There is a lot of outrage right now from the right regarding the decision to prevent military chaplains or other ministers contracted by the government from ministering or performing services during the government shutdown. The outcry is ostensibly over the violation of their right to minister. There is a lot of things wrong here, but I want to sort out some of the reality from the emotion. First of all, the relevant text of the first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Okay, there it is. Congress shall make no law...period. They can neither establish a particular religion or prohibit anyone from freely exercising their religion. So, what is really happening here. The military provides chaplains to our men and women in uniform. This is a long standing tradition and ministers are provided from as many faiths as exist in the military. This is a service provided to service members. It is not a law, required by Congress, therefore, there is no establishment since it is provided to all religions (at least those represented in the military) alike.
The outrage being expressed here, here, and here, suggests that there is some sort of free exercise violation. Before discussing whether or not a free exercise violation is going on, I will first try to ascertain the "facts" taking place on the ground. First, the overwhelming majority of religious services are still taking place because active duty chaplains are not affected by this. Secondly, contract chaplains who have received their contract for this year are supposedly not affected either. This is only affecting those contract chaplains who had not yet received their contracts for this year. However, there is an additional problem to consider. The military is apparently refusing to allow these ministers to perform services even if they volunteer their time to do so.
So, are anyone's rights being violated here? The military is trying to provide for the right to free exercise to active duty members. However, some bases do not have active duty Catholic chaplains and therefore have to "hire them out" so to speak. Those bases are affected by the shutdown because those chaplains aren't considered essential and aren't getting paid. This all makes perfect sense and does not "technically" rise to the level of violating anyone's rights.
However, we have the final problem to consider. In a location where a "contract chaplain" is in place, there is no other method of providing services to military personnel on base. That isn't necessarily a problem because in many religions, laypersons can perform services, so any member of that religion could take on the responsibility. This is not true for all religions though. Catholics can't do this, nor Mormons, and others. In fact, it is more a protestant thing. Nonetheless, the military is not obligated to provide a chaplain, it is a service. The troubling part in these stories is that the military will not allow chaplains to perform services even on a volunteer basis. If there is a minister willing to provide military personnel with their religious rights and traditions on a voluntary basis, for FREE, and the military prohibits them from doing so, then the government has stepped in to the first amendment. The point at which they tell a minister of any faith that they can't perform services on a voluntary basis (according to the stories above, they went so far as to declare that them performing religious services would be an illegal act), then the government is prohibiting the free exercise of religion of those serving in the military as well as the minister offering their services. The government is simply wrong on this one, but I am not willing to go so far as to say it is some sort of conspiracy against religion or Catholics since it is only being carried out against those who are not active duty chaplains.
