KUER⁠0%

Defense Dept. updates faith traditions list after Mike Lee, John Curtis complaints ⁠15%

By Associated Press⁠60% KUER News⁠0%

6/8/2026, 7:52:17 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 12 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Negativity Bias, and Confirmation Bias, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 37% saturation with 70 hits. Analysis detected 352 faulty-reasoning hits from 189 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 31% and a BS Rank of ⁠15% (18,741 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 85.60% of the article peer group.

The Pentagon updated its recognized religious affiliations Monday, three days after it released a streamlined list. 
Utah Republican Sens. 
Mike Lee and John Curtis had complained because the Pentagon’s Christian categories did not include The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 
Whether members of the LDS Church are considered Christian is a long-running debate. 
On social media, Sen. 
Curtis thanked the department for listening and acting. 
Both senators agreed with the department's statement that noted the "Pentagon’s job is not to adjudicate theological debates, but instead to ensure sincerely-held faith is respected and encouraged in our ranks." 
The latest military rubric, however, does not categorize the LDS Church as Christian. 
Rather, it removes the Christian label from 20 other traditions, including Catholicism, Lutheranism and Pentecostalism. 
The armed forces are religiously diverse, and nearly 70% of troops identify as Christian, according to a 2019 congressional report. 
Almost a quarter of troops were listed as other, unclassified or unknown. 
The Defense Department said that the original list “included redundant and unnecessary labeling, and the mistake has been fixed.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 16.4%Associated Press: 2.2%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias16.4%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.9%Associated Press: 3.2%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic6.9%This article: 7.9%Associated Press: 0.8%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic7.9%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.1%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 16.4%Associated Press: 7.1%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect16.4%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.5%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 10.1%Associated Press: 2.1%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias10.1%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.6%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 17.5%Associated Press: 8.7%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias17.5%This article: 10.1%Associated Press: 2.0%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias10.1%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 12.2%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias12.2%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.0%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 2.3%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 15.3%Associated Press: 1.4%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias15.3%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 37.0%Associated Press: 3.4%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority37.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 2.7%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 4.7%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.5%Associated Press: 2.2%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.5%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.5%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.7%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 28.0%Associated Press: 1.2%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)28.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.3%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 1.1%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 3.0%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.7%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.8%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Associated Press: 0.4%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

189 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers14%attributed speech162writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Curtis • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDefense Department • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Defense Department

100%flagged-word coverage
19 attributed words70% of attributed speech88% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.