A question of Bible codes and contract clauses


If a company inscribes a rifle with code from the Bible, but is neither required to nor prohibited to take such an action by the contract, have any rules been broken?

That’s the question I have after reading this ABC News report about rifle aiming equipment manufacturer, Trijicon, inscribing its military scopes with references to New Testament passages about Jesus Christ.

The article suggests the inscribed scriptural references violate military rules banning proselytizing in the war zone. The rules exist out of concern U.S. actions in Iraq and Afghanistan would be viewed as a new Crusade. But it is not clear from the piece whether these requirements are passed along to the company under its weaponry contracts.

Further, since the Army and Marine Corps told ABC they did not know the inscriptions were there, it appears it was not a contract requirement to include such references on the devices.

Nor does it appear that the additional text affected the equipment’s performance.  The Bible references are in the same font and are the same size as the model numbers the company slaps on its products.

So back to the question. What do you do when the contractor does something that is not asked for, prohibited or otherwise accounted for in the contract?


About Author

No Comments

  1. I think that the company is in violation of the constitution on separation of church and state as well as any other laws. One does not have to spell out everything in a contract when higher laws and regulations apply.
    Using your argument, all helemt covers could be emblazoned with “onward Christian Soldiers” with no repercussions if not in contract with maker of the items. DUH!

  2. Easy. If you can’t void the contract outright for deceiving the government into committing a First Amendment violation, you inform them that there will not be any point in any principal of the company making another bid to supply the government with anything.


    Speaking as an Army veteran, I believe that these misguided zealots have committed treason, but I’m willing to let them off with never again collecting a dime from the taxpayers.

  3. Whats wrong with shooting Muslims with Jesus rifles? This is the Holy War on Terror, after all. Probably just some atheist complainers here, trying to end the war before it can burst out into the magnificent Armageddon.

  4. Seems un-necessary and the wrong message of why the supreme sacrifice was made on the cross. The only benifit I see right away may be for a Soldier to have a reminder that a lethal device sould be used to preserve the life of another as He taught. As for the contract, any separation of Church and State would not apply as ther is no State trying to influence the Church here. If a few letters passed functional testing, the winning big wone out. Get to work. Thanks.

Leave A Reply