Military Speakers at Faith-Based Events

Dr. Marty Brunson, executive director of the Catch-A-Dream Foundation, based at Mississippi State University, said the Department of Defense will no longer allow military personnel to speak at charitable events.

Carol Darby, chef of the Media and Community Relations Division of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command, in an e-mail to Brunson, said (we) "discussed the request with our legal experts and command leadership. We regret that we cannot support the event even with modified participation. We greatly admire the Foundation's work. This was a difficult decision for us. Please accept our best wishes for a great event."

Brunson said there are a few final details from the Department of Defense that needs clarifying, but those details could not be resolved in time for tonight’s banquet.

It is vital that we all first fully understand that the decision reached by the Department of Defense regarding our request for SFC Stube to speak at our event was NOT a function of any influence or directive from the President, nor was it a change in policy. It is my understanding that the decision was based upon strict interpretation of an existing policy regarding involvement of military personnel in "fund-raising" activities. Though it has been suggested, it is not clear whether that strict interpretation represents any change in approach or application of policy. Thus, I strongly encourage us to give any benefit of doubt to our military leadership.

The decision was in no way related to issues regarding "faith-based" organizations. The consideration included only the question regarding "fund-raising." The faith-based aspect was not an issue, since Catch-A-Dream, by charter, is not a faith-based foundation. Though there are clearly disturbing undercurrents in existence that do not appear to bode positively regarding religious priorities and futures in this country, these, as best I can determine and discern, DID NOT play a role in this particular case.

Although there was great disappointment when SFC Stube was unable to speak at the event, it is clearly recognized and understood that he was simply abiding by policy and orders, and in no way did SFC Stube abdicate any responsibility. We had, in fact, initially based our plans for the

event upon personal verbal commitment and discussions, and the assumption that SFC Stube would ultimately be granted permission to honor the engagement. Regrettably, we were premature in assuming the commitment; that was our fault, not the fault of the military.

The message that SFC Stube so eloquently delivers is one that America desperately needs to hear, receive and embrace. His concept of "Service Beyond Sacrifice" is a message of gut level patriotism that personifies the absolute fiber of our country, our values and our heritage; it is a message that leaves every person in every audience thankful that we live in a free republic called the United States of America; it is a message that changes the mindset of every hearer to that of gratitude for the sacrifices of the American soldier past and present; it is a message that has inspired perhaps millions of Americans to BE and ACT like Americans, and to stand for what is right, honorable and profitable to our nation and its people; it is a message that reminds us what is still right with our country while at the same time helping us to understand the threats lurking in the shadows; it is a message that binds the hearts and priorities of our citizenry with those of our protectors in the US Military; above all it is a message that MUST be perpetuated and disseminated.

Because of current running commentary I fear that the message and its outreach potential may be thwarted or otherwise compromised. The intent of the military's outreach effort, it appears to me, is not to breed disharmony, but rather to build bridges. If the objective is not being accomplished there may be no perceived need for the program! The very importance of the "Service Beyond Sacrifice" concept leads us to conclude that rather than perpetuating discontent and criticism, we should seek to channel those same energies, that American fervor that has clearly been stirred, toward a concerted and organized effort to communicate with our military leadership and to bring a new harmony in that relationship. The energies devoted to the e-mails, articles, phone calls, letters and other modes of communication must be somehow systematically re-directed toward an empathetic and supportive appeal to military command for appropriate latitude with respect to policy and regulations such that the concept of an outreach program such as SFC Stube's "Service Beyond Self," and the bridges it builds, can be maintained and even magnified, rather than fall victim to unwitting but potential fatal fallout from our (perhaps mis-directed) fervor. The American public, and our valiant military forces, deserve no less.