Name Change

I didn't join TROA because of the name, and I certainly wouldn't leave because of it. It is almost comical to see the impassioned letters, pro and con, in the past few issues. The name change gets as much ink as national affairs. Judging from the letters and articles it would appear that many members have too much time on their hands.

If you want to change the name, change it, and get back to doing what you do!

Capt. Jerry Soriano, USN-Ret.
via e-mail

It appears a significant reason for TROA's proposed name change is to shed the term "retired." Col. Ron Buchert's, usaf-Ret., article ["Securing Our Future," May 2002] indicates that retired officers working a second career resent being called retired. Having recently retired from my second career, I was always proud to be recognized as retired military and still am proud of that distinction.

Col. Walter F. Pitt Jr., USA-Ret.
Clearwater, Fla.

It appears to me that changing TROA's name will eventually lead to changing TROA's primary mission objectives. I base this statement on my subjective estimate that the [needs and desires] of younger officers (40 to 60) would differ sharply from [the needs and desires] of older officers (70 to 90). ...

My question is: How will the future needs and desires of the different age groups be balanced?

Lt. Col. Milton Ballard, AUS-Ret.
Tucson, Ariz.

Editor's note: TROA's board of directors carefully considered and debated these very issues. Many retired officers in second careers are deterred from membership by the word "retired." A name change would in no way be a change of mission or focus for the association. Active duty people have been TROA members since 1950, and the association long has lobbied for issues pertaining to the active duty force.

You may review the research and rationale for the name change proposal at www.troa.org/namechange.

It's a Dog's Life

I enjoyed reading ["Steadfast Sentinels," May 2002] about military dogs, our four-legged heroes. Of particular interest was the account of "Chips," the German Shepherd, attacking the enemy pillbox in 1943 and taking four prisoners. ...

If giving a dog a medal usually reserved for people is resented, then a special medal should be awarded to the war dogs for their bravery.

If anyone or any animal sacrifices themselves for my country and me, I want them honored. Whether they have two legs or four makes no difference.

Doris S. Nusbaum
Albany, Ga.

Concurrent Receipt

Just read ["Historic Action on Concurrent Receipt," May 2002]. Let's all hope that maybe this time we will win our battle for concurrent receipt.

Frankly, I am getting tired of paying for my own disability that I never asked for.

CWO4 Albert Montesi, USA-Ret.
West Milan, N.H.

Church, State, Freedom

I read with interest the comments regarding the relationship between the church and the state some of our members recently shared ["Your Views," June 2002]. ...

Seizing on the words "wall of separation," the emphasis in the state and in public opinion (media-skewed) has focused on the nonestablishment clause of the First Amendment and ignored the free exercise clause. Freedom is a bit messy, and I, like many of you, swore to defend and uphold the whole Constitution. Religious people have a right and obligation to shape public and military policy within their belief system. Surely the Constitution does not leave the field to the nonreligious or irreligious?

Maj. Gary L. O'Day Sr., Chaplain, USAF-Ret.
Hawkins, Texas

Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution are the words "separation of church and state" found. That term first appeared in an exchange of letters between President Thomas Jefferson and the Baptist Association of Danbury, Conn., on Jan. 1, 1802. ... The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Second, the statement that "many of the founders were deists" is wrong. Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, only three were deists. ...

Third, the ACLU certainly does work hard to maintain separation of church and state, much to our detriment. ...

If we believe ... that God belongs only in churches, synagogues, mosques, and homes, God help us, please! If our government cannot rely on God for His protection and moral guidance, then whom can we rely on? As recently as July 30, 1956, the 84th Congress approved our official national motto, "In God We Trust." I would ask Colonel Rabin and Captain Schneider to pull out of their pocket any [U.S.] coin or paper currency and read this motto. ... It recognizes the sovereignty of God over our national affairs - as it should!

Lt. Col. John H. Huber, USA-Ret.
via e-mail

I was surprised that Lt. Col. Glenn Miller does not seem to be aware of the ACLU's unparalleled record in supporting the underdog ["Your Views," May 2002]. Their support for a woman's right to vote (1919), through their support for the disenfranchised African-Americans since then, to today's support for freedom of speech are all in the best traditions of the country's founders. ...

"In God We Trust" was added to the dollar bill and "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance under President Eisenhower. I cannot see that these items have improved our morals.

Cmdr. Hubert Russell, USCG-Ret.
Orinda, Calif.

[Miller] feels that ... to maintain the wall of separation between church and state is attacking some hallowed principle. ... The majority religion must not dictate what our nation of all creeds and beliefs must be or become. The ACLU fights for that when they take issue with the display of a Judeo-Christian document such as the Ten Commandments on property, government property, that belongs to all of us. The "us" includes many, many non-Christians. Why should they be subject to the personal religious belief of others, albeit the majority of the population? If so, we would then have a tyranny of the majority in this country.

Such tyranny is precisely what the "founding fathers" (among them several non-Christians who were followers of deism) so desperately sought with the First Amendment. ...

... I commend The Retired Officer Magazine for having an even-handed editorial approach to things that may not be popular with some members - things that may even surprise some members.

Capt. Jerry R. Williams, USAF-Ret.
via e-mail

Correction: Sun City Texas would like to apologize for inaccurately presenting Lt. Gen. Charles Graham, usa-Ret., as a four-star general in the ad that ran in the June 2002 issue. Graham retired as a three-star general. Sun City Texas sincerely regrets any inconvenience this may have caused. - Gary Newman, general manager, Sun City Texas