i'm a pacifist. my son wants to join the marines.

[Bordeaux]

Does being a sniper pay well, and will enable him to put a fair amount of money in the bank? If so, I think it would be a noble pursuit.

Nah. Military pay is based primarily on your rank not the job your do. The E-7 sniper gets paid the same as the E-7 human resources specialist depending on now many years of service they have under their belt.

Wow! I had no idea it was that way. Thank you for educating me on that.

[kevin]

well, the boy decided against joining for the marines enlistment-out-of-high school program, after taking with his cousin, who is a marine aviator.

the cousin explained that he would be far, far better off entering the corps with a college degree already in hand, in terms of doing well. he explained that the alternative was a choice to join the more or less cannon-fodder.

interestingly, he had a low opinion of marine infrastructure, which he characterized as inefficient and wasteful. good people, bad organization and support.

[Tom]

So you have helped your son to engage his brain occasionally, to make good choices, after all.

[Meat]

Delete this thread. False alarm.

[eyeshaveit]

interestingly, he had a low opinion of marine infrastructure, which he characterized as inefficient and wasteful. good people, bad organization and support.

Welcome to typical government bureaucracy.

[kevin]

my problem has never been to get my kids to engage their brains. they've all got too much brains anyway. but none of them have life-experience, which is the context that allows you to select a best-choice from the suite of possibilities the brains provide.

with the marines, my son pointed out that he was looking for a structured environment, where patterns of behavior were fixed and limited. this is interesting, because he has certainly NOT been raised in a highly structured environment-- a high level of change has been constant in his life, not as much as in mine when i was his age, but probably unusually high.

at any rate, the cousin pointed out that the marine corps was certainly structured, but that the structure was not necessarily congruent with the patterns he was looking for. so life among the kshatriya has been postponed a bit.

[meAgain]

personally, if i were to accede that war was a rational and effective means of solving political problems, it would require a sea change in my own attitudes towards the killing of people. i look at warfare the same way i look at eating meat: if i'm going to eat it, i believe i have to be willing to do the butchering myself. likewise, if i believe that war is appropriate, i have to be willing to accept all that comes with it: mass killing, economic chaos, slaughter of innocents, rape, robbery, and murder. all these things are inevitable components of war, and will always come about when that card is played.

. . . .well, IMO, then I would say your analysis is extreme and narrow.  I find it difficult to believe God is only happy with those who kill their own meat.  Mary was a woman.  Should she not have eaten meat less she slaughtered it herself?  Sorry, your extreme position is irrational to me ?not to mention unscriptural.  One is entitled to his opinion on things, but when he starts to equate those opinions with the opinion of God, he ought to be very careful. 

One need not accept rape and robbery as part of war, unless one is wiling to accept rape, murder, and divorce as part of marriage.  Unfortunately those things are sometimes part of a marriage, but they need not be and they certainly don?t render marriage then wrong. 

I realize your son has since changed his mind regarding joining the military, but I would be concerned about the bigger issue of his belief in God and even wonder if your extreme position regarding warfare has influenced/shaped your son's agnostic outlook.  Perhaps, he has come to see, since it is what you have taught, that serving one?s country in the military cannot be part of a Christian life.  Perhaps, you ought to have said believing that is your opinion, but that many other Christians, including the Church, disagree with you.  Perhaps your views regarding same-sex unions have confused him as well.  On the one hand he is familiar with Scripture and what the Church (including his own) has to say on the matter and then he hears your take.  Perhaps even your vegetarian views don?t jive with him, especially when you make them about Christianity.   I know that many non believers blame confusion of message on why they can?t take belief in God seriously.  And I can understand that. 

[Shawna]

One need not accept rape and robbery as part of war, unless one is wiling to accept rape, murder, and divorce as part of marriage.  Unfortunately those things are sometimes part of a marriage, but they need not be and they certainly don?t render marriage then wrong. 

The difference is that in war, rape and robbery and the suffering and death of non-combatants (as well as combatants) ALWAYS occurs.  Always.  In a war, people try to kill other people who have families they love and homes they miss.

