Desmond Doss: The Adventist Conscientious Objector

[Soloist]

as far as it goes, Mel Gibson is a very bloody director and as Christians we should not be involved in watching a movie to celebrate war.
No one from my church would even hardly be aware the a movie was made, but they would know his story.

Is it celebrating war or showing the reality of war in order to celebrate the heroism of a contentious objector?

I didn't watch the movie but the reality of war isn't something to sell on the screen. Why would we enjoy seeing men killed violently with blood and guts flying? Besides, Mel Gibson removed some of the factual heroism because he believed Americans wouldn't believe it.

[joshuabgood]

as far as it goes, Mel Gibson is a very bloody director and as Christians we should not be involved in watching a movie to celebrate war.
No one from my church would even hardly be aware the a movie was made, but they would know his story.

Is it celebrating war or showing the reality of war in order to celebrate the heroism of a contentious objector?

I didn't watch the movie but the reality of war isn't something to sell on the screen. Why would we enjoy seeing men killed violently with blood and guts flying? Besides, Mel Gibson removed some of the factual heroism because he believed Americans wouldn't believe it.

I found the movie inspirational. I think there is power in his approach of going to the front lines and facing the bullets as opposed to going somewhere safe in CPS.

[Josh]

Are you implying COs who go to MVS or CPSI etc are somehow not doing the right thing?

Is going to the front lines “better”?

[steve-in-kville]

I found the movie inspirational. I think there is power in his approach of going to the front lines and facing the bullets as opposed to going somewhere safe in CPS.

Clips of this movie showed up on my Youtube feed, hence the reason I took notice of it. I may have seen bits of it over the years. I have a 4-day weekend in front of me.... maybe I'll check it out.

[Only an Anz]

as far as it goes, Mel Gibson is a very bloody director and as Christians we should not be involved in watching a movie to celebrate war.
No one from my church would even hardly be aware the a movie was made, but they would know his story.

Is it celebrating war or showing the reality of war in order to celebrate the heroism of a contentious objector?

I was raised Mennonite and quite liked the movie.

[Heirbyadoption]

Is it celebrating war or showing the reality of war in order to celebrate the heroism of a contentious objector?

I didn't watch the movie but the reality of war isn't something to sell on the screen. Why would we enjoy seeing men killed violently with blood and guts flying? Besides, Mel Gibson removed some of the factual heroism because he believed Americans wouldn't believe it.

I found the movie inspirational. I think there is power in his approach of going to the front lines and facing the bullets as opposed to going somewhere safe in CPS.

JoshBGood - sorry, I'm just getting back to this discussion, but it seems like you may be implying that those who have gone the CPS route with their CO classifications generally did so in order to stay safe. Would that be a correct understanding of your comparison there?

As far as war movies and tales of heroism go, the movie was fairly inspirational, I thought. However, this being a discussion on a "Mennonite" site (and I do realize that has far looser implications than it used to), it might be noteworthy to consider that

A. Doss considered the war to be justified, even though he felt he could not personally kill, and therefore he chose to enlist because
B. he considered himself to be a "conscientious cooperator" rather than a "conscientious objector", a distinction that seems worthy of consideration...

[Ken]

I didn't watch the movie but the reality of war isn't something to sell on the screen. Why would we enjoy seeing men killed violently with blood and guts flying? Besides, Mel Gibson removed some of the factual heroism because he believed Americans wouldn't believe it.

I found the movie inspirational. I think there is power in his approach of going to the front lines and facing the bullets as opposed to going somewhere safe in CPS.

JoshBGood - sorry, I'm just getting back to this discussion, but it seems like you may be implying that those who have gone the CPS route with their CO classifications generally did so in order to stay safe. Would that be a correct understanding of your comparison there?

As far as war movies and tales of heroism go, the movie was fairly inspirational, I thought. However, this being a discussion on a "Mennonite" site (and I do realize that has far looser implications than it used to), it might be noteworthy to consider that

A. Doss considered the war to be justified, even though he felt he could not personally kill, and therefore he chose to enlist because
B. he considered himself to be a "conscientious cooperator" rather than a "conscientious objector", a distinction that seems worthy of consideration...

The distinction between Doss and probably the majority of Mennonite COs was that he only objected to taking up arms himself. He did not object to putting on a uniform and being a part of the US military. A lot of Mennonite COs objected to being a soldier period, putting on any kind of uniform, and representing the state whether in a combat or non-combat role. So they would not have been combat medics like Doss.

[Heirbyadoption]

I found the movie inspirational. I think there is power in his approach of going to the front lines and facing the bullets as opposed to going somewhere safe in CPS.

JoshBGood - sorry, I'm just getting back to this discussion, but it seems like you may be implying that those who have gone the CPS route with their CO classifications generally did so in order to stay safe. Would that be a correct understanding of your comparison there?

As far as war movies and tales of heroism go, the movie was fairly inspirational, I thought. However, this being a discussion on a "Mennonite" site (and I do realize that has far looser implications than it used to), it might be noteworthy to consider that

A. Doss considered the war to be justified, even though he felt he could not personally kill, and therefore he chose to enlist because
B. he considered himself to be a "conscientious cooperator" rather than a "conscientious objector", a distinction that seems worthy of consideration...

The distinction between Doss and probably the majority of Mennonite COs was that he only objected to taking up arms himself. He did not object to putting on a uniform and being a part of the US military. A lot of Mennonite COs objected to being a soldier period, putting on any kind of uniform, and representing the state whether in a combat or non-combat role. So they would not have been combat medics like Doss.

Yes. It's rooted in what seems to be a rather fundamental theological difference. It was really interesting to me that Doss essentially recognized said dichotomy and preferred to be considered a conscientious cooperator, even though the military lumped him under a CO classification.