Section 532 tweaks the language in current law on conscience rights of those in the military, so that the new provision (new language in italics) reads:
Unless it could have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, and good order and discipline, the Armed Forces shall accommodate individual expressions of belief of a member of the armed forces reflecting the sincerely held conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the member and, in so far as practicable, may not use such expressions of belief as the basis of any adverse personnel action, discrimination, or denial of promotion, schooling, training, or assignment.The section also sets a 90-day deadline for issuance of regulations implementing this section, and requires the Pentagon to consult with faith-group representatives who endorse military chaplains in drafting the regulations.
Section 533 then requires a DOD Inspector General's report 18 months later on Armed Forces compliance with the ban on adverse personnel action based on conscience, moral principles or religious beliefs. The IG is to consult with the Armed Forces Chaplain Board as appropriate in preparing the report.
Section 534 requires that within one year:
The Secretary of Defense shall conduct a survey among a statistically valid sample of military chaplains of the regular and reserve components of the Armed Forces, to be selected at random, to assess whether—
(1) restrictions placed on prayers offered in a public or non-religious setting have prevented military chaplains from exercising the tenets of their faith as prescribed by their endorsing faith group; and
(2) those restrictions have had an adverse impact on the ability of military chaplains to fulfill their duties to minister to members of the Armed Forces and their dependents.The Joint Explanatory Statement (at pp. 63-65) explains the House-Senate compromises that led to these provisions. The Statement also contains the following language (pg. 82) that appears to be a response to criticism by some conservative Christian groups (background) that the military has given preferential access in policy making to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation:
The House bill contained a provision (sec. 530E) that would require the Department of Defense to provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives advance written notice of any meeting held between Department employees and civilians for the purpose of writing, revising, implementing, enforcing, or seeking advice, input, or counsel regarding military policy related to religious liberty.
The Senate committee-reported bill contained no similar provision.
The agreement does not include this provision.
We believe the Department and the military services should proactively reach out to and meet with religious groups of all faiths when formulating and revising policies that impact religious freedom and tolerance within the military. We are becoming increasingly concerned over reports that the Department and the services appear more responsive to some religious groups and interests than others. The Department and the services must be proactive in their efforts to overcome this perception and to ensure the fairness and equity of policies and regulations that address the religious liberty of service members and their families.