I realize your son has since changed his mind regarding joining the military, but I would be concerned about the bigger issue of his belief in God and even wonder if your extreme position regarding warfare has influenced/shaped your son's agnostic outlook.  Perhaps, he has come to see, since it is what you have taught, that serving one?s country in the military cannot be part of a Christian life.  Perhaps, you ought to have said believing that is your opinion, but that many other Christians, including the Church, disagree with you.  Perhaps your views regarding same-sex unions have confused him as well.  On the one hand he is familiar with Scripture and what the Church (including his own) has to say on the matter and then he hears your take.  Perhaps even your vegetarian views don?t jive with him, especially when you make them about Christianity.   I know that many non believers blame confusion of message on why they can?t take belief in God seriously.  And I can understand that.

Lol!  "Including the Church"?  Really, MeAgain? Could you please please please please, just for once, qualify that statement by saying "Roman Catholic Church" or even changing it to "many denominations" or something else that is more verifiably factual?  Because, just sayin' here, I believe that the Church is non-violent and also not directly connected with the Roman Catholic church or its beliefs in any way.  You disagree.  But please please please please, just once.... please indicate by your choice of language that you understand that many many other people disagree with your opinion, and that, in the end, your opinion about what the Church consists of is nothing more than an opinion.

It seems to me that you are encouraging Kevin to lie to his son about Kevin's beliefs, so as not to confuse him.  That's absurd.  Why would I tell my son things that I believe to be untrue in order to theoretically make it easier for him to believe in God?  If it's not true, it's not true, and I shouldn't be telling my son untruths.  I think that avoiding "confusion of message" by deliberately giving what I believe to be a false message is worse than allowing people to see where folks disagree, even if it seems confusing, and to make up their own mind.

I am not in the least concerned about my son's agnosticism.  He has come by it fair and square.  I would be more concerned if he believed in God only by force of habit or rote, without ever examining his beliefs for himself.  I don't think that God needs yet one more person who can recite the Nicene Creed from memory, while blindly following yet another blind prophet.

Nice job guilt-tripping Kevin, by the way, for the decisions his son is making.....  you managed to throw most of the kitchen sink in there.....

[Shawna]

And one might also feel proud of him, for choosing his own path.

I am just so proud of him, I could burst.  He is thinking and growing and making decisions and being independent.  He's turning out ok.

I don't know whether he will decide to join the military, but if he does, I feel reasonably confident that he will be making the choice for solid reasons.

He knows that I hope he won't enlist, but he disagrees with me in principle on the foundational issues...so.... we will see.  I think that war is a symptom of human failure to work through difficulties until they become a crisis...at which time people don't see any other option.  And yet, there were options--before-- that could have prevented such catastrophic systems failure.  My son concurs as much, but then I believe that our goal should be to seek and implement those options and that it is possible to do so.  He believes that I am a hopeless idealist, and in the real world we cannot expect anyone to successfully implement the options that would prevent violence.

Anyway, my son made the appointment with the marine recruiter, and I went.  The recruiter is a really nice young man. His specialty is aviation, and he likes cross-country running.  We had a nice chat while Griffin was taking the aptitude/skills test and I pointed out that I hoped Griffin wouldn't enlist, because I am a Quaker and a pacifist.  And we talked about how even the positions that didn't directly involve killing people were positions that supported other people killing people, which he understood....  And I told him that the military was the Plumber of politics....   that people call for plumbers in a crisis because by the time there's a crisis there's almost no other option, but really if they were taking care of things and maintaining things properly, the plumbers wouldn't be necessary.  He said, "No one ever called me a plumber before. I have to remember that one."  And he told me about some of his adventures doing humanitarian aid in his Huey after Hurricane Sandy, and about his wife and about fishing and running.  And he recommended a wonderful book.... "Born to Run", about running and why people get injured and what it's like to run.....  I recommend it to everyone.... it's full of adventure and danger and courage.  The next time we met, I told the recruiter it was one of the best books I'd ever read.   And it is.

