What are your thoughts on alternatives to military service if drafted?

[R7ehr]

I'm positive that America would see a draft again in the case of an all out World War. There isn't enough volunteers to fight a major war that goes on for years without pressing into duty the unwilling. One year war, the current military can handle, a two year war needs the current military and all the patriots. A four or five year war? A war that just drags on? All hands on deck.

[ken_sylvania]

What is the purpose of the military?
Is the person who builds the guided missiles less valuable to the war effort than the man on the front lines who calls out the coordinates for the missile strike?

So then Mennonites and others should not have voluntarily fed soldiers and taken care of wounded soldiers throughout our storied past? Weren't they helping the war?
And what about being forced to feed soldiers and care for wounded soldiers? Wasn't that helping the war?

I think it's right to feed the hungry and care for the wounded regardless of whether the hungry or the wounded is or is not wearing a uniform and regardless of the color of his uniform.
If you're an army cook or an army medic, though, your orders will be to care for the hungry or wounded on your side, or for those of the other side who have surrendered.

The military insists that the medics are an integral part of the force and critically important to the goal of winning the war. Why would you want to be a war hero?

What if you refused to be made a war hero, just like Paul and Barnabas refused to be worshipped as gods?

I expect you would end up right there in that cell that you were trying to avoid in the first place. Remember what happened to Paul in that account?

If you were to join the army as a medic, would you follow the commands of the army officers, or would you follow Christ? The single primary purpose of the army is diametrically opposed to the kingdom of Christ. The army exists to kill, maim, destroy, and overpower the enemy. Jesus says to love your enemy.

If I recall correctly, Ernie, I believe that you have previously expressed that you find it difficult to support what you consider unwise or wrong decisions made by your superiors - even when those individuals are doing their best to follow Christ and when you have no reason to question their Christian integrity. Feel free to correct me if I'm misrepresenting things here. But if that is at all the case - how could you expect to be in a position to obey orders when those orders are coming from men who are not following after Christ - from men whose goal is to destroy other men? Would you expect to have the liberty to choose which orders to obey and which to disobey?

[the-real-steve]

Join the Coast Guard. Become a rescue swimmer. Save lives. Retire and be offered a cushy job at Homeland Security. Problem solved.

All that lovely sarcasm on less than a cup of coffee

[JohnH]

The draft is a very serious problem that both Ukrainian and Russian Christian’s are facing.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

What is the purpose of the military?
Is the person who builds the guided missiles less valuable to the war effort than the man on the front lines who calls out the coordinates for the missile strike?

So then Mennonites and others should not have voluntarily fed soldiers and taken care of wounded soldiers throughout our storied past? Weren't they helping the war?
And what about being forced to feed soldiers and care for wounded soldiers? Wasn't that helping the war?

I think it's right to feed the hungry and care for the wounded regardless of whether the hungry or the wounded is or is not wearing a uniform and regardless of the color of his uniform.
If you're an army cook or an army medic, though, your orders will be to care for the hungry or wounded on your side, or for those of the other side who have surrendered.

The military insists that the medics are an integral part of the force and critically important to the goal of winning the war. Why would you want to be a war hero?

What if you refused to be made a war hero, just like Paul and Barnabas refused to be worshipped as gods?

I expect you would end up right there in that cell that you were trying to avoid in the first place. Remember what happened to Paul in that account?

If you were to join the army as a medic, would you follow the commands of the army officers, or would you follow Christ? The single primary purpose of the army is diametrically opposed to the kingdom of Christ. The army exists to kill, maim, destroy, and overpower the enemy. Jesus says to love your enemy.

If I recall correctly, Ernie, I believe that you have previously expressed that you find it difficult to support what you consider unwise or wrong decisions made by your superiors - even when those individuals are doing their best to follow Christ and when you have no reason to question their Christian integrity. Feel free to correct me if I'm misrepresenting things here. But if that is at all the case - how could you expect to be in a position to obey orders when those orders are coming from men who are not following after Christ - from men whose goal is to destroy other men? Would you expect to have the liberty to choose which orders to obey and which to disobey?

