Posted on Feb 23, 2017
Does openly and aggressively berating or insulting people who voted for Hillary or Trump warrant an Article 134 violation under UCMJ?
81.5K
846
417
68
68
0
*First Edit*
There seems to be some misunderstanding: the nature of my question isn't about disrespecting or defying the POTUS, it's about when service members berate, insult or lash out at civilians, friends, peers or family members on social media or otherwise, simply because they voted for the opposite candidate.
*Second Edit*
Also, to clarify, I believe the behavior in question is wrong. I think some folks interpreted my question as asking for justification to be a jerk, but that couldn't be further from the case. I just wanted to generate discussion about people's opinions regarding whether being aggressive or hateful towards voters because of their choice was just being a crappy person, or a legitimate punitive breach of military bearing and discipline.
When President Obama won, there was a deluge of complaints, the birther movement, a different brand of "Not my president." Now that President Trump has won office, there's similar sentiment. On either side, there is a lot of aggression being thrown around. Do you feel Service Members have a higher responsibility to be respectful of the American voters, regardless of their choice?
Respect of the POTUS is a given, we're expected, as service members, to render that. My question is more in line with respecting the fellow Americans that voted; it seems antithetical to me to be aggressive and hurtful to fellow Americans, especially those that have dissenting opinions from ours, for exercising one of the fundamental rights we swore to uphold and defend.
There seems to be some misunderstanding: the nature of my question isn't about disrespecting or defying the POTUS, it's about when service members berate, insult or lash out at civilians, friends, peers or family members on social media or otherwise, simply because they voted for the opposite candidate.
*Second Edit*
Also, to clarify, I believe the behavior in question is wrong. I think some folks interpreted my question as asking for justification to be a jerk, but that couldn't be further from the case. I just wanted to generate discussion about people's opinions regarding whether being aggressive or hateful towards voters because of their choice was just being a crappy person, or a legitimate punitive breach of military bearing and discipline.
When President Obama won, there was a deluge of complaints, the birther movement, a different brand of "Not my president." Now that President Trump has won office, there's similar sentiment. On either side, there is a lot of aggression being thrown around. Do you feel Service Members have a higher responsibility to be respectful of the American voters, regardless of their choice?
Respect of the POTUS is a given, we're expected, as service members, to render that. My question is more in line with respecting the fellow Americans that voted; it seems antithetical to me to be aggressive and hurtful to fellow Americans, especially those that have dissenting opinions from ours, for exercising one of the fundamental rights we swore to uphold and defend.
Election 2016
UCMJ
Leadership
Character
Office of the President (POTUS)
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 205
0
0
0
Off-duty, say anything you like. On duty, though, politics are off limits, especially to subordinates.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Berating someone for their political beliefs is never right. Discuss the differences and if neither person will waver, agree to disagree, and move on. That is part of freedom of speech.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SSG Jim Beverly this is my first encounter with your question. Certainly, it does dance around cyber bullying, public embarrassment, and attack on free speech to insult and berate individuals because of their free choice. I would think if an individual was donning the military uniform, that would come under some definition if wrong doing while in uniform or representing the uniform. When I was active duty, I remember sailors going to Captain's Mast for 'disorderly behavior while in uniform'. So I guess it would depend on whether or not superiors see this type of behavior as besmugging the representation of the uniform that represents a government entity.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
If an officer does it, it is Art 133 (Conduct Unbecoming) and Art 92 (Failure to obey order or regulation).
If its an NCO/SNCO or senior to junior, it is just Art 92.
Any form of political discrimination or undue command influence on political beliefs and favoritism/persecution violates general DOD standing orders about political affiliation and military protocol for expression of political beliefs.
If its an NCO/SNCO or senior to junior, it is just Art 92.
Any form of political discrimination or undue command influence on political beliefs and favoritism/persecution violates general DOD standing orders about political affiliation and military protocol for expression of political beliefs.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
not unless you tell the major he sucks co-k for voting for trump. That would be disrespect if you were a private.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The military is about good order and discipline. Berating or insulting others because you disagree with someone else is a lack of good military discipline. We defend all, not just the ones we agree with. I was fortunate to have some great Commanders and senior NCO's during my 22 year career. If you remember the line from the movie "Saving Pvt Ryan", "We complain up the chain, not down", then this was the attitude instilled in our leaders back in the day. Along with selfless service and being responsible for the training, health, and welfare of our troops and their families. Have we forgotten about Maslow's hierarchy of needs? So as we used to say, don't let your mouth write checks your ass can't cash!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
If I'm not mistaken, the HATCH act applies to servicemembers as much as federal employees. That's a legal standpoint. Ethically, any time that someone could cause someone to feel poorly about political opinions, and that person could have fear of reprisal; it's ethically wrong.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
If they want to make trouble ,talk to your specialists as usual,THE SMARTER ones won't leave marks.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
There is nuance here. Some service members in the military have legitimate issues with policies that are being amended or added because those policies do or could affect them personally.
The only way to exercise your first amendment right as a service member with regard to policies that have agency over you is to interact based on those policies, not the politics or politicians behind them, nor the Americans who voted for or against those politics or politicians.
A friend of mine in service has an older sister who was deported by ICE recently. That sister came to this country when she was two. That service member has every right to speak out against policies, not the voters or politicians who support those policies.
I am a transgender soldier. The minutia of the proposed ban and its subsequent implementation memo notwithstanding, I still fight the policy, because it could potentially affect my ability to feed my kids.
There was a period of time in 2008-9 (and again, moreso, in 2012-13) where there was a social media clamor against Obama voters, and there has been a similar clamor since November 2016 over Trump voters. Engaging in this discourse only serves to give the military a bad name, whether you wanted your opinion affiliated with the military or not.
Focus on policies, not people. And if it doesn't affect you, it might be best to disengage while still serving.
The only way to exercise your first amendment right as a service member with regard to policies that have agency over you is to interact based on those policies, not the politics or politicians behind them, nor the Americans who voted for or against those politics or politicians.
A friend of mine in service has an older sister who was deported by ICE recently. That sister came to this country when she was two. That service member has every right to speak out against policies, not the voters or politicians who support those policies.
I am a transgender soldier. The minutia of the proposed ban and its subsequent implementation memo notwithstanding, I still fight the policy, because it could potentially affect my ability to feed my kids.
There was a period of time in 2008-9 (and again, moreso, in 2012-13) where there was a social media clamor against Obama voters, and there has been a similar clamor since November 2016 over Trump voters. Engaging in this discourse only serves to give the military a bad name, whether you wanted your opinion affiliated with the military or not.
Focus on policies, not people. And if it doesn't affect you, it might be best to disengage while still serving.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
During active duty and as a civilian DoD employee I never voiced my opinion of politics and did not care who my co workers voted for and loved/hated. As a leader and supervisor only respect was shown for our POTUS during my 403 years of service. Berating anyone for voting is wrong, but it is against the law when you are a military member.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google