So anyway....   my son and I had talked about how the recruiter would be sort of a reverse job interview.  He would tell all the absolute best things about the military, and spinning whatever he could in a positive light. And he did.  Really, I have no problems with the organization at all, except for the killing part. I wish that our country valued humanitarian work enough to create such an organization whose job it was to provide support during natural disasters, and assist in engineering solutions and cleaning up and building infrastructure.......  It would be a great thing to have a standing organization that was paid to take care of people.

Anyway, my son and I have also talked about how everything has its advantages and disadvantages, and if you think the advantages are worth it, you find ways to mitigate the disadvantages.  Right now, the VA is a huge disadvantage, so far as I can tell.... so we discussed how if he chose to go into the military, he might plan on other avenues for health care after he leaves the military.... And I told him that if he got PTSD, he could live with us as long as he needed to, and he was not, under any circumstances, to kill himself.  (That made him laugh.)

My own personal suspicion is that part of my son's interest in the military is that it is scary to grow up.  He is looking ahead to his high school graduation in May, and (I think) wondering what he will do after that.  It's a little scary.  I suspect that the military sounded like a safe interim place to go.  You're an adult, and yet you can hang on to the established patterns of an institution that is bigger than yourself if you get a little nervous. 

Talking to my nephew about the realities of being in the marines was very very useful.  My nephew was apparently very straight (it may have helped that he is stationed in Okinawa right now and it was about 4am his time), and helped my son get a picture of how his decisions today might influence the future paths he had available.

So now my son is filling out college applications.  He has already been accepted to the college down the street (Ohio University- Eastern Campus).  And we will see.  He is keeping the option of military service open.

Fingers crossed. But I remain proud of him.... just fit to burst.   

[meAgain]

Nice job guilt-tripping Kevin, by the way, for the decisions his son is making.....  you managed to throw most of the kitchen sink in there.....

I was just taking the opportunity to psychoanalyze the situation and think about the bigger picture.  You know how I always like to look at the big picture. And even if I do say so myself, I think I raise a valid point ? confusion of message is actually one of the reasons non believers cite for why they have trouble believing in God.       

Lol!  "Including the Church"?  Really, MeAgain? Could you please please please please, just for once, qualify that statement by saying "Roman Catholic Church" or even changing it to "many denominations" or something else that is more verifiably factual?

What can I say?  I call Christ?s Church the Church.  I also call the Pope Holy Father.  I?m not going to stop because some are sensitive to that. 

Because, just sayin' here, I believe that the Church is non-violent and also not directly connected with the Roman Catholic church or its beliefs in any way.  You disagree.  But please please please please, just once.... please indicate by your choice of language that you understand that many many other people disagree with your opinion, and that, in the end, your opinion about what the Church consists of is nothing more than an opinion.

Shawna, please, please, please, try to understand that truth exists.  If one group believes X and another group denies X, one of the groups or both of the groups are wrong, but both of the groups cannot be right.  That?s not an opinion ? rather logical reasoning. 

And please, please, please try to understand the illogic in perpetuating the heresy of indifferentism ? that one faith is just as valid or reasonable as another faith.  I won?t apologize for not sharing this heresy with you.  So while you criticize me for my ?choice of language?, I also criticize you for yours.  Words/language have meaning and significance.  How we say something matters. I have no need or reason to use some kind of inclusive language because you prefer it that way.   

It seems to me that you are encouraging Kevin to lie to his son about Kevin's beliefs, so as not to confuse him.  That's absurd.

Then you would be wrong.  I am encouraging Kevin to look into his own beliefs and try to notice the inconsistencies.  I am encouraging Kevin to understand that thinking the Church gets some things right and some things wrong contradicts any reason for believing ANYTHING the Church has to say. 

Maybe your son recognizes this too. 

Why would I tell my son things that I believe to be untrue in order to theoretically make it easier for him to believe in God?

You wouldn?t. But by believing some things the Church teaches and refusing to believe others --  merely begs the question ? why believe any of it? Why should your son believe you that you think the Quaker Church gets it right regarding war, but gets it wrong regarding same-sex unions? 

Uuuh . . .  if I were a smart kid, I would pick up pretty fast that I wouldn?t think then there is much use to me of the Quaker religion.  Who needs it?  I mean if we can all just believe what we want to believe anyway who needs a church?, who needs religion?, who needs God?   

