Preview

Pacifism and Conscientious Objection

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2917 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Pacifism and Conscientious Objection
During the 20th century America has been involved in many conflicts that have led to war or the taking up of arms against other humans and nations. Although the vast majority of Americans have blindly accepted these actions throughout the century, more and more people are seeing war as morally wrong. Reasons for this epiphany are based off of a variety of things and encompass many other aspects related to war and killing examples include: due to moral and ethical principles, objection to war due to strong religious beliefs, the objection to violence due to the same ideals above, objection to the government 's use of force, and the objection to the use of weapons of mass destruction.
Many of the core beliefs of conscientious objection derive from the teachings or beliefs of pacifism. Pacifism has been a system of thinking and living for hundreds of years, and, in the 20th century many objection and pacifistic movements have sprung up all around the nation, more so than in any other time. Pacifism and conscientious objection in the United States have been moral issues that have fallen under question due to the belief of the participants that killing, war, and the act of violence is wrong and immoral.
To begin to understand the workings of conscientious objection, it is important have a clear view of what pacifism is. The roots of pacifism reach back for literally hundreds of years. Practically all of the messiahs of all the chief religions of the world preached for pacifism including: Allah and Muhammad from the Muslim Koran, Jesus and God from the Bible used by Catholics, Christens, and Quakers, and in the Jewish Torah. Other teachers of pacifism include: Plato and Socrates.
The moral and ethical principles of pacifism and conscientious objection have been present throughout United States history. There have been known objectors in every single war that America has been somehow involved, Including: The French and Indian War, The Revolutionary War,



Bibliography: Bourne, Randolph. Conscience in America, a Documentary History of Conscientious Objection in America. Ed. Lillian Schlissel. New York: E. P. Dutton & CO., INC. 1968 Brock, Peter Burns, Stewart. Social Movements of the 1960s, Searching for Democracy. Boston: Twayne Publishing. 1990 Chatfield, Charles "Conscientious Objection." Ethics. Ed. Roth, John K. Pasadena, Cal.: Salem Press. 1994 "Conscientious Objection." www.objector.org Dellinger, David. From Yale to Jail, the Life Story of a Moral Dissenter. New York: Pantheon Books. 1993 Kellogg, Walter Guest Nunnally, Joe. I Was A Conscientious Objector, In Camp-In Prison-On Parole. Berkeley, Cal.: Sooner Publishing Company. 1948 "Pacifism." Encyclopedia of Ethics

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    In today’s society, it is often unclear where to draw the line between good morals and effective government. It is for this reason that many times, laws that are enacted for the “good of the people” can be in direct conflict with a person’s conscience. Due to the various struggles that the United States has faced in building a government, this topic has been a popular discussion throughout American literature. Although they did not live during the same time, American writers Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, Jr. each wrote about how a person should not follow laws that they believe to be immoral. Thoreau’s main concern pertained to the legal existence of slaves and slave-owners, and a century later, King spoke out against legal segregation in the South. In his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” Martin Luther King, Jr. shares the same attitude with Henry David Thoreau’s work, “Civil Disobedience” concerning just and unjust laws; however, they each had different means of executing their beliefs.…

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “Morality is contraband in war”, as quoted by Mohandas Gandhi, showcases how our morality as humans is constantly challenged by war. The act of warfare and killing humans has been a part of mankind’s existence since the invention of the gun itself. As time moved forward, and new discovers were made, the variety and caliber of these weapons began to develop. With each passing decade and through World Wars, firearms were becoming more and more lethal. Scientists were being hired to invent and produce weaponry that would kill a man in his tracks, while being more light weight and more mechanically sound. In order to do this though, they had to run many tests, some…

    • 1986 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Cited: Daniels, Roger. Prisoners Without Trial: Japanese Americans in World War II. New York: Hill and Wang, 1993.…

    • 2051 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The Just war theory maintains that war may be justified if fought only in certain circumstances, and only if certain restrictions are applied to the way in which war is fought. The theory that was first propounded by St Augustine of Hippo and St Ambrose of Milan ( 4th and 5th centuries AD) attempts to clarify two fundamental questions: ‘when is it right to fight?’ and ‘How should war be fought?’. Whereas Pacifists are people mainly Christians who reject the use of violence and the deliberate killing of civilians but claims that peace is intrinsically good and ought to be upheld either as a duty and that war can never be justifiable. However, Realists agree that, due to the nature of humans, force is a necessary action to be used to maintain a just and ordered society. Therefore, since the Second World War, people have turned their attention to Just War again establishing rules that can serve as guidelines to a just war- the Hague and Geneva conventions.…

    • 1943 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    2. Daniels, Roger and Eric Foner. Prisoners Without Trial: Japanese Americans in World War II. New York: Hill and Wang, 1993. Print.…

    • 1834 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    During the World War II battle some people believed that pacifism was the answer toward stopping it. George Orwell, one of the most important controversial writers during the twentieth century, was stunned and enraged at the people who believed pacifism would help end the war. How can someone expect to win by being pacifist when the enemy cannot be reasoned with? Orwell’s passionate antifascism during War World II led him into conflict with the liberal pacifist movement. This led him to attack back against active pacifist with his writings in the “London Letter”, a column in the American magazine Partisan Review .This addressed how pacifism during a war does nothing to stop the enemy but instead gives them the upper hand. Orwell’s assertion that pacifism during World War II aids the enemy is correct.…

    • 980 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The other point of view on these conscientious objectors is that, from their action of refusing to go to Iraq has been violating the contract that singed when they joined the armed force.…

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Foner, Eric. Voices of Freedom, Vol. I. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 2011. Print.…

    • 1719 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Jeannette Rankin

    • 3948 Words
    • 16 Pages

    Cited: Evans, S. M. (1987). Born for liberty (First ed., pp. 171-284). New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.…

    • 3948 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Cited: Barber, Ben. "The POW Predicament.“ The American Legion. 1 Aug. 2002: (pg 1). Career and Technical Education, ProQuest. Canyon Ridge High School Library. 17 Feb. 2010. < http://proquest.umi.com…

    • 1765 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Kohn, Stephen M. American Political Prisoners: Prosecutions Under the Espionage and Sedition Acts. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1994.…

    • 1769 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Solitary Definition

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Wofford, Ben, et al. “The Ethics of Solitary Confinement.” Brown Political Review, 21 Mar. 2016,…

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    me myself and I

    • 1314 Words
    • 14 Pages

    presupposition of our faith, and the manner of our action. Nonviolence as it grows from Judaic-Christian…

    • 1314 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    <br>There are, however, various categories of ‘pacifist'. A ‘total pacifist' is someone who completely avoids violence and believes it can never be justified, not even in self-defence or to protect others – this they see as the only morally correct view of war. A relative pacifist is someone who may use violence in certain situations but who supports disarmament. They are discriminating about WW1 but agree that WW2 had to be fought. Nuclear pacifists believe that conventional weapons are acceptable as a last resort if war is inevitable, as it is, but nuclear weapons should never be used. A nuclear deterrence pacifist, on the other hand, believes that one can only achieve peace through a position of strength and nuclear deterrence provides this peace.…

    • 923 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Living by this moral principle can cause a greater harm by turning the other cheek than by using force to deminish a greater threat. There is always going to be people seeking out power or people who have different beliefs and morals because it is engraved within ourselves through generation after generation. Jan Narveson directly states a pacifists view, "His belief is not only that violence is evil but also that it is morally wrong to use force to resist, punish, or prevent violence. We are aggressive and greedy people and to change the thinking of the entire world with out the threat of force seems nearly impossible. Hypathetically, if pacifism was put into law, the use of any type of force will be breaking the law and the sentence is life in prison. Now imagine if a man breaks into a house of a young lady and rapes this lady and then pulls a gun out to shoot her. If the woman grabs the gun and shoots the man, she would also be sent to prison for life because any use of force is labelled as unacceptable. In our society today, violence is happening everyday even though we have laws in place to minimize them. Violence is not only a thing of the past but it is a thing of the future and without a proper punishment, violence will increase drastically. Narveson communicates a second version of pacifism where " one might argue that pacifism is desirable as a tactic: that as a matter of fact, some good end, such as the reduction of violence itself , is to be achieved by 'turning the other cheek'. " This again is a good theory, but if it was put into action, the consequences would be great. A human has the right to defend themselves, or help a person that is in need. In war it is the same thing but instead of one person needing help, it is a population worth of needed help. A person claiming they are a pure hearted pacifist by " turning the other cheek" does not necessarily make it the best…

    • 1929 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays