OBJECTORS TO MILITARY SERVICE

Dominion, Volume 34, Issue 118, 12 February 1941, Page 6

OBJECTORS TO MILITARY SERVICE

Since No. 4 Armed Forces Appeal Board began its sittings in Wellington a week or two ago The Dominion has received a considerable volume of correspondence on the question of objection to military service. The majority of these letters refer in detail to one or other of the main lines of argument advanced by appellants in support of their stated beliefs; and as the board has answered each argument officially and authoritatively by its decision in each particular case,'the publication of additional, detailed comment would serve no useful purpose. It is, however, both timely and' proper to point out that the correspondence, inasmuch as it represents a cross-section of public opinion, discloses a very strong —and apparently very widespreaddisapproval of the attitude of many of those whose disinclination to defend their country in the fighting Services has been set down as “conscientious objection.”

To argue at this stage in the country’s war emergency the question as to. whether true conscientious objection, based upon religious conviction. is a valid reason for withholding such service to the nation as the individual is deemed fit to give, would be simply an academic exercise. Nor is it necessary to discuss the difficult problem of drawing distinction between true conscientious objection and the expedient pleading, opportunism and masquerading of selfish men, indolent men, cowardly men, and even, perhaps, traitorous-minded men. « The question of vital moment is that of making the fullest use of the manpower on which depends so largely this country’s effort in the cause of civilization. The appeal board has taken decisive steps in certain cases to assist the assembly of manpower. What is now required is that the remaining processes of law, in support of the board’s findings, will be equally decisive. It is on this important aspect of the question that public attention is now likely to be concentrated. Certain men have expressed unwillingness to serve, but their appeals have been rejected. Assuming that they persist in their attitude, what steps are to be taken —and when —to deal with them? There is. too, a question concerning those men whose appeals have been allowed. They are privileged citizens. For reasons they have set out, they have been absolved from the personal inconvenience and sacrifice of military service. Are they to continue to enjoy this special privilege, together with all the advantages and security of citizenship, won and held for them by others, without special obligation of any description? If such be the case it is an inequity calling for careful reconsideration. Every successful appellant should be called upon to earn the privilege bestowed upon him by personal non-military service and/or by monetary sacrifice which places him on the level of the soldier citizen. Objectors -who are sincere in their convictions may be expected to be ready and willing for adjustments.