Month: November 2009

Veteran’s Day

Heathir suggested I write a little more about my thoughts on Veteran’s Day this year. Here, as with many subjects, I’ll start with a brief history lesson.

Following World War I’s devastation, Woodrow Wilson proclaimed Nov 19, 1919 as “Armistice Day,” a day set aside to honor the fallen of the war and to reflect on the sacrifices made, as well as the victory achieved:

To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations.

Congress reaffirmed this seven years later, saying:

It is fitting that the recurring anniversary of this date should be commemorated with thanksgiving and prayer and exercises designed to perpetuate peace through good will and mutual understanding between nations;

Armistice Day was celebrated as a legal federal holiday beginning in 1938. In 1954, after World War II saw even greater moblization numbers than the first World War, and after the American involvement in the Korean War, a movement began to change Armistice Day into Veterans Day, a day in which to honor all those who have served in the Armed Forces. President Eisenhower, in the first Veteran’s Day Address, said:

In order to insure proper and widespread observance of this anniversary, all veterans, all veterans’ organizations, and the entire citizenry will wish to join hands in the common purpose. Toward this end, I am designating the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs as Chairman of a Veterans Day National Committee, which shall include such other persons as the Chairman may select, and which will coordinate at the national level necessary planning for the observance. I am also requesting the heads of all departments and agencies of the Executive branch of the Government to assist the National Committee in every way possible.

He then assigned that role to the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs, and the positions have been linked since.

Many people get Veteran’s Day and Memorial Day confused. The key difference between the two holidays is that while Memorial seeks to honor the fallen and those they left behind, Veteran’s Day seeks to honor those who live on, celebrating the sacrifices they have made as well as their patriotism and dedication. Some of these people may be home, among us, while others may still be serving overseas. Regardless of where they are, today is their day.  Thank them. Buy them a drink. Off to watch their children for a night so they can get out of the house. Just take a little time out of your day to honor someone that has made sacrifices for your well-being and that of the country.

To those who are serving: thank you for all that you have done and all that you continue to do. It is your steadfastness and willingness to serve this country that keeps us all safe and secure. You can never be thanked enough for what you do.

To those who have served: thank you for all you have done. Thank you for taking time out of your life to serve and defend this country from its opponents, for as Churchill said:

We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.

Today’s English Lesson

Today’s pet peeve comes via John H at the BHT:

More generally, I think we should also avoid the word “ignorant” in this context, as the word is too much of a value-judgment. First-century people weren’t “ignorant” of what centuries of scientific and medical research have unearthed; they just “didn’t know” it.

“Ignorant of it” means “didn’t know it.” I am ignorant of a great many things – as are you. This is not a value judgment of any kind, it is simple fact. It is only when you define a person as being ignorant as an aspect of his character that it becomes a value judgment. So, can we go back to using words because of what they mean rather than what politicians try to make them mean?

Loyalty to God and country

Over at The Jury Talks Back, Not Rhetorical asked an interesting question:

“I’m a Christian first and an American second.” If you heard someone say that, would you consider it divided loyalty? What if a soldier said it?

I responded that I would not be surprised at all, because if anyone claims to believe in God but doesn’t place him as the primary influence in his life then that person does not really believe in God. It doesn’t matter which god – the God of Israel, Allah, Zeus, you name it – if God exists, then your entire existence is shaped by that fact. Anything else you do must be in the context of what that all-powerful God wished you to do or to be. I think the US Armed Forces understand this, given that they’ve allowed soldiers whose faith prevents them from fighting to serve other roles so as not to force a showdown between God and country.

This quote, however, comes from Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood shooter. He apparently made it public knowledge that he considered himself a Muslim first and an American second – a fact which is being played up as another sign of his blind devotion and barbarism. This should surprise no one. No political entity can match the sheer clout of a deity. The fact that he considered his religion to be the primary motivator in his life is a perfectly rational response to his beliefs, and using this point as evidence of his insanity is at best intellectually dishonest and at worst outright anti-religious propaganda. Continue reading Loyalty to God and country