If it's not true, it's not true, and I shouldn't be telling my son untruths.

We?re on the same page there.  But remember step back and look at the big picture . . .  how can you be sure you are getting it right?  Many, many sincere individuals believe different things.  I think your son is smart enough to recognize that.


Why should he even believe in this guy Jesus Christ?  Much of what we know about Christ and His message comes from His Church.  But if you show him that you don?t believe all His Church has to say . . .  why should any intelligent person believe any of it?  Doesn?t make a lot of sense ? just say?n.

[Gnu Ordure]

And one might also feel proud of him, for choosing his own path.

I am just so proud of him, I could burst.  He is thinking and growing and making decisions and being independent.  He's turning out ok.

I don't know whether he will decide to join the military, but if he does, I feel reasonably confident that he will be making the choice for solid reasons.

He knows that I hope he won't enlist, but he disagrees with me in principle on the foundational issues...so.... we will see. <snip for brevity]

So now my son is filling out college applications.  He has already been accepted to the college down the street (Ohio University- Eastern Campus).  And we will see.  He is keeping the option of military service open.

Fingers crossed. But I remain proud of him.... just fit to burst.   

Cool, @Shawna.

I don't have a problem with anyone joining the military; what I don't like is that enlisted soldiers are committed to a lengthy period of employment, a commitment which doesn't apply to other professions. And I don't think that 16-year-olds are old enough to make that commitment.

(Yes, I know that 16 is also the marriageable age in my country and many others, and that marriage involves a longer commitment - but I think that's too low as well).

I've been trying to find out the exact length of the commitment in the US/UK, without success. I found this article in Time magazine which says:

Men and women of the U.S. armed forces sign an enlistment contract that binds them to service, generally for eight years. Unlike your average job contract however, this one gives the employer significantly more control over your working life. This contract, binding the service member to the armed forces under threat of imprisonment, is understood as necessary in order to ensure that military can reliably count on the majority of its members being deployable in the event of a national emergency

Is that right, @Mr. Blackwell @Jay ?

If so, I think a commitment of eight years is too long - particularly for a 16-year-old.

[kevin]

we'll see what he does.

trying to settle into structure is a trap, sometimes, when the available structures are wrong.

[Mr. Blackwell]

@Gnu Ordure

I've been trying to find out the exact length of the commitment in the US/UK, without success. I found this article in Time magazine which says:

Men and women of the U.S. armed forces sign an enlistment contract that binds them to service, generally for eight years. Unlike your average job contract however, this one gives the employer significantly more control over your working life. This contract, binding the service member to the armed forces under threat of imprisonment, is understood as necessary in order to ensure that military can reliably count on the majority of its members being deployable in the event of a national emergency

Is that right, @Mr. Blackwell @Jay ?

No, that is not entirely correct. There are all sorts of enlistment contracts available and the length of the contract is typically connected to the type of service and/or a sign on bonus. When I signed up I did not want to enlist in the "regular" Army because I did not want to do it full time. I signed up with the Army Reserves. My initial contract was for 6 years + 2 years in the IRR[nb]Individual Ready Reserve[/nb]. That might sound like 8 years but it's really not. I only put my uniform on once a month for two days and for a two week training period once a year. I have completed my initial contract and am currently in the "+2" which basically means that I can be called back in if they need me but I don't see that happening.


Most of the people who go into the regular service sign a four year contract but I have heard of 1,2 and 3 year contracts. It all depends. Plus, there are all kinds of ways to get out of the contract that don't involve jail time. So, saying that everyone signs a standard 8 year contract is not accurate at all.

[Mr. Blackwell]

Active Duty: Active Duty Soldiers make up America?s ready, full-time defense force. They perform the Army?s in-need jobs, and carry out day-to-day operations. Generally, Active Duty terms range from two to six years.

Army Reserve: Soldiers keep their civilian careers while training part-time. Service ranges from one to six years, depending on the job and the location of the Soldier's Army Reserve Center. Many professionals and college students serve in the Army Reserve. In times of need, Army Reserve Soldiers may be called to Active Duty.

http://www.goarmy.com/parents/what-to-expect/service-options.html

[Gnu Ordure]

Thanks, Mr B.

