And here is Penn's response video (which he has embedding disabled):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xdf4uYnMmkg
Now, I get it. Pledging service to a president sounds creepy on the surface. One of the things that really gets my liberal panties in a bunch is how everyone is so quick to take sides and jump on a bandwagon simply because they are of a certain party, and you happen to be a member of said party. In my opinion it's one of the biggest destroyers of any real debate and progress in this country. I personally believe in pledging myself to causes, and not people.
However, in thinking a little deeper on this, I thought about the military. The President is our military's Commander in Chief. He's (supposedly) the person that every member of the military needs to answer to ultimately. Therefore, using that logic, would it be fair to say that all in the military serve the President, whose office is an extension of our Country? They do have an oath:
""I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962)."
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is the difference. Why is serving your President through military service acceptable, yet serving him to make our country better through acts of humanity and just being a better person in general wrong?
Should we start a petition to change the military oath?
Comment
© 2009 Created by Dani Cutler on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
You need to be a member of Truth Seekers Community to add comments!
Join this Ning Network