What is your military experience, to make these statements?
Are you suggesting that she’s wrong?
How does it work in the military, then? Can officers really just decide that they don’t want to follow orders any more, and everyone’s cool with that?
For one thing, if a major wanted to be relieved of her duties, she would have to go to her superiors, not to a captain.
Is that the only thing? Because I think you maybe didn’t read that post as carefully as you should have.
No, that wasn’t the only thing, just the obvious one.
What did I miss, in my so-called less than careful reading?
I wonder if something happened in the translation. I can’t find a definition that isn’t related to military/war. But the gist of it works, he just expanded it to jobs other than soldier. The second definition of conscientious is “relating to a person’s conscience,” so, yeah, she’s a conscientious objector. I’m not saying we should start using it that way all the time, just that it passes muster on a technicality.
And I’m 100% in support of her right to object. She shouldn’t have to give out a marriage license if she doesn’t feel comfortable doing so. But people have a right to marriage licenses and she doesn’t have the right to interfere with that.
…
Right.
Why would her major, a superior, then
The OED has a citation from the Baptist Magazine in 1843 referring to conscientious objectors to oath-taking. And we have “conscientious objection” cited from 1790, referring to the refusal of a dissenter to take the sacrament in the Church of England.
I think the term “conscientious objector” is mainly used nowadays with reference to those objecting to military service. But earlier cites referred to refusal to conform to the established church, refusal to take legally-required oaths, refusal to co-operate in implementing capital punishment, refusal to accept vaccination. All these are pre-20th century uses.
And, even if the term is relatively new, the concept is older ; Thomas More was beheaded in 1535 because of his refusal to comply with a legal requirement to take an oath which, he said, his conscience would not permit him to take. The precise term “conscientious objector” may not have been used of him at the time, but now that the term has been coined I think we’d have no difficulty applying it to him.
That’s what we call a brainfart. They are not eliminated by any level of military expertise.
I just saw that the meeting with the Pope was confirmed by the Vatican. I really hate to know that.
I’m an atheist but I was beginning to like this Pope. The one, and only, religious leader that I’ve ever known, and liked, was a Catholic priest from South America. I met him when I was in the mountains of Peru right after an earthquake in 1970. I was there to convert a dirt road into a runway for the relief effort. He and I spent many hours at night discussing our beliefs.
This Pope sort of reminded my of Father Roberto. But the Pope’s meeting with this nutcase woman has really changed my opinion of him.
Your forgetting one thing. Conscientious objection is only valid if you on the left side of the political aisle
Even if Davis’ was engaging in conscientious objection, which is a stretch as pointed out repeatedly above, what do you think society’s response to conscientious objection should be?
What gives you that ridiculous point of view?
Actually, the military would have the major in question jolly well shut up and soldier. Filing for conscientious objection is a long Kafkaesque process and they don’t just take your word that you’re a Quaker now - you have to demonstrate that those are sincere beliefs that have affected multiple facets of your life for a long time. Suddenly finding the good lord before a suicide mission ? Not so much.
And of course in a modern all-volunteer Army, I suspect you can jolly well fuck off with all that peacenik shit on the grounds of “you signed a contract, son” :o.
Which, incidentally, would be what applies in this case. Davis took an oath and signed a contract. She can’t take them back whenever it suits her, although she’s free to resign or file for a transfer at any bloody time.
It sklightly confirmed mine - that his alleged cuddliness is overblown and long-overdue reforms in the policies of the RCC are not coming anytime soon.
But I’d just as happily assume he had only the vaguest idea of who Davis was.
Not necessarily. There have been COs who’ve enlisted into the Armed Forces and served with distinction; at least two have been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Little bit of both, I’d say, and I too have mentioned before how people on both the “right” and “left” of a particular issue are so quick to jump up and down going “OMG OMG OMG did ya see/hear that, SO RADICAL!!!” whenever he says or does something that’s just restating the same established policy, only in a nicer, more diplomatic, less abrasive manner.
And add to the second probably some willful ignorance (as in “don’t bother me with details”) on the part of the Vatican Staff as to how she is not some unfortunate civil service employee having her livelihood threatened but a petty politician taking it upon herself to prevent others from doing their jobs and exercising her rights. I suppose some staffer must be disappointed that they could not whip up some nice Catholic civil servant being put at risk of losing his house for not obeying orders…
It doesn’t matter to me if she’s a conscientious objector or not, as a head of state Pope Francis has no business interfering in our internal affairs, especially as he’s here on a state visit. If some renegade priest or nun over in Rome was supporting same sex marriage and was facing ecclesiastical penalties I wouldn’t expect President Obama to show up and give him or her a big pat on the back and a thumbs up. That’s just being a dick.
This and many other points were ignored during the visit of this religious despot. People should note that Kim Davis is standing up for a very un-American principle, the unbridled power of bureaucracy. She wants to be the Pope of Rowan Country. Perhaps we should also invite and revere some Ayatollahs to visit also, I’ll bet they can help us rid ourselves of the rest of our pesky rights.