Politics, News & Issues >
Soldiers & Veterans
RSS FeedShould protesters be permitted to picket military recruiting offices in the US?
Results so far:
| Yes | 63% | 343 votes | Total: 546 votes | |
| No | 37% | 203 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThomas Jefferson once stated that ignorance may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. As I read the essays from both sides of this issue I find that many writers refer back to their own military qualifications. There are veterans, retirees, the sons and daughters of those who served. There are those who refer to rights, and there are those who refer to preserving freedom. Both sides have the best interests of the nation at heart. The fact that we debate this issue is what makes our nation great. The fact that we, as logical human beings, have constructed a forum for discussion rather than resort to the violence which rocks nations like Afghanistan and Sudan is a good sign. We live Jefferson's dream.
Yet if we tell a man that he cannot hold up a sign in front of a government building, then we declare our government infallible. If we stop a mother from handing out flyers to the youngsters walking up to the recruiter, we censor her voice. We send the message that our nation is too small for two opinions. In 1776, men and women were willing to shed blood for the right to disagree with their government, and shed blood they did.
We are lucky. Ours is a nation defended by an all-volunteer army, a group of soldiers who freely join, soldiers from all walks of life. I know from experience that any man or woman who is physically, mentally, and emotionally able to serve will be allowed to join our military the recruiter will drive to your door, if need be. The recruitment office could be mobbed by protest, and our recruiters in uniform would find ways to meet their quotas. They would go door-to-door, they would call the lists of the high school graduates. They would call the lists of those who graduated the year before. They would go to the malls in their uniforms with their brochures. They would whisper of bonuses and college money and health insurance because these piles of greenbacks (authorized by Congress) speak to the heart of an eighteen-year-old like nothing else.
There are those who compare today to World War II, declaring that no one protested then and no one should now. There are those who state that our era is now entirely new, a dangerous world with no time for protest and little time for "selfish" or "personal" freedoms. Both opinions are wrong. Our era now is as new as any other the youth of our age fight the wars as dictated by of our elders, as in the past. An eighteen-year-old can carry the twenty-four pound M-249 Squad Automatic Weapon and the thirty pounds of Kevlar body armor reinforced with ceramic plate while humping three quarts of water up a mountain at 7,000 feet and he can do this every other day for a fifteen-month deployment. Our elected leaders can't. This isn't a question of freedom this is a fact of life. This is the sad truth about our nation's continued survival our writers and poets and politicians are largely defended by the young. And from those young adults come the soldiers who choose to reenlist, the cadre of sergeants and officers who lead our new recruits into combat.
So go ahead, tell these kids that no protest is permitted at the recruiters office. Tell these kids these kids with their eyes on the money and on their hearts and on God and Country tell them that our nation is behind them one hundred percent. Tell them that for their heroism, we will jail anyone who dares tell our youth not to join. And then, once these kids are in, once they wear the uniform, tell them to enforce the law. Order these young soldiers to arrest the protesters. Tell them we live in a unified nation that defends freedom for all. Tell them there is no time for doubt.
I ask you, what is the nature of evil? Is it a terrorist, a man who kills the innocent because he is too weak to rally the just? Absolutely. Is it a man who orders young soldiers to invade another country with insufficient resources to track down the biological weapons that weren't there? I'm not sure. Is it the protestor, angry about the war, who sits beside a government office and hands out flyers telling the young to stay safe and keep away? I can't tell. Let me know when he kills someone in the name of freedom.
Learn more about this author, Ryan Edel.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
The Freedom of Speech is a right abused and perverted, today, far beyond the intent of the founding fathers and their vision for its provision. The freedom to voice one's opinion without fear of persecution or retribution was the intention of the First Amendment. When the founding fathers penned this, the word "speech" meant "speech" - not like the word "is" is to some, today.
To vocalize one's heart-felt belief is a right purchased by the blood of patriots - not unlike the brave patriots who protect the extremists who, today, wish to persecute them. To speak one's beliefs was never meant to be done with the kind of disorderly and disruptive behavior we witness today. Even the freedom of speech has its limits of civility. (Case in point: Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.)
The concept of "expression" was more specifically related to religion and the practice, thereof. Beside the issue of "taxation without representation," our fore-fathers fought for independence to escape the shackles of a government compelled religion. The freedom to express one's worship toward God without governmental mandate is the intent of free expression. Subsequently, the concept of the "freedom of expression" (which has all but completely replaced the actual First Amendment entirely) has also been perverted to include any, and every, kind of behavior (which would be considered disgraceful anywhere else) as acceptable; all in the name of "speech" and "expression."
With that said, protesters do have a fundamental right to voice their opinion about a war they believe should not be fought; but, they do not have the right to impede the operation of the military, itself. The US military is not a business to be "picketed." Any dissension regarding military operations should be addressed to their boss, the President, his subordinates, and other elected and appointed officials responsible for the decisions that direct military operations. Being present within a community to provide the opportunity for some of its citizens (the very same it protects) to join, stand, and bravely serve to protect freedom and liberty is not an illegal activity.
It's time dissension, as well as "expression," be brought back to an order of civility and decorum. Voicing one's opinion is a right that didn't come cheap; neither should the exercise of that right be made cheap by such disruptive behavior. Picketing a military recruitment office is just steps from the disgraceful way some in this country treated Vietnam vets for their service.
Our military has one objective - victory. When given an order, theirs is not to question why, but to do or die. Wishing them anything less than success is to wish them failure. What our military doesn't need are distractions from the citizens it is charged to defend. Demonstrating against the military is a demoralizing distraction. As important as superior skill and weaponry is, even more important is morale and confidence.
Young men and women under the direction of seasoned leadership proudly and selflessly put on a uniform accepting the commitment and sacrifice that comes with it. Our military does not need to be, nor, does it deserve to be, caught in the middle of a debate a lesson one might think we would have learned from the past.
It's impossible to both support the men and women of our military and demonstrate against them. Just as the leadership discusses between its members (Joint Chiefs of Staff and other national security advisers included) differing opinions without putting the military in the middle of a debate, so should citizens refrain from directing its dissension toward the military. Debate should take place within the civilian and political domains.
The best way to support our military is to wish them God's speed for a successful mission and a complete victory. The best way to express an opinion of disagreement with US policy, and its military operations, is to direct it to those responsible for determining it. Harassing the US military by unparalleled displays of disrespect to acquire news media "face time" is the wrong way to exercise a right.
Learn more about this author, Lane Trawick.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
