liability reasons. That this is some sort of Obama conspiracy is beyong stupid. Whatever happened to critical thinking or common sense? Are people such sheep that as long as it fits in with what they hope is true they will believe anything? Common ATS get it together your better than this.

Already been dealt with and is an invalid argument. My employer has numerous volunteers, many do. The liability issue is make-believe.

MrSpad

DancedWithWolves
reply to post by MrSpad

 

They aren't employees though. They are independent contractors. And it is not providing services FOR the government. It is them providing contractual services for private individuals. I'm not seeing how that law applies in this situation.

???

Their contracts are with and payed for by the federal goverment. That pretty much covers it.

No, it doesn't. Contractors are not automatically federal employees.

DancedWithWolves
reply to post by MrSpad

 

No, sorry, I don't believe it does. I appreciate the information though for employees. A contract does not guarantee the government or any one client exclusivity to an individual's time and talents, unless that was by prior agreement and compensation. They don't own these priests they merely have contracted with them previously. The Fed's authority in this situation, is an illusion. If other priests or citizens can go into a venue made available on a base, these folks would be free to accept other contracts utilizing the same venues.

edit on 5-10-2013 by DancedWithWolves because: (no reason given)

What are you talking about? Who are these other people? What other contracts? Lets go over what is going on again. In some places because of the lack of military chaplains the govermenr has contracted and pays civilian priests to come on base on X amount of day to do X amount of services. While the government is in shut down these contractors be them priests or grocery store workers can not volunteer to come on base and do the jobs the have been contracted to do. "The law and let me repeat it again prohibits federal employees from accepting voluntary services for the United States, or employing personal services not authorized by law, except in cases of emergency involving the safety of human life or the protection of property. 31 U.S.C. § 1342." You can not think it applies all you like but, if you want to do the research you will find the courts, the government and the contractrors all agree they can not volunteer to do contracted jobs unless it involves the safety of human life. This is not new.

OccamsRazor04

MrSpad

DancedWithWolves
reply to post by MrSpad

 

They aren't employees though. They are independent contractors. And it is not providing services FOR the government. It is them providing contractual services for private individuals. I'm not seeing how that law applies in this situation.

???

Their contracts are with and payed for by the federal goverment. That pretty much covers it.

No, it doesn't. Contractors are not automatically federal employees.

Go read the law. I am not going to keep spoon feeding this stuff for you all. If its is to much for you to read hundreds of contractors sum it up for their workers in multiple places on the web from this and other years dealing with the shut downs. So a few people at ATS are welcome to think this law does not apply to contrators but so long as the goverment, the courts, and the contrators themselves all think it does then it does not matter.

reply to post by MrSpad


I appreciate that you are trying to explain this position again. I simply disagree and believe a significant case can be made that contractors are not employees and are not subject to the same 'control.' Government generally contracts rather than hires outright in instances where expertise is desired without incurring the expense of full employment salaries and benefits. Contract employees, which I have been for government in the past, will serve specific projects or needs but also may have other companies/churches/organizations/individuals they contract their expertise with at the same time. Client A cannot control your work with client B. They don't own you. To forbid priests from being treated like any other individual citizen who you don't own the right to control...is the Fed's mistake in this situation. If they want to control them then they should have biggied up and made them full employees. They are not. Unless they signed a non compete clause that says they won't do priestly activities on the side, they can't be treated any differently than a private citizen.

I just feel there is a case to be made and the government is attempting to use powers they don't truly have.

Not a shocking assumption actually that government thinks it has more power than it really does. Just because the Fed assumes they control all actions by their contractors doesn't mean they do...unless they paid and negotiated up front to have it that way.

Not trying to argue with you...just saying the Fed isn't always as large and unconditionally in charge as they may think. I'm sure the Fed will back down on this or at least I would hope....they are kind of hanging out there on this one.

MrSpad

OccamsRazor04

MrSpad

DancedWithWolves
reply to post by MrSpad

 

They aren't employees though. They are independent contractors. And it is not providing services FOR the government. It is them providing contractual services for private individuals. I'm not seeing how that law applies in this situation.

???

Their contracts are with and payed for by the federal goverment. That pretty much covers it.

No, it doesn't. Contractors are not automatically federal employees.

Go read the law. I am not going to keep spoon feeding this stuff for you all. If its is to much for you to read hundreds of contractors sum it up for their workers in multiple places on the web from this and other years dealing with the shut downs. So a few people at ATS are welcome to think this law does not apply to contrators but so long as the goverment, the courts, and the contrators themselves all think it does then it does not matter.

There are several problems with this line of reasoning. The first is that the act allows for certain positions to be "essential". Since the military is a "captive audiance", and the law states the government MUST provide them with priests, the position should be considered essential.

Second, while the law allows for arresting people, common sense should prevail, and the law used based upon the crime. This is done every day by every enforcement agency.

