The Saturday Constitutional: Part one: Service and Vocation

Service in the military isn't just another job. It is a vocation, whether it be long term or short term, much akin to being a pastor or police officer. It is a high calling that requires sacrifice. I am disappointed that the US Army has given yet another exemption for Cpt. Simratpal Singh. Joining the military requires you to give up certain liberties in order to meet conformity standards. I am sure he is a good soldier. A decorated combat veteran. However, when you **voluntarily** enter into US military service, uniformity is one of the first things that you are schooled in. I think it is a shame that accommodations are made for this. It is a slippery slope that once tread may indeed lead to breakdown in unit cohesion. I fear this is part of a larger problem of tolerance and syncretism wherein we are losing our identity as a country, as Americans.

No longer are we a melting pot, where all races, creeds and colors come and become Americans, but a nation of individuals bent on self service instead of service to a higher calling. We are bent on serving self and not others, and whatever pleases me takes precedence over what is meant to serve the greater good. This has become apparent in the recent string of growing troops and their spouses who do not understand their oath to uphold the constitution and protect against threats both foreign and domestic. I have heard some military men and many of their spouses say they do not want their husbands/wives to serve in combat situations no matter how necessary. I wonder if they understand how ridiculous this notion is? Your souse has enlisted for the purpose of serving in a *military capacity*, and that means the possibility (probability in this day and age) of serving in a hostile or combat theater. It is what they are trained to do, from cooks to rangers, from motor-t drivers for MARSOC, from Seamen to Seals. When you as a service member or your spouse speaks out in criticism of deployment to such a theater, or criticises the idea of serving in general, you not only reduce confidence in yourself and your spouse in their ability to perform, but you reduce your unit's effectiveness, because you are showing that you may not have your buddy's back. When you are "in it", and your buddies know your heart is not there with them in the stink of it, how safe do you think they are going to feel?

There is a time and a place for religious practice and political opinions, On duty is not the place, and keep your opinions about deployment private, confined within the walls of your own house, out of ear-shot of everyone else. No one wants to hear your liberal blathering about Sanders' socialism in the military and how your spouse doesn't need to deploy to protect us from terror. So, here, let me recap this for you. If you are serving, there is the knowledge that there are things you are going to have to give up voluntarily (time with your family, the ability to express your faith while on duty in a public way, the ability to dress differently from all your peers, your possible safety, etc), because serving isn't a job, it is a calling. Don't be that nagging pastor's wife who complains that her husband is ministering to the needy, or the cop wife who is complaining that her husband has to patrol a dangerous part of town. Instead, be a good spouse by setting aside your own fears and worries and publicly supporting them with all your being. In that you will be a good partner, and in setting aside your public display of faith to serve your country you can show honor to whatever god you serve by acknowledging that it was he who called you to that service.