These are all good thoughts Ken. I think if I were involved in the military, I would want to be a noncombatant medic, and look for opportunities to aid people wounded, regardless of their national allegiance. This might "land me in that same cell I was trying to avoid", but I would have done some good along the way, which is better than just going straight to the cell.

I would have a problem of conscience if I had sworn (or affirmed) in some way that I WOULDN'T aid and abet "the enemy" and then I did anyway. So my first preference is still just no involvement in the military.

Which brings me back to a point I made very early in this topic: if i felt called to help (like Desmond Doss), I'd join the Red Cross or something similar, a private nonprofit organization dedicated to offering humanitarian aid.

[barnhart]

How would you feel about the Christian love of people who advance against you with an army but claim to be noncombatants.

[Ken]

How would you feel about the Christian love of people who advance against you with an army but claim to be noncombatants.

What exactly are you asking?

War is impersonal. Conventional war is mostly about taking and controlling territory (and populations). If an army is advancing against you (whether you are a civilian, noncombatant military, or combat soldier) then that army is just going to relentless advance and attack any defenses and fortifications in its path. If you are in the way then you are in the way. None of it is personal. If the advancing army is from an enemy state then really that entire state is supporting the war effort. Civilians who pay taxes to fund the war effort, the entire military structure that supports the war effort, and the small percentage of soldiers who are at the tip of the spear so to speak.

The US hasn't fought a conventional war on US soil since the Civil War. Mostly it is the US military fighting conventional or unconventional wars overseas. So if you are a noncombatant deployed overseas you are almost certainly standing in someone else's country and engaged in some kind of national effort to either defend an ally or engage in offensive actions against some sort of state or non-state enemy.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

War is impersonal.

This is the propaganda of the kingdoms of this world if I have ever heard it. Anything humans do to other humans is personal. War, abortion, imprisonment, medical care, gift giving, a hug, a slap, an insult, a blessing, a theatrical performance, a mass shooting, an assassination, a secret santa gift exchange.

God the Father making the rain and the sunshine "fall on the just and the unjust" is just as personal as a father who gives his child bread and not a stone. It is in exactly this way that we are called to be complete, as our heavenly father is complete.

The world will tell you that an abortion is impersonal. War is impersonal. Slave masters owning slave is impersonal. They say this because they want to (or at one time wanted to) continue these things, and that was the best justification. But notice that other things that are in this same categories are actually sold as incredibly "personal" things. War is impersonal, but writing a check to a charity across the world is made out to be as personal as possible. And abortion is impersonal, but prenatal care, even lifesaving prenatal surgeries have a close personal touch, a bedside manner by a caring surgeon, midwives, etc.

[Ken]

War is impersonal.

This is the propaganda of the kingdoms of this world if I have ever heard it. Anything humans do to other humans is personal. War, abortion, imprisonment, medical care, gift giving, a hug, a slap, an insult, a blessing, a theatrical performance, a mass shooting, an assassination, a secret santa gift exchange.

War in the modern age is absolutely impersonal and industrial.

We no longer live in the Bronze Age. Back then if you came face to face with war it was in the form of another soldier standing in front of you with a spear or sword and looking you in the eye as he drove a spear or sword into your heart. Warfare was thousands of individual 1:1 contacts between individual soldiers.

Today if you are a casualty of war, the chances that you will actually see the person attacking you are infinitesimally small. Most casualties of war these days are from shelling from tens of miles away, aerial bombing from planes based hundreds of miles away, or missiles launched from dozens to hundreds of miles away. No one was aiming at you personally. Even infantry soldiers engaged in firefights rarely see the people they are shooting at or who are shooting at them. It is completely impersonal.

[ohio jones]

There's been some discussion of the pros and cons of serving as a medic, or in other noncombatant roles. What about being a chaplain in the armed forces?