CCW - Understanding “CO” in U.S. Law

Are you a conscientious objector? A conscientious objector is someone who believes it is wrong for them to participate in war. You must actually object to participating in war. That’s more than just disliking war or having questions about the wisdom of war. Most people don’t like war.

Like most people who joined the military, you probably weren’t excited about the prospect of going to war. You may have realized that you might have to be a part of war and accepted that sometimes it’s a necessary evil. Even if you didn’t like war, you didn’t actually object to it.

But now something has changed: You realize that you cannot in good conscience be a part of it.
U.S. law requires that your objection be based on “religious training and belief”; the Supreme Court has ruled that ethical and moral beliefs qualify as well.

Religious training and belief. When it expanded the definition beyond traditional religion, the Court was careful to explain that these beliefs must be Text Box: U.S. law requires that your objection be based on “religious training and belief”; the Supreme Court has ruled that ethical and moral beliefs qualify as well.

Text Box: U.S. law requires that your objection be based on “religious training and belief”; the Supreme Court has ruled that ethical and moral beliefs qualify as well.

central in a person’s life. They talked of beliefs that hold “a place parallel to that filled by… God” in a traditionally religious person and beliefs so strong that they “impose upon him a duty of conscience.” They talked of beliefs that are bigger than the individual; something beyond yourself. Your belief, to qualify, must be about something more important than your survival alone, and should be related to higher values or to a traditional religious belief.
DoD Instruction explicitly states that if you object “solely upon considerations of policy, pragmatism, expediency, or political views” you do not qualify as a conscientious objector.

Political objection. A political objection would be expressed by stating “this war is illegal” or “Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction.”
While these things may be true, these expressions cannot be the sole basis of a CO claim.

Pragmatic objection. An expression of pragmatism or expediency would be “The war isn’t working. There are better options.” Again, the truthfulness of this statement is not the issue. Such a statement cannot be the sole basis of a CO claim. But keep in mind that your values or religious beliefs don’t exist in a vacuum. You live in a real world where political decisions have moral or immoral consequences. So your beliefs probably do influence your political or social opinions, and that’s okay. But remember to focus on the values you hold that influence your opinions and downplay the political and pragmatic aspects.

Your own participation in war. Your objection must be to your personal participation in war. When you write your conscientious objection statement, you are not writing a treatise on war and peace or how the U.S. can defend itself without weapons or without going to war. You are writing about your personal beliefs, and what you can or cannot do because of those beliefs. That's very different. While many conscientious objectors become actively engaged in the political process and work to stop war, not all of them do. There are some traditional religious COs who feel the state may choose to go to war, and it is the right of the state to do that, but they are very clear that God has commanded them to not participate. They qualify as COs!
What you must object to is your own participation in war. The first definition of war in the Miriam-Webster Online Dictionary is "a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations." You must object to being a part of that. You do not necessarily have to object to using force or even violence to defend yourself or someone else who is being victimized by violence. (For more on this point look at Answering the “Trick Question” on page 19.)

War in any form. You must object to participation in war in any form. The courts have interpreted this to mean that you can't pick and choose your wars.

If, for example, you say "I object to participating in the war in Iraq, but I would fight in Afghanistan" (as some have said) you do not qualify as a conscientious objector under U.S. law.

This can present a problem for conscientious objectors in the military. They often come to realize that they have moral qualms about orders they have just been given or to the war they are being sent to or the job they are performing, but they have yet to think about war in general. They had just assumed it was sometimes necessary and, therefore, okay even if they weren't very excited about it. Now they have a moral dilemma. They are not certain that they could honestly say they are opposed to participating in war in any form, but are certain they object to what they are being asked to do.

If your answer to the last question is “No”, you may be a conscientious objector.

“Selective” conscientious objection

If you believe there are wars in which you could in good conscience participate, you do not qualify as a conscientious objector under current U.S. law. This is not to deny the validity of your conscience, but rather to describe the narrowness of U.S. conscientious objector law.

Many religious traditions, while affirming that war is generally not good, set out standards for “just war” consistent with the faith.

If you accept this kind of teaching and conclude that you might, in good conscience, be able to participate in some wars even though you believe other wars are wrong, you are a selective conscientious objector.

As a selective conscientious objector you do not qualify for CO status under current U.S. law.

By applying these principles to modern warfare, however, some selective-objectors have come to the conclusion that there can be no such thing as a just war. These people may qualify as conscientious objectors under current U.S. law.

This is important to understand. The Handbook for Conscientious Objectors, 1972 edition, put it this way:

Some will fight only when Allah commands, and Allah remains silent; some will fight only in Armageddon, which seems always to lie in the future; some would fight if there were no nuclear weapons, but there are; some would fight if certain theoretical criteria were met, but they can't be. In the meantime, these [people] may find themselves opposed to [participation in] “war in any form” and can say so honestly.

The military and our culture try to portray conscientious objection as an extreme, even absurd perspective that almost no one really believes. The truth is that we all have a conscience. Objecting to something based on your conscience is a normal thing to do.

If you are a conscientious objector, you should consider applying to be recognized as a CO by the military.

If you think you're not a CO, contact The Center anyway. We may still be able to help you get out of the military.

If your beliefs forbid your participation in war in any form, you qualify as a conscientious objector under U.S. law.

What Military policy says about COs

COs apply for either reclassification as a non-combatant or for a discharge from the military.

You must show that your beliefs have changed since you joined the military. This actually makes sense because if you felt then the way you do now, you would not have joined the military.

Those who are recognized as 1-A-O conscientious objectors are often reclassified as non-combatants, but generally are not permitted to re-enlist. And sometimes if a non-combatant job is not available, 1-A-Os are discharged.

Since the 1960’s when this policy was established, the vast majority of conscientious objectors who have gone through this process have been honorably discharged.

In recent years (2002-2006), government studies indicate a mere 53% approval rate for conscientious objectors.

Non-combatant service. Many COs in the military struggle with the fact that they signed a “contract” and have a commitment to their country or to the other members of their unit, yet now their conscience will not allow them to continue in their present role in which they may be required to kill someone. Some see noncombatant military service as a logical compromise.

Far too often, those who make that choice later come to realize that their new responsibilities also violate their conscience. It’s important that you understand noncombatant status so you that can make the best decision.

Being classified as a noncombatant simply means that you would not be required to carry a weapon, use a weapon, or be trained in the use of weapons. Other than this, you would be a full and regular member of the military.

This does not mean that you would not go to war. You could be sent to the front lines in a non-combatant role.

Historically, the most common assignment of COs in the military has been to the medical corps where they often found themselves on the front lines of the battlefield providing medical care to wounded soldiers.

Text Box: The mission of the Medical Corps means that the objective of battlefield medicine is different than what you experienced with your family doctor and is different from even the practices you’d find in your local hospital ER. One major difference is in the way triage is implemented. Even if you’re not carrying a weapon, keep in mind that the purpose of the military is to fight wars and be prepared to fight wars.

The mission of the medical corps is to keep the soldiers in good physical condition so they can fight the war most effectively. The corps' mission means that the objective of battlefield medicine is different than what you experienced with your family doctor and is even different from the practices you’d find in your local hospital emergency room. One major difference is in the way battlefield triage is implemented.

Triage is a necessary practice of sorting great numbers of casualties when first responders cannot possibly take care of everyone at the same time. Patients are sorted into groups to determine who gets medical treatment first.

Battlefield triage puts those with minor and superficial injuries at the front of the line because they can be most quickly patched up and sent back into the fight. This approach makes sense considering the mission of the military. But battlefield triage runs counter to many people’s moral thinking.

It means that some people who might have been saved had they received prompt medical attention will die while medics are busy treating those with minor problems.

Civilians and those classified as “enemy” are always at the bottom of the list, no matter what their injuries. Many conscientious objectors find that this kind of service violates their conscience.

On the eve of the Normandy invasion during World War II, General George S. Patton, Jr. said:

“Every single man in the Army plays a vital role. Every department, every unit, is important in the vast scheme of this war. The ordinance men are needed to supply the guns and machinery of war to keep us rolling. The Quartermaster is needed to bring up food and clothes - because where we are going there isn't a hell of a lot to steal.”

Every job in the military has supporting war as its ultimate objective. This can create a moral dilemma for many conscientious objectors who are opposed to "participation in war in any form." If you think you could be a CO in the military, you should think carefully about these things. Only you know what your conscience will allow you to do. You should think carefully about which option you choose.

Once you have decided to apply to be a CO, you must submit a written application that answers more than twenty questions. You should also submit letters of support.

Working with a good counselor who understands military CO law from the beginning of your CO application process can make all the difference in the world.

Besides helping you to do a good job throughout the process, therefore increasing your likelihood of success, the counselor can help you create a “paper trail” that increases the likelihood of success should you have to go to court. The counselor can also provide moral support throughout the process which is often long and sometimes stressful.

DoDI 1300.06 par 4.1.1.

GAO report 07-1196, Sept. 2007, p.4.

DODI 1300.06 par 3.3 outlines non-combatant service:
3.3.1. Service in any unit of the Armed Services that is unarmed at all times.
3.3.2. Any other assignment the primary function of which does not require the use of arms in combat provided that such other assignment is acceptable to the individual concerned and does not require him or her to bear arms or to be trained in their use.
3.3.3. Service aboard an armed ship or aircraft or in a combat zone shall be considered to be non-combatant duty unless the individual concerned is personally and directly involved in the operation of weapons.

Army Field manual 8-10, par 14-4,b “...treatment during a mass casualty situation is based on what can be done to save as many lives as possible and to maximize RTD.” (RTD means Return to Duty)

Speech to the troops, June 5, 1944; from Province, Charles M., The Unknown Patton. (Random House Publishing, NY) Jan. 27, 1988.

Tatum, Arlo. Handbook for Conscientious Objectors, (CCCO, 12th edition, 1972; p.61).