<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Running from the Military Police</title>
	<atom:link href="http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/</link>
	<description>let's activate something</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ben Krauß</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-20758</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Krauß</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-20758</guid>
		<description>town's best", sorry I forgot to finish my sentence.
Schalom and Salaam, I hope you think about this</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>town&#8217;s best&#8221;, sorry I forgot to finish my sentence.<br />
Schalom and Salaam, I hope you think about this</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Krauß</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-20757</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Krauß</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:18:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-20757</guid>
		<description>Dear Jason,
Anabaptists don't "only exist in North America and I would dare to say could only exist in a 'free' nation", they exist in Europe, Africa, Asia, SOUTH AMERICA and Australia.
Actually the continent with the most Mennonites (I'm  not informed about other Anabaptist groups), and churches there are growing rapidly in spite of the fact that they are persecuted there...
But let's start at the beginning, MJ mentioned that "War resistance has been an issue that Anabaptists have dealt with for hundreds of years" and didn't dig in to the matter because he didn't think it was necessary, but let's see how Anabaptism started: In the time of the Reformation in Europe some students of Zwingli, a swiss reformator, decided that their teacher wasn't radical enough in matters of PEACE, relation of CHURCH to STATE, baptism and I think that's it...
For this believe they were persecuted, sent to prison, killed... but the movement grew...
There were some parts that turned violent (Munster), but the main part stayed pacifist...
Over migration, which was always caused by the offer of being able to exercise their believe without persecution, they came to Prussia, then to Russia and later to Canada, the US, South America (Paraguay and Uruguay specifically)...
These migrants kept their pacifism and were willing to migrate to keep it. Those who stayed in Europe (mainly Germany and Switzerland) assimilated with the "world" and slowly forgot their pacifist roots, in the beginning just WHY they were conscious objector and later they didn't refuse to serve in the military, and so sadly we have to acknowledge that there were Mennonites in the Wehrmacht, SA and even SS, but not a single German Mennonite conscious objector in WWII.
Thanks to our North American brothers we later rediscovered our pacifist traditions and renewed them...
So I think you realized that there not only ARE anabaptists in countries where they cannot exercise their believe freely, but actually ORIGINATED from these environment.
The first christian congregation were pacifist and  were persecuted, a church father (is that the term?; in German it is) said: "The martyrs blood is the seed of the church"
As to the "Oath of Enlistment":
33"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.' 34But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." Matth. 5 (I think you should read Matthew 5-7 anyway...
and the scripture DOES NOT say "Earthly law and submission to such things are clearly to be obeyed", instead we should "seek the</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Jason,<br />
Anabaptists don&#8217;t &#8220;only exist in North America and I would dare to say could only exist in a &#8216;free&#8217; nation&#8221;, they exist in Europe, Africa, Asia, SOUTH AMERICA and Australia.<br />
Actually the continent with the most Mennonites (I&#8217;m  not informed about other Anabaptist groups), and churches there are growing rapidly in spite of the fact that they are persecuted there&#8230;<br />
But let&#8217;s start at the beginning, MJ mentioned that &#8220;War resistance has been an issue that Anabaptists have dealt with for hundreds of years&#8221; and didn&#8217;t dig in to the matter because he didn&#8217;t think it was necessary, but let&#8217;s see how Anabaptism started: In the time of the Reformation in Europe some students of Zwingli, a swiss reformator, decided that their teacher wasn&#8217;t radical enough in matters of PEACE, relation of CHURCH to STATE, baptism and I think that&#8217;s it&#8230;<br />
For this believe they were persecuted, sent to prison, killed&#8230; but the movement grew&#8230;<br />
There were some parts that turned violent (Munster), but the main part stayed pacifist&#8230;<br />
Over migration, which was always caused by the offer of being able to exercise their believe without persecution, they came to Prussia, then to Russia and later to Canada, the US, South America (Paraguay and Uruguay specifically)&#8230;<br />
These migrants kept their pacifism and were willing to migrate to keep it. Those who stayed in Europe (mainly Germany and Switzerland) assimilated with the &#8220;world&#8221; and slowly forgot their pacifist roots, in the beginning just WHY they were conscious objector and later they didn&#8217;t refuse to serve in the military, and so sadly we have to acknowledge that there were Mennonites in the Wehrmacht, SA and even SS, but not a single German Mennonite conscious objector in WWII.<br />
Thanks to our North American brothers we later rediscovered our pacifist traditions and renewed them&#8230;<br />
So I think you realized that there not only ARE anabaptists in countries where they cannot exercise their believe freely, but actually ORIGINATED from these environment.<br />
The first christian congregation were pacifist and  were persecuted, a church father (is that the term?; in German it is) said: &#8220;The martyrs blood is the seed of the church&#8221;<br />
As to the &#8220;Oath of Enlistment&#8221;:<br />
33&#8243;Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, &#8216;Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.&#8217; 34But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God&#8217;s throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37Simply let your &#8216;Yes&#8217; be &#8216;Yes,&#8217; and your &#8216;No,&#8217; &#8216;No&#8217;; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.&#8221; Matth. 5 (I think you should read Matthew 5-7 anyway&#8230;<br />
and the scripture DOES NOT say &#8220;Earthly law and submission to such things are clearly to be obeyed&#8221;, instead we should &#8220;seek the</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-19920</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 02:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-19920</guid>
		<description>Interesting to hear what was stated here. Obviously there will always be differences in regards to the interpretation of scripture and how to best go about living in society, not just a modern one but from any age. If a "free" nation in the traditional sense is one that it's officials are elected by the people and there are certain liberties granted to them such as freedom of speech and press, freedom of assembly, certain judicial processes are guaranteed and so on, which "free" nation(s) do you know of that did not have to sacrifice through at best severe hardship or at worst the blood of many of it's sons and daughters to not only obtain, but maintain that freedom? 

