If this is the case, however, then why is the distinction made between the two oaths when both enlisted and officers are not obligated to follow unlawful orders according to the UCMJ?
Officers, especially at higher ranks, have a unique position of authority and influence within the organization that could be taken advantage of for political gain. Swearing loyalty to the Constitution instead of the president or any other person means that officials cannot manipulate officers in order to gain control over the military and become dictators.
A note from @stevescoins (too lazy to jump over to my account)...
The first part of the oath is to defend the Constitution, therefore, no order that violates the Constitution, whether it is from the President or not, is valid.
When something is ambiguous, the President's orders should carry the day, but when an order clearly violates the purpose of the Constitution, the number one priority of the Constitution being the protection of the citizen, the order becomes instantly invalid.
I'll put this in the example of LE, since they swear a similar oath to defend the Constitution, and the situation comes up far more often. No "stand down" order is valid, period, since it violates the prime purpose of the Constitution, which is to defend citizens.
That doesn't mean that LE has to do things that are impossible to do, but it does mean LE should arrest politicians that issue "stand down" orders when citizens are in danger and LE can act.
I hear you, and I respect you for your conviction and service. I also think there becomes a problem when the sitting commander in chief becomes a domestic enemy to the people and the freedom we hold dear. I'm not saying this to sway your beliefs or to get in an argument, but I feel strongly that the person in office is there in part because of foreign manipulation and that neither he nor his policies are doing the country any good. He's made a joke of this nation, more than anyone before him. I hope we rise from the ashes of this trash fire and become both more humble and willing to work together. Peace!
You are preaching to the choir girlfriend! I could not agree with you more, but as a man who has taken orders most of my life, the current situation in this Country and its elected leadership is a hard pill to swallow.
Though I am still affiliated with the military, I have been arrested at a number of protests in the past two years. The Democratic National Convention and also a non-partisan protest at our Nation's capitol. Also attended the woman's march and wore an homemade pussy hat (I crocheted it myself).
I did not speak for the military, but did speak as a former combat Veteran that is disappointed in the direction our leadership has taken. I am a bit left of center. I am an Independent Voter and a member of neither political party. Hell, I voted for Jill Stein. Her running mate during the 2016 Campaign is a Vietnam Veteran; not my reason for voting for her, but she was my candidate as I liked what she promoted: Peace and care of the earth.
I do not share this with you to brag, by no means, but so that you may understand me a little better as well as my political ideology.
Best to you and your loved ones always sweetheart.
Great post, sir! I know, you are not a "sir" you work for a living. You have upvoted some of my posts and I deeply appreciate it. I'm glad to return the favor with this most excellent definition of personal integrity. I look forward to more!
wanted to drop by and tell you that you won the steem prize for the trippy selfie contest.....good job , amazing steemian and amazing post and entry <3 b.a.
This why the oaths are different...
If this is the case, however, then why is the distinction made between the two oaths when both enlisted and officers are not obligated to follow unlawful orders according to the UCMJ?
Officers, especially at higher ranks, have a unique position of authority and influence within the organization that could be taken advantage of for political gain. Swearing loyalty to the Constitution instead of the president or any other person means that officials cannot manipulate officers in order to gain control over the military and become dictators.
http://www.quantico.marines.mil/News/News-Article-Display/Article/611510/the-difference-between-oath-of-office-oath-of-enlistment/
Curated for #informationwar (by @stevescoins)
Relevance: The oath to defend the Constitution
Our Purpose
A note from @stevescoins (too lazy to jump over to my account)...
The first part of the oath is to defend the Constitution, therefore, no order that violates the Constitution, whether it is from the President or not, is valid.
When something is ambiguous, the President's orders should carry the day, but when an order clearly violates the purpose of the Constitution, the number one priority of the Constitution being the protection of the citizen, the order becomes instantly invalid.
I'll put this in the example of LE, since they swear a similar oath to defend the Constitution, and the situation comes up far more often. No "stand down" order is valid, period, since it violates the prime purpose of the Constitution, which is to defend citizens.
That doesn't mean that LE has to do things that are impossible to do, but it does mean LE should arrest politicians that issue "stand down" orders when citizens are in danger and LE can act.
Very good, but I do not know what LE is, could you enlighten me?
sorry for the late reply...LE = law enforcement
LEO= law enforcement officers
Thank you!
I hear you, and I respect you for your conviction and service. I also think there becomes a problem when the sitting commander in chief becomes a domestic enemy to the people and the freedom we hold dear. I'm not saying this to sway your beliefs or to get in an argument, but I feel strongly that the person in office is there in part because of foreign manipulation and that neither he nor his policies are doing the country any good. He's made a joke of this nation, more than anyone before him. I hope we rise from the ashes of this trash fire and become both more humble and willing to work together. Peace!
You are preaching to the choir girlfriend! I could not agree with you more, but as a man who has taken orders most of my life, the current situation in this Country and its elected leadership is a hard pill to swallow.
Though I am still affiliated with the military, I have been arrested at a number of protests in the past two years. The Democratic National Convention and also a non-partisan protest at our Nation's capitol. Also attended the woman's march and wore an homemade pussy hat (I crocheted it myself).
I did not speak for the military, but did speak as a former combat Veteran that is disappointed in the direction our leadership has taken. I am a bit left of center. I am an Independent Voter and a member of neither political party. Hell, I voted for Jill Stein. Her running mate during the 2016 Campaign is a Vietnam Veteran; not my reason for voting for her, but she was my candidate as I liked what she promoted: Peace and care of the earth.
I do not share this with you to brag, by no means, but so that you may understand me a little better as well as my political ideology.
Best to you and your loved ones always sweetheart.
@sgt-dan (Sargento) the hippy Jarhead
Great post, sir! I know, you are not a "sir" you work for a living. You have upvoted some of my posts and I deeply appreciate it. I'm glad to return the favor with this most excellent definition of personal integrity. I look forward to more!
wanted to drop by and tell you that you won the steem prize for the trippy selfie contest.....good job , amazing steemian and amazing post and entry <3 b.a.
Wow! Thank you! I am rich peoples!
Same should be the position of every man and woman in uniform round the globe. Nice post bro!
Thank you so much for your comment as well as the resteem. Have a great week!
@originalworks
Thank you for your upvote @hispeedimagins!
