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?
81.8K
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
It’s bullying so yes it does deserve it. BUT, before Obama, most Active Military are more concerned with their immediate chain of command. Since Obama, Many are definitely more concerned since he literally hand cuff to our military and we were sitting ducks everywhere we went because he refused to allow us to engage any time we were fired upon.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Here is my 2 cents, you were the uniform and identify on social media then you may not express political views. Now in private area not with sailors of lower rank sure discuss it. When they win they are commander and chief and it is against ucmj to talk against or disrespect them. I also disagreed with people that thought it was ok to put the President picture up in work space.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
By being in the service, we fall under SecDef, who is directly under the President. Therefore we should keep our political opinions to ourselves. By doing this we don't upset the apple cart, and we stay out of trouble with the White House. Just my view. Everybody is entitled to a view though.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The President of the United States, no matter who, where he or she comes from, what color they are, or where they go to Church, should mean nothing to someone wearing the uniform. They are the Commander and Chief of our Armed Forces.....period, and should be respected as such. The majority elected Trump, you can argue about who should have won the election till the sun don't shine, it's done....don't like it, 3 more years folks, then you can do it all over again. Personally, I hope a respected person, with a political, AND military background is the next President, and doesn't know what twitter means!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Openly and aggressively berating or insulting anybody warrants an Article 134 violation. Period! As far as being political, know enough about politics and the Constitution to know when someone appointed over you is giving you an illegal order. If the President gives you an unlawful order, don't just remember the part about obeying his orders, more importantly remember that you swore to support and defend the Constitution. American ideals and purpose are far more legitimate that a person who seeks to usurp the Constitution. Forget Fox News and CNN; Read the Constitution and History!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
During Watergate, President. Richard Nixon was the Commander-in-Chief, during Cease Fire we were called back to Vietnam in 1973., a new album came out by James Brown the soul singer: the song were titled: "You can have Watergate but give me some bucks and I'll be straight." aboard ship that song were banned and confiscated, even in music you could not say anything bad about the President.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I think you’re always supposed to be nice, no matter who you are. The internet seemed to have taken that away. People get that liquid courage juice through their fingertips while typing because it’s not face to face. But they generally would never say what they type to another’s face. And you’re right, there’s no difference in the treatment and disdain as to when President Obama was first elected compared to when President Trump was elected. It’s just coming from the other group.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Should people get in my space and start trying to get me fired up With anti potus speech, I tell them you made your choice and I made mine, my choice was elected end of discourse. Now if you’ll please vacate my space and go sob into your cry towel and I can do whatever I had been doing before you violated my space. Thank you and goodbye(read riddance)..
oh.. are you still here? I thought this discourse was terminated... I can either stand my ground or move on myself.. no need to continue a lost discourse..
oh.. are you still here? I thought this discourse was terminated... I can either stand my ground or move on myself.. no need to continue a lost discourse..
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Article 134 of the UCMJ is a catch all, a study in vagueness. It means what ever your CO needs to mean, and has upheld Constitutional review. Simple Answer, Stay off your Skippers short list
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Once rump was ele ted to CIC, tp speak ill of him is punishable under the UCMJ. Ms Clinton is not an elected official.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google