Day 29 - Did anyone die for my right to blog?

I had “duty” today, which essentially amounts to being required to stay on base for an extra four hours beyond my regular schedule. Unfortunately, despite the extra hours there remains a lack of news to report on the progress of my request.

In an attempt to discover more information, I succeeded in talking to the Command’s legal representative. My aim was to see if she had for me the copies of the reports from the Psychologist and Chaplain for which I had asked. However, our seemingly stilted conversation resulted only in her statement that the legal office does not yet have both of these documents and she is therefore unable to provide them to me. She advised me that, of course, she would provide these when they are available.

In sum, no “Investigating Officer” has been assigned, and there is no further progress to report.

Looking forward, I intend to offer a more thoughtful post tomorrow as I don’t expect to be hindered by an additional four hours under the direct governance of the Navy. Perhaps I’ll express my thoughts on the adage that is commonly applied to those who speak out against war or the military: “Remember, you only get to say what you do because someone else served and died so you could”.

If you have thoughts on this topic in advance I’m certainly interested to hear them. You’re welcome to either email or post a comment. In a brief online chat while writing this, an individual advocated that free speech is “a God-given right, yes, but that doesn't negate the fact that others have died to prevent others from infringing upon that right.”

An alternative perspective is found in a very short article entitled "The Blinding Fog of War" in which Roger Young asserts that those in the military "did not die for your freedom--they died to maintain the power of the US government over its subjects and to project its power towards other governments that don’t follow its hegemonic direction."

What do you think? I'd appreciate hearing from you, as what you say may very well affect my perspective and writing in tomorrow's post.

Day 4 - Man of the Cloth

I was thrilled at 10:27 this morning to receive an email from my Chief telling me to report to Command Legal. Action. Unsure exactly what to expect, I headed promptly from my office to report as ordered on the other side of the base. After introductions were made, I was informed that my application had been reviewed by the Command, but there was yet one more form requiring my signature. The legalese I readily endorsed was as follows:

"The authority to request this information is derived from 50 U.S.C. 456j and 38 U.S.C. 3103, and 5 U.S.C. 301, departmental regulations. The purpose of this application is to allow myself to apply for conscientious objector status. This application is completely voluntary; however, failure to provide the required information would result in an inability to process this request and I would not be able to receive the requested status."

Exciting prose, I know. Better news awaited in the conversation that followed, as I was directed to meet with the Chaplain. The Chaplain interview is a prerequisite for being classified as a conscientious objector, whether or not religious reasons are listed as the grounds for discharge. In the words of the Department of Defense Instruction 1300.06,

"The applicant shall be personally interviewed by a chaplain who shall submit a written opinion as to the nature and basis of the applicant's claim, and as to the applicant's sincerity and depth of conviction. The chaplain's report shall include the reasons for the conclusions contained within the report."

Given the above description, I wasn't exactly sure what to expect from this interview, but as it turned out, I left pleasantly surprised at how well it had gone. The Chaplain began by explaining that he found the essays I had written for my application to be so detailed and thorough that he honestly had very few questions regarding what it is that I believe. After further conversation, he made the very deliberate statement that he was convinced that I believed my world view had changed, and he thought that I was honestly trying to align my actions with that change. I clearly understood the not-so-subtle implication of his obviously Christian world view to be that he believed I was going through a phase that would eventually fizzle out, whether in my lifetime or when I faced "the Christian Deity" on judgment day. The ominous insinuation that there may be fire and brimstone in my future if I don't change my ways didn't have me breaking a sweat, nor do I hold it against him for doing what he thinks is best and right. In fact, I feel only gratitude to the Chaplain for his assurance that he would endorse the authenticity of my beliefs and thereby my application.

To add to the fantastic news of the day, I also scheduled an appointment for my other mandated interview, this one with a clinical psychologist. I wonder if anyone has ever felt so much anticipation for a psychiatric evaluation? In any case, if there's no other news, there will be more on that tomorrow.