Active Duty terms range from two to six years.

Six years is still too long, in my opinion.

As far as I know, no other professions require this advance commitment.

I don't really see the need for it. 

[Mr. Blackwell]

Well, it's not like they are being forced to sign a contract with the military. It could be worse.

[Shawna]

I think the standard length for the marine enlistment is 4 years.  Yes, you can get out of it....  they can kick you out for various reasons, and you can apply to be released for family hardship and such.  But as far as I know, it is the only employer that you need to get permission from in order to quit.  And saying, "Hey, I made a mistake.  I feel that I was misled by your descriptions of what I would be doing, and I don't feel that this is the correct path for me to follow at this time,"  just isn't good enough.

That's one of the disadvantages my son and I talked about....  if you enlist, you are theirs for the length of the enlistment.  You can't change your mind like you can with any other job, or with college, or even with relationships.

But there are worse disadvantages.  Our government has a bad habit of helping bad people stay in power because our gov't thinks it is in our interest.  I told the boy, "Do your best if you decide to enlist.... but remember that the weak are for protecting, not for preying on.  If you find yourself in a situation where you are helping people who prey on the weak, you will know that you are on the wrong side."  "Sometimes it's hard to tell who is weak," he sez.  "Not when they're torturing nuns," retorts I (Our history in South America is horrific). "Yeah.  Good point," he sez (he knows history too).

He has completed another college application, and I have been trying to get him to apply at a Quaker college, but he isn't very interested. Dang.

I told him that there were veterans here on IGI who would be happy to tell him about their experiences in the military, and that I thought they would be invaluable in helping him get information to help him make decisions.  He is not thrilled about the idea of getting on a forum that his parents post to....  but he has promised that he will get in touch here when he is ready to explore military service more.  Thanks for volunteering to talk to him, guys!  Any advice I should relay to him?

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Perhaps you could point out the culture he'd be entering.  War often affects people in bad ways.

[rickymooston]

my son has been raised a quaker, strictly pacifist. currently he's agnostic with respect to theism.

he's always had an interest in weaponry, and recently had an interview with a marine recruiter. the recruiter wants to have another interview with me present, as my son is a minor.

strange days indeed.

Move to Canada!

That way, it is far less likely he will kill people when he joins our military. He still might of course
but he will be less likely to take part in invasions that being in the U.S military

[kevin]

thats an option, should the draft be reinstated.

[ChristianDamien]

America likes war for a simple reason. The reason is because the entire boom of consumer affluence and America becoming the most powerful and richest nation in the world was achieved by GOING TO WAR.

Americans have enjoyed the fruits of winning WW2 for sixty years: that is why America likes war, wants war, and why their answer to every problem is to declare war on it. That is why America likes war. PERIOD.

Killing innocents is NOT acceptable, and that?s all you f**king Americans do. Whether you enter Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam or any other poor nation you murder, rape, and loot their people, for what? Freedom? War on Terrorism? How ironic, given that the most evil and corrupt criminals are those running your country, better kill them off first before you step a foot elsewhere.

In my country (UK), only thickheaded idiots join the army because they believe there are no better alternatives. I?m sure your son is not of those. Slap him across the face.

[rickymooston]

thats an option, should the draft be reinstated.

You said, he wants to join. By wanting to join, he can join a military that focuses more on peace keeping. As a quaker, he'd be exempt from the American draft.

Alternatively, he could join the police force and/or the coast guard. (Yeah, I know the coast guard deployed to Iraq.)

[kevin]

Theres no such thing as a conscientious objector any more, moose.

Legally

[rickymooston]

Theres no such thing as a conscientious objector any more, moose.

Legally

Since when ...?

[Mr. Blackwell]

America likes war for a simple reason. The reason is because the entire boom of consumer affluence and America becoming the most powerful and richest nation in the world was achieved by GOING TO WAR.

Americans have enjoyed the fruits of winning WW2 for sixty years: that is why America likes war, wants war, and why their answer to every problem is to declare war on it. That is why America likes war. PERIOD.

