Is it a moral obligation to fight for your country?

No, simple as. I am not patriotic in the slightest and care little or nothing for my country as it stands at present so for me there is no obligation what so ever.

No. I care about my country but 1) I cannot violence wars in any form, except to defend oneself (and NEVER pre-emptively) and 2) I don't love my country enough to die for it.

i do what i do and fuck you

there are some people patriotic enough to take it upon themselves the obligation to defend their country but i don't believe it's a moral obligation.

when you append the word 'moral', you quantify the obligation to a criteria that is universally-accepted and colloquially defined as 'good', universally in the relative sense obviously, as the concept of 'good' or even acceptable is culturally malleable.

taken in the context of military action where there is often no direct or first-hand correlation to me or anyone i care about, i can never equate violence with anything moral. if anything, it's a social/political obligation.

I don't know how to answer this, my country wouldn't let me fight for it even if I wanted to...

Wait, I should clarify that, I can't join the military...

Fighting for my country though?! I am not so sure what that entails, if someone could tell me what exactly 'fighting for your country' means, I'd appreciate it...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FUCK THIS BITCH

I should clarify. Its a patriotic duty. How can you live in a country and not be willing to defend it? Youd defend your house if it was being burglarized, wouldnt you? Would you really sit back and just let everything happen?

Maybe I shouldnt take it back. I think fighting for what you believe in is a moral obligation. Great and all if someone will do it for you- but gee whiz. Man up, you know?

Well if the country is literally under attack...sorta Red Dawn, the Russkies are comin' type stuff, then sure, there might be some sort of moral imperative to take up arms. But, that kinda shit aint happened since Pearl Harbor. The modern military is an extension of corporate interests. They aint defendin' shit, except the military industrial complex and their own access to unlimited fossil resources.

If you were a German solider during WWII, I think you could say it's a moral obligation *not* fight for your country. I think it depends on what exactly is being fought.

There is no moral obligation to fight for anyone else's land. You don't own it. You own your land. If someone trepasses, you decide whether to fight for it. It is perverted to believe someone can be jailed for not fighting for someone else. Everyone is their own person, respect thy neighbor.

A 'nation' is an illusionary mental construct. Nations don't exist, government's don't exist. Only mental constructs. Your property is yours because your neighbors agree to it. That's concrete.

I posted this in the 'get out and (don't) vote' thread, and find it fitting here. I don't advocate flag burning, but this is a powerful message.

It is if you remove the word, "for".

This land is your land, this land is my land
From California, to the New York Island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was made for you and me

If this land was made for you and me, then why were there a bunch of Indians shooting arrows at us when we tried to settle in it? Didn't they get the memo?

^ One of the hymns of civil religion. Have faith in country, we does no bad! Only good! Spread freedom...not real freedom, what we say is freedom!

Wasnt made for them- it was just inhabited by them. We made it. For ourselves. And then we wrote the song.

They were inhabiting our land! Damn them!

That song was written by Woody Guthrie, a socialist and critic of governments and nationalism. The version he played live, which no studio would let him record, included the lyrics:

A big tall wall there
Tried to stop me
And painted on it
Said "Private Property"
But the other side it
Didn't say nothing
That side was made for you and me.

It's not a happy, go-America, flag-waving song at all. It's one of the most touching protest songs ever written, and has been bastardized by elementary schools and the American Legion.

EDIT: Also, he'd end some of the verses with "this land BELONGS to you and me."

Wow, Truth FTW.

There's a big difference between defense and violence. Defense is the Civil War. Violence is Iraq. To use your analogy, should we really go around breaking into other people's houses and expect them to not get pissed?

As Bug said, it's about what's being fought for. And I happen to believe that there is no good reason for fighting, unless one is being directly, explicitly threatened. Suspicion of WMDs, protection of oil interests, and battling the "domino effect" of Communism doesn't fall into the category of defense.

How YOU doin?

Freeing slaves, asisting the flight of slaves, etc, is defense. Killing southerners on a battlefield is violence.

Wow, I had NO idea....

Actually, I was talking more about the Southerners defending their property than the slavery issue...

No. Countries do amoral, sometimes evil things. You can't be morally obligated to do something that isn't moral.

I think I'd fight a civil or border war, those just seem more fun. The whole over seas thing, eh, not so much.

Oh, and if North Jersey ever fights South Jersey, it is so on.

I think the over seas thing would be great fun! The government pays you to travel around, see the sights (and blow them up)! Woohoo!

The answer is obviously "It depends on the person answering the question."

If I want to see the world I'll go to flickr.

I admire your frankness in admitting that you don't read the entire thread you are posting to, but I'd like to suggest you change that habit. Reading the thread is respecting the thread, and if you don't respect the thread, you shouldn't be posting in the thread, IMHO.

is it a moral obligation to read an entire thread before posting!

