05-28-2016, 03:37 PM
(05-28-2016, 12:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No offense, as I know you served as well. The guilt and remorse a Soldier feels is a real thing. I suppose the easiest answer is to look inside and determine the motivation. If someone's intent is to go into a crowed market and kill as many people as he or she can,I have no issue with making sure that person does not obtain his or her goal. Similarly if an organization's mission is to treat women as nothing more than dogs (in some cases worse) and decide a good lesson would be to mutilate a young girl and kill her family because she had the nerve to try to go to school, then I have no problem doing what is required to stop that trend.
As I have said: I have compassion for a young, scared girl that feels she has no other choice. It is just my wish that killing the unborn child not be so convenient. I know we will never live in a utopia where no one has abortions and all grow up healthy and happy; I just think it shouldn't be so simple to abort the child.
I have seen legislature aimed making the process more strict get, such as the facilities and the credentials of those preforming the abortion be dismissed as "hate". I could pose some compromises; however, they would most likely be viewed as controlling a woman's body. Don't folks realize that when a woman has an abortion she is giving over control of her body.
Before I became an Army PA, I was infantry. Started out in 3rd Ranger Battalion. Most of the men there, me included, want(ed) to go combat because we're ****** in the head. I remember sitting in the barracks of Charlie Company watching CNN reports of Bravo Company in the firefight that inspired Black Hawk Down and we were pissed we weren't there. I'm still pissed off at Les Aspin for only sending Bravo Company instead of the whole damn battalion. I probably have an overly romanticized view of what soldiers do. We're willing to risk our lives for others because . . . well, who else is going to do it? So I understand the greater good rationalization of killing, but I think most infantryman's motivation is, "Die, mother *****!!!" before they kill you. The greater good goes right out the window when the survival instinct kicks in and the Somalis are using women and children as human shields. It's strange how a situation can be simple and complicated simultaneously. If you are under fire you return fire; simple. But, what happens to the greater good when you have to kill innocent women and children being used as human shields by the men shooting at you? Complicated. When I went to Iraq I was a PA. I didn't have to personally kill anyone, but we didn't return with everyone and I still wonder if there was more I could have done to treat their wounds. I don't feel guilty, I feel betrayed by the political leaders I put my trust in to only use us for the greater good instead of a bunch of lies. The situation is so much worse than before we went into Iraq. We basically created ISIS which has led to the current refugee crisis and so much untold human suffering. And there is all this anti-refugee sentiment for people who are just trying to get the **** away from a situation we poured gasoline on. As one US official said, "Iraq has turned out worse than my worst nightmare." Where's the greater good in all of that? I don't know.
There are at least three interpretations of turning the other cheek, one of which is the basis of Christian pacifism. Jesus himself was a pacifist who taught pacifism to his disciples.
Which brings me back to the sanctity of life and how religion seems to have a sliding scale depending upon the situation. Different religions treat the sanctity of life differently. Within the same religion, people have different interpretations on scripture dealing with the sanctity of life, for example Christians differ about pacifism. When you wrote, "I suppose the easiest answer is to look inside and determine the motivation" aren't you leaving the decision making up to the individual based upon their morals?
