comma before 'and' [conjunction]: signifies God and the dead soldier

[PHart]

In the following sentence, is the comma before "and" optional?:

--Thus, the military signifies God and the dead soldier, whose diligence is a hymn to the military, signifies a pious follower.

 

[Copyright]

I think a comma is mandatory there. You need to make it clear in the beginning that the military does not signify "God and the dead soldier."
Thus, the military signifies God, and the dead soldier ...

 

[Matamoscas]

Yes, absolutely necessary. What about a ; and no and?

 

[PHart]

If it were simply "Thus, the military signifies God and the dead soldier signifies a pious follower," would the comma still be necessary? Because I have read that in two closely related clauses, one can omit the comma. Is it the additional relative clause ("whose diligence is a hymn to the military, signifies a pious follower") that changes the merit of the comma in my sentence?

 

[Matamoscas]

I see no need for a comma where the two clauses are parallel as in your new example.

 

[PHart]

So, because the relative clause breaks the parallelism, I need a comma?

Also, doesn't the sentence make clear that the military does not symbolize both?

 

[Parla]

I would use a comma in the second version as well, just to forestall the possibility of misreading. "Rules" are less important than assuring clarity.

 

[Einstein]

Maybe you could substitute "and" with "while" (with or without a comma). It might even be more suitable.