Conscientious Objection

Conscientious Objection

According to the U.S military, conscientious objection is the act of opposing participating in all wars. When a military member convinces the military that he/she is a conscientious objector, they can be granted a discharge. In most circumstances, this is brought about by ones religious training and faith (Jurden, 2005). However, they have to prove that they became conscientious objectors in the course of the service and not at the time of the recruitment. Fortunately or unfortunately, one cannot decide which war to go or which war not to take part in. For this reason, a draftee or service man is either a conscientious objector or not. They cannot be seen in some wars then fail to be seen in others for no other reason than conscientious objection (Packard, 2003).

The just war theory literally implies that there are wars that are worth public support than other wars. According to this theory, war is sometimes necessary in politics. However, there are different principles that guide the people who feel that there are some just wars and some are unjust. When greatly evaluated, the just wars have ambiguous criteria that prevent anyone from easily using them to conclude that a war is just or not. For this reason, most conscientious objectors can still not take in just wars. This is because their belief are objected to the shading of blood (especially of the innocent ones) and not of its status. Whether the war is declared just or not, there would still be the shedding of blood.

If the U.S goes into a Just War, the citizens still have a right to object serving in the particular war. What criteria or measures were used to gauge whether the war was just or not? Is there really a just war? Is shedding of blood shedding of blood? Most conscientious objectors have their beliefs set on certain principles or doctrines. For example, the Quakers, Church of Brethren, seventh day Adventists and Amish base their beliefs on the Bible (Packard, 2003). According to these teachings, wars are not advocated but rather a spirit of peace and reconciliation is advocated.

The current military policy towards conscientious objection is fair. Although one needs to prove that they became objectors during their time in service and not at the time of recruitment, the policy gives every one a right to what they believe in. At the same time, it brings some order in a place where there are strict rules that need to be followed. If everyone just claimed that, they could not participate in a war especially those already in the military and not give good ground or good evidence, then running the military would almost be chaotic. As constantly stated, all people have rights. The military are people who also have rights. It is not right to make someone do something that goes against his/her beliefs if the refusal will not affect someone else. Unless the person was a conscientious objector at the time of the recruitment and was aware of what goes on in the military, the others who convert in the course of the service or are still not in the service should not be forced to do a task that goes against their belief.

The War in Iraq brought out hundreds of Conscientious objectors. This is because war was a reality to them as opposed to what they talked about serving the nation. It is reported that soldiers raised questions to the religious leaders about what they were supposed to do in matters concerning some things that were conscious disturbing. It is reported that there were approximately 200,000 conscientious objectors in the Vietnam, 37,000 in the Second World War, 4,300 in Korea and 3,500 in the First World War (Packard, 2003). Unfortunately, the objectors are viewed in different ways once they go public. Some are celebrated while others are despised. The U.S policy should make the task less hectic and intimidating. It should also offer the objectors positions, which are less intimidating. For example, most of them are taken to remote areas. These people are still soldiers and they do not need to go through the treatment they are sometimes given. The policy should also make the recruits aware of what they are getting into before things get out of hand (Griffiths, 2005). Currently, most of the Conscientious objectors are those who entered the military as poor teenagers.

References

Griffiths, R. (2005). A Note on Mosley, the ‘Jewish War’ and Conscientious Objection. Journal of Contemporary History, 40 (4): 675-688. doi: 10.1177/0022009405056124.

Jurden, J. P. (2005). Conscientious Objectors. GPSolo Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/publications/gp_solo_magazine_home/gp_solo_magazine_index/conscienciousobjectors.html

Packard, G. (2003). Hundreds of U.S. Soldiers Emerge as Conscientious Objectors. Interpress service. Retrieved from http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=17584

Last Completed Projects