That being said, given the stance of Anabaptists have on war in any form and regardless of the reason(s), why do they only exist in North America and I would dare to say could only exist in a "free" nation? Why was this same fervor not brought, in the presence of their physical bodies and voices, to the leaders of the USSR, to China, to Japan, to Nazi Germany, to Fascist Italy and so during WWII? What about before that? After that? What about the guerrilla wars carried out in South and Central America? Dictators committing atrocities all throughout Africa? To the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets? North Korea attacking South Korea and then China entering? Is there any hypocrisy to staying within the confines of a "free" nation and claiming all the benefits but sacrificing only what you would be willing to offer up but not what is required? I would like to ask when was the last time any of the above writers visited a less than "free" nation such as China, Myanmar, or Sudan and publicly conducted "radical action" in regards to these countries activities?  

Yes, the U.S. Military is a professional all volunteer force. I agree that CO's should not have to go to war but this is not the same as the Secretary of Defense extending tours. This is a contractual obligation to be sure, but what you are forgetting is that when they entered the U.S. Military, they took an oath. The Oath of Enlistment states, "I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." 

I understand that people change but one has also to understand that with every decision made there are consequences. Earthly law and submission to such things are clearly to be obeyed according to scripture.        

As a former soldier who has been deployed to several different combat locations and more importantly as a mature Christian brother, I do not want war nor believe war is right nor just but only that at specific times and for specific reasons, it is a sacrifice that is required of and made by FREE men and women to insure... you have your platform.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting to hear what was stated here. Obviously there will always be differences in regards to the interpretation of scripture and how to best go about living in society, not just a modern one but from any age. If a &#8220;free&#8221; nation in the traditional sense is one that it&#8217;s officials are elected by the people and there are certain liberties granted to them such as freedom of speech and press, freedom of assembly, certain judicial processes are guaranteed and so on, which &#8220;free&#8221; nation(s) do you know of that did not have to sacrifice through at best severe hardship or at worst the blood of many of it&#8217;s sons and daughters to not only obtain, but maintain that freedom? </p>
<p>That being said, given the stance of Anabaptists have on war in any form and regardless of the reason(s), why do they only exist in North America and I would dare to say could only exist in a &#8220;free&#8221; nation? Why was this same fervor not brought, in the presence of their physical bodies and voices, to the leaders of the USSR, to China, to Japan, to Nazi Germany, to Fascist Italy and so during WWII? What about before that? After that? What about the guerrilla wars carried out in South and Central America? Dictators committing atrocities all throughout Africa? To the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets? North Korea attacking South Korea and then China entering? Is there any hypocrisy to staying within the confines of a &#8220;free&#8221; nation and claiming all the benefits but sacrificing only what you would be willing to offer up but not what is required? I would like to ask when was the last time any of the above writers visited a less than &#8220;free&#8221; nation such as China, Myanmar, or Sudan and publicly conducted &#8220;radical action&#8221; in regards to these countries activities?  </p>
<p>Yes, the U.S. Military is a professional all volunteer force. I agree that CO&#8217;s should not have to go to war but this is not the same as the Secretary of Defense extending tours. This is a contractual obligation to be sure, but what you are forgetting is that when they entered the U.S. Military, they took an oath. The Oath of Enlistment states, &#8220;I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.&#8221; </p>
<p>I understand that people change but one has also to understand that with every decision made there are consequences. Earthly law and submission to such things are clearly to be obeyed according to scripture.        </p>
<p>As a former soldier who has been deployed to several different combat locations and more importantly as a mature Christian brother, I do not want war nor believe war is right nor just but only that at specific times and for specific reasons, it is a sacrifice that is required of and made by FREE men and women to insure&#8230; you have your platform.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Anderson</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-1383</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 00:24:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-1383</guid>