Killing innocents is NOT acceptable, and that?s all you f**king Americans do. Whether you enter Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam or any other poor nation you murder, rape, and loot their people, for what? Freedom? War on Terrorism? How ironic, given that the most evil and corrupt criminals are those running your country, better kill them off first before you step a foot elsewhere.

Spoken like a true enemy.

In my country (UK), only thickheaded idiots join the army because they believe there are no better alternatives. I?m sure your son is not of those. Slap him across the face.

So, after that little tirade against the evil terrorist, war mongering and violent solutions America employs to solve it's problems you recommend Kevin slap his kid across the face because the boy is thinking about doing something Kevin doesn't want him to do?

Anyone else see the irony in that?

[kevin]

Theres no such thing as a conscientious objector any more, moose.

Legally

Since when ...?

since the end of forced conscription

[rickymooston]

Forced conscription never ended;
It is simply a political reality that
The American public will oppose it
Without a clear and present threat.

Bush avoided it but fOrcing your coast guard into
Combat

[Inertialmass]

Kevin's already made this terse and deceptive declamation followed by his being corrected,  http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,58733.msg733069.html#msg733069 ,but it doesn't seem to make any difference. 

https://www.sss.gov/FSconsobj.htm

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION AND ALTERNATIVE SERVICE

A conscientious objector is one who is opposed to serving in the armed forces and/or bearing arms on the grounds of moral or religious principles.

HOW TO APPLY
In general, once a man gets a notice that he has been found qualified for military service, he has the opportunity to make a claim for classification as a conscientious objector (CO). A registrant making a claim for Conscientious Objection is required to appear before his local board to explain his beliefs.

He may provide written documentation or include personal appearances by people he knows who can attest to his claims. His written statement might explain:

?how he arrived at his beliefs; and

?the influence his beliefs have had on how he lives his life.

The local board will decide whether to grant or deny a CO classification based on the evidence a registrant has presented.

A man may appeal a Local Board's decision to a Selective Service District Appeal Board. If the Appeal Board also denies his claim, but the vote is not unanimous, he may further appeal the decision to the National Appeal Board. See also Classifications...   

In fact there have been at least a few actual conscientious objectors even after they'd signed on voluntarily:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aidan_Delgado

Delgado states that he joined the Army Reserve while he was also investigating Buddhism.[2] He signed his enlistment contract on September 11, 2001, and he was in recruiting office in Florida when he first learned about the attacks of that day.[3] He began a year-long tour in Iraq in April 2003; by then he was openly questioning whether he could participate in the war in Iraq good conscience, due to his newfound dedication to the principles of pacifism espoused in his faith. He filed for conscientious objector status and continued to serve in Iraq while it was processed.

As the only member of his company who spoke Arabic, Delgado was in frequent contact with Iraqi civilians. Eventually he was transferred to Abu Ghraib where he claimed to have witnessed many abuses. The Army recognized his conscientious objector status and he was honorably discharged in April 2004...   

he's always had an interest in weaponry

How the heck do you s'pose that happened?

[eyeshaveit]

he's always had an interest in weaponry

How the heck do you s'pose that happened?

The whole family is armed; (per Kevin), they all got knives for Christmas. Don't leave home without one; must be Indian uprisings in their part of the boondocks. 

[Inertialmass]

he's always had an interest in weaponry

How the heck do you s'pose that happened?

The whole family is armed; (per Kevin), they all got knives for Christmas. Don't leave home without one; must be Indian uprisings in their part of the boondocks. 

I know, I know.  In the midst of threads whose topic is the bloody murder of innocents, it's been pacifist Kevin's routine to derail with photos of "fine instruments" -- guns -- whose workmanship he admires.  This, apparently, to demonstrate that these "instruments" are nothing more than mundane multipurpose tools, not specifically murder weapons.  With the exception of that auto load pistol he got for defending against Santa Clara County barrio gangstas... 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Galton,_Jr.

Samuel "John" Galton Jr. FRS (18 June 1753 - 19 June 1832), born in Duddeston, Birmingham, England. Despite being a Quaker he was an arms manufacturer. He was a member of the Lunar Society and lived at Great Barr Hall. 

So much for the alleged "moral absolutes" inherent to religion.