http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2013/02/25/religious-computer-game-brings-wrath-down-on-pentagon/
I wish the ACLU defended our entire Constitution rather than just the parts they liked.
Quote from: LongBlade on February 25, 2013, 01:04:27 PM
I wish the ACLU defended our entire Constitution rather than just the parts they liked.
+1
Can you be more specific?
Quote from: LongBlade on February 25, 2013, 01:04:27 PM
I wish the ACLU defended our entire Constitution rather than just the parts they liked.
What is the mandate of the ACLU?
"The first is that the Army's Chaplain School says it never asked for the game and doesn't want it." I think that this is the most important
and renders the issue meaningless. If they are forced to use it then it is wrong. I personally do not want to see anybody defending or promoting
rights of
any religion. They can do it themselves with the benevolent (or otherwise) assistance of the goddess or FSM or the Force.
Quote from: DicedT on February 25, 2013, 02:58:07 PM
Can you be more specific?
I think LB's point is that the ACLU has been conspicuously silent on the recent 2d Amendment hubbub. Further discussion along those lines should probably be directed to the gun control thread (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4115.0).
Here's the rub - while chaplains are commissioned as ordained ministers of specific denominations, they are expected to serve the spiritual needs of everyone in their units. So a Lutheran battalion chaplain still needs the skills to address a Muslim or Wiccan or Catholic or Mormon or even Atheist soldier without offending him/her. It would almost seem that a training sim would be a perfect way to present these sorts of scenarios to a wide variety of chaplains without having to take a lot of time / effort to conjure up a bunch of hokey scenarios for people to be forced to role-play through just so chaplains can train on live bodies instead of virtual ones.
I get that the fear is that the courses of action being taught or coached or preferred are subject to religious coercion, but no more or less so than the current classroom training at the chaplains' school itself.
It seems to me that if there's a problem with the coursework, that needs to be addressed before we ever talk about the sim.
If there's a problem with the sim, but not the coursework, then it's a poorly-designed sim in need of further refinement before fielding.
If this is reactionary counter-action on the part of moralistic crusaders, then there's a completely different issue to be solved, and one that no sim is going to fix for them.
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 25, 2013, 03:48:45 PM
Quote from: DicedT on February 25, 2013, 02:58:07 PM
Can you be more specific?
I think LB's point is that the ACLU has been conspicuously silent on the recent 2d Amendment hubbub. Further discussion along those lines should probably be directed to the gun control thread (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4115.0).
2nd, 9th, and 10th...enumerated powers, limits of the supremacy clause. I could go on, but I'll wear myself out beating a dead horse.
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 25, 2013, 03:56:09 PM
Here's the rub - while chaplains are commissioned as ordained ministers of specific denominations, they are expected to serve the spiritual needs of everyone in their units. So a Lutheran battalion chaplain still needs the skills to address a Muslim or Wiccan or Catholic or Mormon or even Atheist soldier without offending him/her. It would almost seem that a training sim would be a perfect way to present these sorts of scenarios to a wide variety of chaplains without having to take a lot of time / effort to conjure up a bunch of hokey scenarios for people to be forced to role-play through just so chaplains can train on live bodies instead of virtual ones.
I get that the fear is that the courses of action being taught or coached or preferred are subject to religious coercion, but no more or less so than the current classroom training at the chaplains' school itself.
It seems to me that if there's a problem with the coursework, that needs to be addressed before we ever talk about the sim.
If there's a problem with the sim, but not the coursework, then it's a poorly-designed sim in need of further refinement before fielding.
If this is reactionary counter-action on the part of moralistic crusaders, then there's a completely different issue to be solved, and one that no sim is going to fix for them.
I completely agree with the points you make.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-jmdn1UC7uHk%2FTeM9WLVSkRI%2FAAAAAAAAATs%2FGxEXfSmHuwQ%2Fs1600%2Ffather_mulcahy_mash.jpg&hash=6a73d297a0430566116ca44c2d3eb4cdd42e15df)