God OR Country ?

[ScoutParent]

I have a valid example of when duty to God conflicted with duty to country. While serving in the United States Army, Military Police Corps, I was asked to sign a health waiver and guard a physical security site. The physical security site contained materials that could be harmful to any children I could have (even in the future). I said no to signing the waiver and when asked why I explained that it was against my religious beliefs and that it wasn't what God expected from me. My commander didn't understand then and I would guess he still wouldn't. I think that in that instance I prioritized 1) God, 2)Family and then 3)Country.

[NJCubScouter]

ScoutParent, I will not doubt your religious beliefs, but I do have to wonder whether it was really a religious belief that caused you to refuse to expose yourself to a health hazard. What we have not discussed so far in this thread is "duty to self," which overlaps with "duty to family" but is not exactly the same. It seems to me that when you refused to sign the waiver, you were mainly thinking of your own physical well-being, including your ability to have healthy children (so duty to self and duty to family both came into play.) I, for one, do not fault you for doing so. I have never been in a position like that, but I am not sure I would have reacted any differently than you did. But what "duty" would I be putting ahead of my "duty to country" if I did what you did? I think it would be my duty to myself and my family -- not my duty to God.

[ScoutParent]

I guess it totally depends on your outlook on life. For me, marriage is a Holy Sacrament and part of that is having children. For me to purposely place myself in a position to damage the health of those children, irrevocably, is definitely an affront to God. As far as a health risk to myself, that never entered into the equation as the waiver only waived the rights of children I would bear. As a soldier, you expect there to be risks to yourself; just by the very nature of the job.

[rlculver415]

I do have an actual event in the US to offer as an example. In the early 1990's ('93, '94?), a group of high school students were arrested for praying at their school flagpole before the start of school in mid-September. The principal had called the police to do this because he believed that separation of church and state meant no praying by anyone whatsoever. He was in violation of these students' rights, the case was dismissed in court, and the principal was acquainted with students' rights as pertains to religious freedom and student-led functions. Did the students know how the principal felt about their function (See You At The Pole)? Yes, and they followed their conviction to pray anyway.

 

Hope this is the type of example you were looking for.

[rlculver415]

Forgot to add that there are several free legal services that address such issues. Two that I recall are the Alliance Defense Fund and the Christian Legal Society. They both have web sites. Must observe that if there weren't that many conflicts between duty to God and duty to country, these services wouldn't exist.

[eisely]

Just because the military asks or orders one to do something that is dangerous to one's self scarcely creates a conflict with duty to God. Being in the military can be construed as unusually dangerous. They use really big guns and fireworks. But viewed simply as acceptance of an occupational risk, then nobody should do anything. Some occupations are more dangerous than others and duty to God does not mean take no risks. What about the firemen of FDNY on 9/11? They faced a high liklihood of death yet did their duty anyway. In doing this duty did they offend their duty to God to preserve themselves? I think not.