Third, if they really want to nitpick, then they should be working with the Catholic priests to ensure Mass is provided, even if it has to be another priest.

If you think this is an unresolvable situation you are beyond clueless. They don't want it resolved, or it would be.

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

So a contracted (for money) employe is on furlough along with all other non essential services. Then they offer to forgo pay to offer those services. Request denied. Generally by base commanders in cases of military. Somehow that directly becomes Obama did it, as in he denied it directly. Am I understanding that correctly?

The concept is a simple one ...and NO ONE here has *ANY* problem understanding or applying the standard when Bush is the man it's being applied to.

The concept is that the buck stops somewhere. At SOME point, blame finds a home and can go no further for what happens, is decided and pursued within the executive branch departments. I've never heard debates taking Bush to task, also hedge to say how little he personally controlled as a man. It's a stupid argument there...and it's no more logical or fitting here.


Now, these people can ALL act independent of Obama. Absolutely they can. Obama is a President, not split to be the commander of a thousand different commands at once. HOWEVER.......this is where the buck stops with HIM. Leon Panetta IS his direct employee, and these people threatening Courts Martial ARE HIS direct employees. The chain is clear and while Obama can't jump it, he can damn sure USE it.

Any of these things (and some HAVE BEEN) can be countermanded by Executive Order. He knows how to use Executive order very well at this stage. He's used it in the last week for other things he deemed worth it. He doesn't deem THIS worth it.

That's as simple as it gets and YES... that DOES make it Obama's problem after the problem is known to exist.

Woe now slow down. I read the article but I didn't see any mention of a courtmartial. What is your source on that.

Since we are at it with the blame game here. I was just reading a thread here the other night saying 26 republicans have publicly stated they would pass a clean bill but the house leader old Johny boy will not allow a vote. Isn't that the definition of tyranny? If true then I think it's time to clean house.

reply to post by Grimpachi


The article plainly states if they go to the base they will be arrested.

As for cleaning House, I am all for that. The senate and Presidency as well, if you are going to clean do it right.

roadgravel
Why is the government paying for religion. The religions can supply at no cost their own services if they so desire. Religion is a business but the gov doesn't need to be paying.

No they can't because of the law. During this period, even if they volunteer (just as if I would want to volunteer to do my job being furloughed), they cannot and they would be in direct violation of the law.

So it seems you are in a conundrum here.

ownbestenemy

roadgravel
Why is the government paying for religion. The religions can supply at no cost their own services if they so desire. Religion is a business but the gov doesn't need to be paying.

No they can't because of the law. During this period, even if they volunteer (just as if I would want to volunteer to do my job being furloughed), they cannot and they would be in direct violation of the law.

So it seems you are in a conundrum here.

That's actually not true. They have several options as I already outlined. Option one, make them essential employees. Option two, allow non contracted Priests to take over this Mass until the shutdown ends. There are other options as well, but two should be fine for now.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Well, first, I don't just go by one source ...even a thread source...and I'm sorry I hadn't linked everything I was reading to backup the thread info on this, but it's a personal and very touchy thing to me if this is true and happening as it's described, so I put real effort into it.

Yes,, Court Martial threats are precisely how it has been headlined and reported on other sources around the world over the last couple days on this. That's where this came from.

There is no "blame game". Barack Obama spent 2 years of his time in Jakarta attending Catholic Mass himself at a Catholic School. He, of all people, should understand that Mass isn't a "oopsy.... sorry I missed it.. doh!" kinda of thing to Catholics. It's pretty damned important to make it to and receive it.

I know this is stupid and amusing to the religion haters...but this is deadly serious stuff to devout followers and Obama just cannot stop pushing.

How about we just cancel Ramadan observation of any form ..because it's a pain in the butt or we can't afford to allow any form of observance? Sound fair? Hell... They're just Muslims..they'll get over it. Right? That's basically what this man in Office is saying by not correcting this issue as soon as it became known as a major issue in need of correction.

One man on Planet Earth has the INDIVIDUAL and Executive power to solve a problem like this threads. ONLY ONE MAN. That would be the U.S. President. No one else in the world has independent authority to order a solution.

So this is his tar baby to hold now... I hope he enjoys getting everything he asked for. He wanted pain inflicted? He got everything he wanted and more ...and in ways some of us will remember as clearly as crap Carter did. He'll be DEFINED by some of the crap he's either done or allowed to BE done in his name as President. ...and if folks forget years from now? People like me will DAMN SURE be there to remind....after outrages like we've witnessed this week.

Defending that pathetic piece of trash in Office is as large an outrage to see at times as what the man has personally done and. by omission of action, allowed to be done. Simple as that, IMO.


** BTW... This has absolutely nothing to do with parties or politics. Obama represents average democrats about as much as Bush represented average Republicans...which is to say, the men can spell the words and that's doing well for them. It's a direct and INDIVIDUAL issue I have here and Obama could be ANY party. His failure to do the right thing, more than once this week, is pathetic and absolutely unforgivable on many levels.

Well it's Sunday....

Sunday seems a good day to pass along an example of leadership to the Catholic Church, that is borrowed from another ATS thread with similar circumstances.

National Park Service security personnel speak on their phones after World War II veterans broke through a barricade with police tape that prevented access to the World War II Memorial on Tuesday, Oct. 1, 2013.
CARLOS BONGIOANNI/STARS AND STRIPES

World War veterans on an October 1, 2013 Honor Flight from Mississippi were confronted with barricades at the National World War II Memorial, which was closed due to the government shutdown.
LEO SHANE III/STARS AND STRIPES

WWII veterans storm D.C. memorial closed by government shutdown

WASHINGTON — Wheelchair-bound elderly veterans pushed aside barricades to tour the World War II Memorial Tuesday morning, in defiance of the government shutdown which closed all of the memorials in the nation’s capital.

The four bus loads of veterans — visiting from Mississippi as part of a once-in-a-lifetime Honor Flight tour — ignored National Park Police instructions not to enter the site as lawmakers and tourists cheered them on.

“We didn’t come this far not to get in,” one veteran proclaimed.

The scene was both emotional and comical at once. After it was clear they had lost control of the situation, Park Police officials stood aside, telling press that they had “asked for guidance on how to respond” to the breach of security.

As 80-something veterans slowly walked around the massive war memorial, Park Police stood quietly to the side, advising other tourists that the site was technically still closed. But they made no moves to stop the wishes of the war heroes.

Link to full story by Leo Shane III Stars and Stripes



At a minimum, there is another response which they can give to their Federal contractors.

These priests and the Catholic Church can just say, "No. We resign our Federal contracts and are not subject to any perceived Federal restrictions on the practice of religion."

The latest update I have seen is the House Resolution making holding mass just fine with them. The Resolution is not the law of the land yet, so....

Peace

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

The article plainly states if they go to the base they will be arrested.

As for cleaning House, I am all for that. The senate and Presidency as well, if you are going to clean do it right.

Do you not understand arrest and court martial are not the same thing. Wrabbit said there are other articles that do confirm court martial however my search engines did not find any pertaining to this. Even the article in the OP says they have it from a good source which doesn't garner a much confidence.

Either way I am sure there are a lot of special interest groups whose personnel are on furlough and many who would volunteer their time. So which ones should get special treatment. I am sure they all feel entitled. I am not emotionally attached to the issue so I am simply looking at it as practicality.

Does it say anywhere that soldiers can't attend services off base? It has been my experience that many soldiers attend services off base anyway due to subpar facilities and the added benefit of getting away from base for a while.

Grimpachi

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

The article plainly states if they go to the base they will be arrested.

As for cleaning House, I am all for that. The senate and Presidency as well, if you are going to clean do it right.

Do you not understand arrest and court martial are not the same thing. Wrabbit said there are other articles that do confirm court martial however my search engines did not find any pertaining to this. Even the article in the OP says they have it from a good source which doesn't garner a much confidence.

Either way I am sure there are a lot of special interest groups whose personnel are on furlough and many who would volunteer their time. So which ones should get special treatment. I am sure they all feel entitled. I am not emotionally attached to the issue so I am simply looking at it as practicality.

Does it say anywhere that soldiers can't attend services off base? It has been my experience that many soldiers attend services off base anyway due to subpar facilities and the added benefit of getting away from base for a while.

I already stated I think everyone who wishes to volunteer should be allowed to do so. They will all be backpaid anyway, so not having them work and then paying them anyways is just plain stupid. Allow each "group" to have an internal mechanism where if the majority of them want to volunteer they are allowed to do so.

Isn't that our patriotic duty, to help the country when it needs it? So why make it impossible to do so?

The persecution of the faith, it is going to get worse. Evil BHO, he demands Catholics pay
for abortion and contraception under Obamacare. Obama did away with President Bush's executive
order to ban funding abortion overseas.

Father Ray Leonard filed a lawsuit Monday in federal district court in Washington, saying he "wishes to continue practicing his faith and ministering to his faith community free of charge... but has been told that he is subject to arrest if he does so."

Leonard is a newly hired civilian employee, scheduled to start work October 1 to provide Catholic religious services at the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base in Georgia.

The government will be given a chance to respond to the lawsuit in coming weeks. It was unclear whether any end to the shutdown and resumption of the Catholic services would stop the lawsuit from proceeding.

The case is Leonard v. U.S. Department of Defense (1:13-cv-1571).
link

Honestly if this goes forward I do not think it will hold up in court. The reason I say that is since the shutdown I have read other articles where contracted gov scientists were at conventions or scheduled to be at them to speak on different issues in their fields however they were held to the same standards as the contracted priests and would face prosecution even if they attended and spoke on their own dime. In fact if they even spoke about not being able to speak to the press they faced prosecution.

That newly hired priest may his contract canceled in the near future.