Editing Conscientious objector (section)

==Alternatives for objectors==
Some conscientious objectors are unwilling to serve the military in any capacity, while others accept noncombatant roles. While conscientious objection is usually the refusal to collaborate with military organizations, as a combatant in war or in any supportive role, some advocate compromising forms of conscientious objection. One compromising form is to accept [[non-combatant]] roles during conscription or [[military service]]. Alternatives to military or civilian service include serving an imprisonment or other punishment for refusing conscription, falsely claiming unfitness for duty by feigning an allergy or a heart condition, delaying conscription until the maximum drafting age, or seeking refuge in a country which does not extradite those wanted for military conscription. Avoiding military service is sometimes labeled [[draft dodger|draft dodging]], particularly if the goal is accomplished through dishonesty or evasive maneuvers. However, many people who support conscription will distinguish between "[[bona fide]]" ''conscientious objection'' and ''draft dodging'', which they view as evasion of military service without a valid excuse.

Conservative Mennonites do not object to serving their country in peaceful alternatives ([[alternative service]]) such as hospital work, farming, forestry, road construction and similar occupations. Their objection is in being part in any military capacity whether noncombatant or regular service. During World War II and the Korean, Vietnam war eras they served in many such capacities in alternative I-W service programs initially through the Mennonite Central Committee and now through their own alternatives.

Despite the fact that international institutions such as the United Nations (UN) and the [[Council of Europe]] (CoE) regard and promote conscientious objection as a human right,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www1.law.nyu.edu/journals/jilp/issues/33/pdf/33n.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111122030613/http://www1.law.nyu.edu/journals/jilp/issues/33/pdf/33n.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=22 November 2011 |title=THE STATUS OF CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION UNDER ARTICLE 4 OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, 33 N.Y.U. J. INT'L L. & POL. 379 (2000) |author1=D. CHRISTOPHER DECKER |author2=AND LUCIA FRESA |date=29 March 2001 |publisher=New York University School of Law, Issues&nbsp;– Volume 33 |access-date=2009-12-02 }}</ref> {{As of|2004|lc=on}}, it still does not have a legal basis in most countries. Among the roughly one-hundred countries that have conscription, only thirty countries have some legal provisions, 25 of them in Europe. In Europe, most countries with conscription more or less fulfill international guidelines on conscientious objection legislation (except for [[Conscription in Greece|Greece]], [[Conscription in Cyprus|Cyprus]], [[Conscription in Turkey|Turkey]], [[Conscription in Finland|Finland]] and [[Conscription in Russia|Russia]]) today. In many countries outside Europe, especially in armed conflict areas (e.g. [[Democratic Republic of the Congo]]), conscientious objection is punished severely.

In 1991, The Peace Abbey established the National Registry for Conscientious Objection where people can publicly state their refusal to participate in armed conflict.