259
submitted 9 months ago by Dasnap@lemmy.world to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gnutrino@programming.dev 75 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

So, as far as I can see the ruling was that the guy hadn't sufficiently proved through his actions (e.g. protesting, joining any anti-war movements or in this case even expressing this view to anyone beforehand) that he was an actual conscientious objector and not just a chancer who didn't want to serve.

The fact that he played PUBG was brought up as part of the suggestion that he was just having a go but wasn't the whole case against him. Indeed tbh I can't really see anything suggesting it was a particularly important consideration compared to the lack of positive evidence of conscientious objection but obviously it's the bit that's going to get clicks.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 36 points 9 months ago

Can't hold a moral stance without shouting it at everyone around you!

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
259 points (97.4% liked)

Not The Onion

12299 readers
1030 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS