Replies

I had to do some quick research. So my opinions on their pacifism are more impressions than well studied analysis. I was familiar with Mrs. White’s positions, but not those of the modern church.

It seems the church’s current stance is to encourage peace and pacifism, but it does not bar those who choose combatant roles from membership. They do, as an organization, support member draftees asserting conscientious objection based on AD A faith, and resultant assignment to noncombatant roles.

I do find their toolkit for students considering military service problematic, but that is because I see military service as an honor and a calling, not as a job in the common use of the phrase. As a body, they seem to actively discourage military service, and begrudgingly accept that some of their members may feel such a calling.
http://circle.adventist.org/files/jae/en/jae200365051612.pdf

My biggest concern is not a CIC who through faith considers military action a last resort, that should be the position of any CIC, of any faith.

My biggest concern is rather a CIC who is so opposed to armed conflict that a necessary decision is delayed, and thereby causes a loss of advantage, or worse a loss at the tactical theater level, or further worse, a loss that affects the strategic balance.

I also believe the CIC is be default, the recruiter in chief, affecting both directly and indirectly the population, composition, and careers of our service members.

These are the kinds of concerns and implied questions I feel should be answered by any candidate for President. The position of the SDA church doesn’t dictate that Dr. Carson toe the line without exception.

I cannot claim to be an unbiased observer, and will make no such claim. Dr. Carson may have inadvertently opened himself to religious questions with his publicly stated concerns about whether a Muslim was supportable for the Presidency.

While I would welcome an understanding of where he draws the line between personal faith and public service, I would never ask or require anyone to become a Pelosi Catholic, or a Ried Mormon, effectively acting against the tenets of their professed faith while in office.

Personally I do not consider membership in any religion as a bar to public service. However, reality says that there are many with whom I will disagree significantly and seriously on matters of public policy, and that in the end those differences may at times have roots in differences of faith. To claim otherwise would be to lie for the sake of sounding politically righteous.