My Husband Means What He Says: "War is Wrong"

by Monica Benderman

HINESVILLE, GEORGIA, February 6, 2005—As the wife of a soldier who has sworn to "defend his country and its constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic," and as the mother of an 18 year old son who has recently had to register with Selective Service, I have thought about these comments to a great degree.

In keeping with professional and "military" bearing, I realize that I must be aware that while I do not endorse this general’s opinion, nor do I understand it, I must give him the benefit of the doubt and realize that in America, we are entitled to our beliefs, even when others feel that they do not meet the standards of the values set forth in our constitution, nor do they meet the criteria established for humanity set forth in the Ten Commandments.

As I have come to understand it, the Ten Commandments may be found throughout the buildings and offices of our federal government. I am certain there is a reason for them there.

My husband, Sgt. Kevin Benderman, goes to his preliminary hearing in the morning, to determine how the military will proceed on the two charges filed against him, Article 85, Desertion with intent to Avoid Hazardous Duty, and Article 87, Missing Movement, of the UCMJ. These charges were filed after he submitted his application for Conscientious Objector status to a command who refused to accept the application, causing my husband to have no other choice but to refuse redeployment back to Iraq. He has since been reassigned to a Rear Detachment unit at Ft. Stewart, and the command of that unit has followed the Army Regulations and accepted my husband’s Conscientious Objector application.

My husband served one combat tour in Iraq. He has told of some of what he witnessed and experienced while in country that caused him to become this committed to speaking out against war. He has more reasons for his choice but he keeps these inside.

To know this man is to know that he does not make decisions on a whim, he does not react, he does not change his thinking without serious thought, and without a full commitment to his new beliefs. He cannot say what his thoughts will be in the future. How can anyone make a decision based on hypotheses, or "what ifs?" He knows what is NOW. That war belongs in the history books, that this war and all wars were predicated on the belief that humanity did not have the mental fortitude to bring weaker minds to a higher way of thinking without the use of guns, missiles and abject destruction of entire countries.

We look at every other form of life on this earth, and we see nothing of the violent acts that we justify as defending freedom, fighting for democracy, destroying evil. Animals kill for food, they kill to protect their young, but only when their young have been visibly threatened. Animals live in peace, different species mingle together throughout the earth, and the sea. Animals do not search out victims, do not run rampant terrorizing other creatures less fortunate than themselves, not without reason, unless rabid. Animals do not delight in the destruction of other creatures, merely for the sake of killing them. There is a balance in their world, and theirs is a world of peace.

What is it that makes humanity so violent? What is it that makes people cheer for the right to "brawl," for the right to go against a weaker force and declare it "fun?"

What is it that makes this acceptable?

Why is it that my husband is questioned, berated, called coward, and put on trial for not wanting to kill any longer? He has not broken a contract, he continues to serve his country by speaking out against wanton killing, by speaking on behalf of bringing morality back to the forefront of thought in America. He has not said that he would no longer serve to defend his constitution, he has merely said that he will no longer be part of an institution that is designed to kill, to destroy and whose members are taught to revel in the acts. His declaration of Conscientious Objector, is not a declaration against his country, nor its constitution. His decision to speak out on behalf of Peace, and non-violent defense of this country is one that, to me, speaks of higher morality, of higher intellect, of thoughtful consideration for humanity.

To come to the realization that violence only perpetuates violence and hate among the world’s population is a bold step in this society where shooting people is considered fun.

To have the courage to speak out in defense of non-violent solutions, to be bold enough to suggest that we are of a higher order, and that perhaps we should be setting the example for finding a better way rather than perpetuating the worst way, is something that, to me, should be recognized with honor and applauded. And yet, a comment that "It’s fun to shoot some people" prompts the applause and the laughter, while my husband’s statements of "killing is wrong, war is wrong" receive questions, and the potential for a prison sentence.

The captain who is the Investigating Officer in charge of the Conscientious Objector hearing on Tuesday, will now determine his findings as to Kevin’s sincerity. The packet of information that he will use to help him determine this is full of articles written by Kevin, by me, and by every journalist who has interviewed Kevin over the past month. It contains comments by his current commander, and before we are through, will contain copies of over 2500 emails offering support as well as over 40 hand written letters of support received at our mail box over the past 3 weeks. All of this will be forwarded on to the Department of Defense. All of this is astounding.

The letters of support are astounding for their sheer number, as well as the thoughts, for which we are sincerely appreciative. Support has come to us from all over the world, and the understanding, the energy and the warm feelings come through loud and clear in every one of the messages. We cannot begin to thank each person who has written in a way that would show them just how important every message we have received really is to us. We cannot begin to tell every person who has called just what their phone call has meant, and how it made us feel knowing that people cared that much about someone they had never met. We thank you all now.

Something else just as astounding is the fact that the questioning still continues and the evaluations are far from complete. In spite of everything said and done, my husband still has to prove that he is against war, that he is sincere in his conviction, that he is sane and means what he says: "War is wrong. War does not solve problems. War should be relegated to the pages of history, and we should do everything humanly possible to find a better way to solve our differences as human beings."

My husband and I are fighting to defend Peace and the non-violent means to reach out to humanity and do our part to teach that there is a better way than war. Something that should be so easy is such work, and meets so much opposition. Living and working for Peace should be so simple, and peaceful. It should not require the evaluations, the explanations, the justifications we are continually asked for. A public commentary on the sheer joy of shooting people results in a "slap of the hand" and is accepted as the words of a "superb leader," the words of someone who surely will "continue to serve this nation with... distinction."

I am not sure I have the words, because I am sure that I do not understand.

http://www.bendermandefense.org/

audio of Sgt Kevin Benderman
http://radio.indymedia.org/uploads/...

To file as a Conscientious Objector
http://www.objector.org/