		<description>This is very interesting. I was not raised in a home that valued CO. My father was in the Navy and always looked down on my mothers brother in law for being an objector. I was always told that being a CO for moral reasons was just a cover up and they really were cowards. As I have grown older I have come to believe, through my study of they Bible and my maturity as a Christian, that CO is the biblical think to do. I believe that for myself and for all christians that taking part in violence is unbiblical and completely contradictary to our call as believers. But I have always had the question what is a country supposed to do? How would a country defend itself and remain in existence without a military? I also know christians you see it as their duty to take part in military service (although I do believe that with spiritual maturity they will change and I have also seen it happen). But I would be interested in hearing some of your responses about how a contry would and could operate with out a millitary defense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is very interesting. I was not raised in a home that valued CO. My father was in the Navy and always looked down on my mothers brother in law for being an objector. I was always told that being a CO for moral reasons was just a cover up and they really were cowards. As I have grown older I have come to believe, through my study of they Bible and my maturity as a Christian, that CO is the biblical think to do. I believe that for myself and for all christians that taking part in violence is unbiblical and completely contradictary to our call as believers. But I have always had the question what is a country supposed to do? How would a country defend itself and remain in existence without a military? I also know christians you see it as their duty to take part in military service (although I do believe that with spiritual maturity they will change and I have also seen it happen). But I would be interested in hearing some of your responses about how a contry would and could operate with out a millitary defense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Update on conscientious objector Agustin Aguayo &#187; Young Anabaptist Radicals</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-792</link>
		<dc:creator>Update on conscientious objector Agustin Aguayo &#187; Young Anabaptist Radicals</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 01:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-792</guid>
		<description>[...] Back in September, Michael wrote about Agustin Aguayo here on YAR. Today Agustin was found guilty of desertion in a US military court in Würzburg, despite 3 years of attempting to get out of military service as a conscientious objector. According to the Independent, &#8220;He faces up to seven years in prison, a dishonourable discharge and loss of pay.&#8221; This development is the latest in a very long struggle for Agustin, so please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Back in September, Michael wrote about Agustin Aguayo here on YAR. Today Agustin was found guilty of desertion in a US military court in Würzburg, despite 3 years of attempting to get out of military service as a conscientious objector. According to the Independent, &#8220;He faces up to seven years in prison, a dishonourable discharge and loss of pay.&#8221; This development is the latest in a very long struggle for Agustin, so please keep him in your thoughts and prayers. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael J. Sharp</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael J. Sharp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 21:51:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-4</guid>
		<description>I'm going to try to answer this fairly loaded question as succinctly as possible.  The first thing I'd like to say is that applying for conscientious objection or any other discharge is in no way breaking a contract.  In the same way that Donald Rumsfeld has the right, according to the contract, to extend soldiers' terms indefinitely (via stop-loss) during a time of war, so too does a soldier have the right to certain early discharges under certain conditions.  

As far as the CO discharge, even the Department of Defense recognizes the transformational power of war.  People change when they see dead civilians; people change when they see friends get shot; people change when they shoot other human beings.  As Anabaptists, I think most of us would suggest that if people knew what war was really like, they wouldn't want to participate in it.  Volunteer soldiers who become conscientious objectors are a great testament to this fact.  

It's easy for us (or at least it was for me), as people who grew up being taught that war wasn't a good way to go about solving problems, to say, "Look, you're either a CO or you aren't - it's pretty clear."  I've found, however, that if you happen to grow up in a family that teaches you that serving God and serving country are the same thing, you might not have ever considered that war might be wrong.  It's second nature to us, but it hasn't even been considered by others. 

Even if there wasn't a legal or contractual basis for conscientious objection, and even if it were a dishonorable thing to refuse to deploy, one still has to decide which is the bigger mistake: participating in a war that you know is wrong or choosing not to honor a written agreement that you have made.  I'd personally rather have the latter on my conscience than the former.  The point is mute, though, considering that military regulations specifically allow for such a discharge.

The other thing to point out is that none of these discharges, especially not the CO discharge, are an easy way out.  Agustin is a great example of this, in that he struggled for over two and a half years only to be denied at every turn.  During this time, he was ridiculed and belittled by many of those around him.  Agustin was deployed to Iraq for a year, during which time he didn't load his gun.  If you think that made him any friends among his colleagues, you're crazy.  You don't do something like that for your health.  You do it because you believe it's absolutely the right thing to do.  As one CO put it, "Not only is conscientious objection an honorable discharge, it's the only honorable one."  

I could seriously write about this all night, but I'll stop, hoping that I've answered your question by now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m going to try to answer this fairly loaded question as succinctly as possible.  The first thing I&#8217;d like to say is that applying for conscientious objection or any other discharge is in no way breaking a contract.  In the same way that Donald Rumsfeld has the right, according to the contract, to extend soldiers&#8217; terms indefinitely (via stop-loss) during a time of war, so too does a soldier have the right to certain early discharges under certain conditions.  </p>
<p>As far as the CO discharge, even the Department of Defense recognizes the transformational power of war.  People change when they see dead civilians; people change when they see friends get shot; people change when they shoot other human beings.  As Anabaptists, I think most of us would suggest that if people knew what war was really like, they wouldn&#8217;t want to participate in it.  Volunteer soldiers who become conscientious objectors are a great testament to this fact.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s easy for us (or at least it was for me), as people who grew up being taught that war wasn&#8217;t a good way to go about solving problems, to say, &#8220;Look, you&#8217;re either a CO or you aren&#8217;t - it&#8217;s pretty clear.&#8221;  I&#8217;ve found, however, that if you happen to grow up in a family that teaches you that serving God and serving country are the same thing, you might not have ever considered that war might be wrong.  It&#8217;s second nature to us, but it hasn&#8217;t even been considered by others. </p>
<p>Even if there wasn&#8217;t a legal or contractual basis for conscientious objection, and even if it were a dishonorable thing to refuse to deploy, one still has to decide which is the bigger mistake: participating in a war that you know is wrong or choosing not to honor a written agreement that you have made.  I&#8217;d personally rather have the latter on my conscience than the former.  The point is mute, though, considering that military regulations specifically allow for such a discharge.</p>
<p>The other thing to point out is that none of these discharges, especially not the CO discharge, are an easy way out.  Agustin is a great example of this, in that he struggled for over two and a half years only to be denied at every turn.  During this time, he was ridiculed and belittled by many of those around him.  Agustin was deployed to Iraq for a year, during which time he didn&#8217;t load his gun.  If you think that made him any friends among his colleagues, you&#8217;re crazy.  You don&#8217;t do something like that for your health.  You do it because you believe it&#8217;s absolutely the right thing to do.  As one CO put it, &#8220;Not only is conscientious objection an honorable discharge, it&#8217;s the only honorable one.&#8221;  </p>
<p>I could seriously write about this all night, but I&#8217;ll stop, hoping that I&#8217;ve answered your question by now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Yoder</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Yoder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 04:02:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://younganabaptists.zettazebra.com/2006/09/04/running-from-the-military-police/#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Awesome story, MJ.  It's awfully encouraging to hear about concrete war resistance efforts, especially since I'm not exactly in regular touch with other Mennos at this point (the ethnic melting pot that is Moscow, Idaho somehow lacks an Anabaptist congregation).  I'd like to hear more about your thoughts on doing this kind of thing with an all-volunteer army:  I can see a non-pacifist (warifist? violencist?) arguing that you're helping people break a contract they've signed of their own free will - to what degree is it the responsibility of CO's to come to that position &lt;i&gt;before&lt;/i&gt; they enlist?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Awesome story, MJ.  It&#8217;s awfully encouraging to hear about concrete war resistance efforts, especially since I&#8217;m not exactly in regular touch with other Mennos at this point (the ethnic melting pot that is Moscow, Idaho somehow lacks an Anabaptist congregation).  I&#8217;d like to hear more about your thoughts on doing this kind of thing with an all-volunteer army:  I can see a non-pacifist (warifist? violencist?) arguing that you&#8217;re helping people break a contract they&#8217;ve signed of their own free will - to what degree is it the responsibility of CO&#8217;s to come to that position <i>before</i> they enlist?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

