Jump to content

Sicurella v. United States/Dissent Reed

From Wikisource
910205Sicurella v. United States — DissentStanley Forman Reed
Court Documents
Case Syllabus
Opinion of the Court
Dissenting Opinions
Reed
Minton
 Wikipedia article

United States Supreme Court

348 U.S. 385

Sicurella  v.  United States

 Argued: Feb. 1, 1955. --- Decided: March 14, 1955


Mr. Justice REED, dissenting.

It is not important to the United State military strength that a few people eligible for military service are excused from combat and noncombatant duties as conscientious objectors. It is important to other American citizens that many without such scruples against war must serve while the few continue their assigned tasks with no exposure to danger greater than that of other civilians.

Many, by reason of religious training or moral conviction, may be opposed to certain wars declared by the Nation. But they must serve because they do not meet the test of the statute, 'conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form.' The Court assumes that Sicurella's conscience permits him to participate in theocratic wars, that is, those approved by Jehovah, such as the blood and flesh wars of the Israelites. Sicurella testified he would use force in defense of 'Kingdom Interests.' Those words also seem to me to include theocratic wars. Under the assumption of the Court and petitioner's statements, he is not covered by the statutory exemption. His position is inconsistent with his claimed opposition to war. I would require him to serve in the military service.

Notes

[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse