Without question, Chris Gomes’ situation is worthy of sympathy, and I’m sure all the readers of his Jan. 20 letter to the editor wish his son a safe return home from wherever he may be deployed. And no one can but commend Mr. Gomes’ personal courage as an ordnance disposal technician in a job that contributed to the safety of all.

In his tirade against Army First Lt. Ehren Watada, however, Mr. Gomes makes a significant error. The oath of office that a U.S. military officer takes is different from the oath of an enlisted service member, which Mr. Gomes quotes. The officer’s oath that Lt. Watada swore (which is prescribed by statute in the United States Code and is the same as that taken by most other federal officials), in its entirety, is as follows:

“I … do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

The first obligation of military officers is to obey the Constitution and, by inclusion, other duly-enacted federal laws and international laws such as the United Nations Charter. There is no clause in the officers’ oath that requires them to obey the president or any other person.

In January 2005 Naval Institute Proceedings, the recently retired commander-in-chief of the U.S. Central Command, Marine General Joseph Hoar, cogently wrote, “In the U.S. military services, loyalty and honesty — often described as integrity — are highly prized virtues. They rank right behind courage as prized characteristics of an officer. Although there is perpetual friction and competition between them, we need go no farther than the oath taken by all military officers: ‘I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic … ’ This provides the necessary direction as to where our primary loyalties should lie — to the Constitution, not to our commanders.”

Lt. Watada did not merely “lip sync” his oath of office, as Mr. Gomes so derisively (and inaptly) suggests, but rather took the words of his oath, as an officer, quite literally and seriously.

Sometimes being morally courageous means refusing blind obedience to an order one honestly believes is unlawful and, in doing so, incurring public opprobrium and, as in Lt. Watada’s case, risking almost certain imprisonment. Often moral courage demands much more of a person than physical courage.

In the performance of his duties as an enlisted man, Mr. Gomes has demonstrated physical courage, Lt. Watada, in conscientiously observing his oath as an officer, has shown uncommon moral courage. Certainly neither is a coward.

Kendall Ellingwood

Oak Harbor