War, Wicca and "Harm None"

[Gryphon]

I have a question for our soldier Wiccans on the board.

I am preparing a class on Pagan ethics based on the Harm None philosophy.

The problem is I am not now, nore have I ever been a Warrior.

As a card carrying pascifist, being in the Armed Forces is not my Path.

I realize that one can be both a good soldier and a good Wiccan. My question is how do you, as a Wiccan soldier, reconcile the Harm None guideline in the Rede with having to go to war and be in the position where you need to take another's life?

I believe that this is something that deserves to be in my workshop, especially now that many Wiccans are in active service.

[Lark]

Back when Sen Barr was having fits over the open circle at Fort Hood I wrote an essay that you might find some interesting points in.  You can find it at:

http://www.tangledmoon.org/military-pagans.htm

-Lark-

[Gryphon]

Thanks for the link Lark. I am in agreement with the points you made 100%.

I already have included the point that the Rede doesn't preclude self defense in my workshop notes. I was hoping for more personal insight from actual Warriors then the general one covered in your essay.

I want to be able to answer the soldier-war question should it be brought up and don't feel that just saying "acting in defense of home and country" really gets to the heart of the issues involved. Since the way of the Warrior has never been mine, I can't use personal experience. I want to be able to offer a solid answer from a soldier's perspective.

[Lark]

One specific answer that I can give you is that I believe the Rede is erroneously interpreted as saying "Harm none".

What the Rede actually says is that any action which will not cause harm you are free to do.  The Rede is silent on the subject of those actions that will cause harm.  That is when it is left up to the individual to determine what the ethical course of action is based on a particular situation.

When I was in Vietnam, we nurses were issued weapons that we were permitted to use in defense of ourselves or our patients.  Had we ever been in a situation where there were enemy combatants in my hospital, I can tell you now that I would not have hesitated to kill as many of them as I had to to protect my patients.

And our Wiccan soldiers today are willing to do what is necessary to protect their country, their families, and their people.

The other half of the situation for our soldiers is that Wicca requires that we take responsibility for our actions and their consequences.  And that means that a soldier needs to be ready to stand up and say "no" if they are issued an unlawful order which violates the laws of warfare such as the Geneva convention.   A soldier could, under the usual ethical code that Wiccans follow, kill an  enemy combatant...but he could not kill an unarmed civilian who was no threat, nor could he torture or humiliate prisoners who were in his care.

But I think the biggest issue to point out to people to help them understand how one can be military and Wiccan is to make sure that they understand what the Rede actually says..and that is not what people usually interpret it to mean.

-Lark-

[Gryphon]

I intend to hand all participants a copy of the original Rede and go over it line by line. I think the famous single line is often misquoted and erroneously interpreted.

Thanks for the help   .

[Rowan CedarWolf]

A Vietnam War Nurse? My hat goes off to you! I have a hard enough time caring for patients here in a civillian hospital! LOL

[Anonymous]

For many servicemen, it's not simply a question of 'could you kill in defense of ___' but also (and more important in my mind) 'could you die in defense of ____" and worse, 'could you let someone else be harmed in defense of _____'. Wiccan or not, every serviceman (generic 'man', not gendered) has to answer that for themselves. When my husband and I were discussing our wish for a family, we had to examine ourselves very carefully - it was the end of the cold war, we were both in ratings that were security-risks and were counselled that the possibility of kidnapping and tourture were real... what we can accept for ourselves in not what we can accept for others. And in that, I found the line for me - I was in uniform to protect others from danger (harm) that I found un-acceptable for them to face. I had the strength and ability to guard, therefore the burden to do so was mine.
   To do less - to NOT service, would have been to do more harm... "An it harm NONE..."  I would have harmed more by standing aside.

[Anonymous]

I don't think that most Pagans are thoroughgoing pacifists, the way that Jains and Quakers are.  If you would answer "yes" to the question, "would you fight in self-defense or in defense of another," then although you may still have pacifistic tendencies, you are not a true pacifist.

Also, it is incorrect to characterize the antiwar movement of the 1960s and 1970s as pacifist.  A majority of protesters would have answered "yes" to that question, and also did not dispute the need for a military force or to defend the country.  The protests were targeted against the Vietnam War specifically, and more generally against the Cold War and America's post-WWII aggressive military posture in the world.

So it is not really a question of whether Paganism is in conflict with being a soldier per se.  I don't think, for most of us, that it is.  The question is whether Paganism conflicts ethically with being a soldier in today's U.S. military force.

I myself would have moral problems choosing the military as a career, given the political and international situation at this time.  What I mean by that is that we have strayed very far from the old concept of the U.S. military as a defensive force, or a force used to defend the liberties of the American people.

Not that we were ever all that close to it.  In fact, few of the wars we have fought in have been fought to defend American freedom.  I would characterize the Revolutionary War that way, and also World War II.  The Civil War was fought both for and against freedom, on BOTH sides -- the Confederacy fought for the independence of the Confederate states, but also to defend slavery; the Union fought to free the slaves, but also against the independence of the South.  But how should we describe the War of 1812, which was fought mainly to stop British arms sales to the Indians so that they could more easily be conquered by our settlers?  Or the Mexican War, surely a naked (or at best very thinly-disguised) land grab if there ever was one?

Our military has never been better than our politicians, because we (rightly) subordinate the military to civilian rule.  Alas, we have seldom been ruled by philosopher-kings.  And since World War II, our military power has grown from the small, mostly defensive force it once was into a mighty juggernaut far too easily employed for very dubious purposes by a highly corrupt government.

On an individual level, the moral question is whether, recognizing that a military force (if not necessarily the one we have) is necessary to defend the country, can one serve in that force even though it is currently used not to defend our liberties but to threaten the liberties (and lives) of foreigners whom we need never have fought if we were less aggressive, and if our government were less in service to the rich and greedy?

I cannot.  But each person must answer that for himself or herself.

[Anonymous]

I have a Wiccan friend currently stationed at Ft.Bragg.  He's been to Iraq already and faces another deployment here in the next month or so.  I will call him tonight and ask him and let you know what he said tomorrow.

Hope this helps!

Love and Light
Skye

[Anonymous]

Ive been saying it for years. Peace is best, but not always possable. Sometimes theres nothing you can do but fight. I dont like it, but thats the way the world is

[NachtSorcier]

I totally agree that the Rede is misinterpreted often, maybe as much as the Bible is.

As Lark pointed out, the Rede does not say to "harm none."  As many of us will say, doing nothing is perhaps the greatest form of harm.  What good would it do to allow someone to hurt you or your loved ones?  If someone broke into my house and tried to hurt my partner or myself I would not hesitate to take out my knife and defend us.  If I were able to restrain an attacker while waiting for the police, would that not be working for the Greater Good, since we had prevented him from potentially hurting who knows how many others?

--Christophe

[Anonymous]

I've been in the Army now going on 5years, I have seen my friends blown away. my own Brother has died in this war. The truth is that  even though our country is mostly christian of some form. We have the right to believe what we want, do what we want.  Yes the harm none, well Lets just put it this way I don't wakeup in the morning looking for something to kill. But the first time a RPG comes flying passed your head you can the fire the weapon it is not even hard. I will tell you I CRY A LOT the first time. But it me or them! now the the main war is over we are more into saving lives. we don't have to kill the iraqi that are killing each other.

now my circle have talked about this and it mostly comes down to we want our kids to grow up in a free country and that they are safe. To believe what they want. I just found out that i will have my 3rd deployment some time next year. I will not even be home a full seven months before im back out here. But never for get that we do what we do so you don't have to. Also you could do something to support the soldiers there is a program called adopt a soldier for a year. Sand them letters, a box of goodys, let them know that you are thankful for what they do. Because it is hard sometimes. You are so far from home, and you are seeing people die. Well I'll be home in 60something days and thats the time I will do a cleansing circle, I will also walk in the woods naked to ground myself. The wiccans new years will nexts and I will try to get back to where I was. well I hope that can help if you have anymore questions just e-mail me and I will ask my circle.

Metopo