Samuel Jackson also makes a very good point. And you don't wanna mess with SJ.

Really glad someone picked up on this. Nice one PocketFives.

Terrible example. There was no country to fight for then. It was a rebellion.

And yeah, like everyone else said...what you're doing by posting without reading threads is saying, "My opinion is more important than everyone else who already posted". Only you believe this.

I have a moral obligation to defend my family from harm, and if joining a group/miltia/military is the best way to do this then I would choose to join.
This is in the context that my family is in direct harm from either a foreign force or a domestic force.
I have no obligation to 'fight' for my country in some far off land that poses no threat to my family.
A country/government does not owns its' people, no matter how hard they try. they have no right to force me to fight a war under the guise of 'spreading freedom'.
Patriotism is believing that your country is better than everyone else's just because you were born there.
I cringe at faux patriotism, when the Iraq war apologists say 'They are fightin for your freedom!'
Really? Sadam was going to take my freedom away? Hmm I must have missed that news broadcast......

Seems that "freedom" is a nice buzzword that a lot of people use for their own purposes.

I try and distinguish between patriotism and nationalism, since patriotism has so many different emotional connotations, I use nationalism to define people just as you said, who feel they are the chosen ones because their nation is the one true nation, and can do no wrong so long as the flag flies above it.

Hmm….
I suppose if you are from a small country like Nepal or Afghanistan, it would be kind of a moral responsibility, because there just aren’t enough soldiers to do it for you. Without everyone banding together, they would be stomped on.
In a country that considers itself a world power like this one, I think it is easy to think we are for the most part exempt from having our towns and homes ravaged. War is not personal, but a foreign affair.
My father was a hippie, and was not drafted, but had his bags packed to run away to Canada if his number came up. We grew up on the stories of how terrible the Viet Nam war was and with the general idea that the military was a terrible thing, though necessary at times. My grandfather on the other hand, was a doctor and felt strongly that he needed to serve. He had low blood pressure and trained himself to bear down as if to take a crap in order to raise his blood pressure to a level deemed acceptable for entry into the Military. Granted, he was a doctor, so his role was not nearly as dangerous as the man on the front line (though he was wounded by a fluke accident with his own gun in Germany).
Today, I live in Southern California near Camp Pendleton and it seems that most people who have nice homes and lives in this area are military families. I wonder how many people join for the promises of good home and education rather than out of duty. For many years, joining meant training and never really finding yourself in combat. Nice idea. The truth? Not everybody comes out on top. Just last month I discovered that the man bagging my groceries was just back from his second tour in Iraq. It seems wrong that the guy who went and fought in place of some other shmoe who didn’t feel it was his duty, should now be bagging his groceries.
I know another kid, my step-son's half brother, who out of high school enlisted. We told him he was crazy and didn’t he know where they would send him? Did he know what it was going to be like? He said: “But how can I stay here and let all my friends go fight for me and not be there when they need my help? If one died and I wasn't there doing all that I could, how could I live with that?” He returned safely.
It’s your duty! It’s not your Duty! Who is right? I honestly think that it is a very personal decision. It matters if you believe in the politics behind it. It matters if you are standing next to your brother or a stranger. Some people could never live with themselves if they actually had to kill someone. Others could never live with themselves if they were not there to defend their friend. For those of us who don’t have the fight, thank goodness there are those who do. There are times that military IS necessary. Someone has to do it.

If it is indeed a duty to fight in a war, then rock on, Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban. You're only fulfilling your obligation to your country/people. Don't let those American soldiers get you down!

Good second post, Señora Lee.

Good point, Jane.

How, then, do others draw the distinction? If my neighbor asks to fight with him, do I not respect his wish? If he is loyal, I would unless by default you are a selfish, immoral person. But if you take that same reasoning, whether I should obey or disobey 'thy neighbor' is taking the matter in question and trying to settle it into simpler terms, considering which option of being loyal or not loyal will do more good for me and me only. So my obligation to fight comes down to morals ... nothing else. Therefore, there is a moral obligation in the sense to which you view the scenario. To appreciate this holistically, in the sense that it needs to be appreciated, there can be a political orientation or obligation, if you will, to the matter of fighting for someone's land other than my own. Especially if you offer your neighbor the putative obligation to comply, then the consent to fight for someones land becomes yours, too.

Consent, my friend. That he's asking you gives me no reason to believe he's demanding you do it at the point of a gun, as government's do.

You own yourself. You therefore have to right to choose whether or not to risk your life fighting someone else's battle. If you find the battle unjust, you have a right to obey your own moral compass and refuse.