<p>I know the basic rights are true to me (an American) because I enjoy them every day.</p>
<p>And I’m not sure about equality. Great idea, but maybe too utopian to be practical.</p>
<p>“What makes you believe that “basic rights” are true?
WHY are all people supposed to be equal?”</p>
<p>Because society would have a better chance of working better if we believed in that philosophy.</p>
<p>Cuse0507</p>
<p>You are making a argument in support of a draft based on ideological principles that sadly no longer apply to the wars of today. You bring up WWI and WWII but the context of both of those wars was very different from Vietnam and Iraq 1 and 2. The bottom line is that IF the American way of life was TRULY being threatened from an outside adversary, the American people would have to make a decision. Is it worth fighting and possibly dying to protect these freedoms? But that question doesn’t apply to the Iraq war. You may disagree with me, but obviously the majority of Americans don’t. They think this war is pointless and they want it to be over. So why would they want to go fight in it?</p>
<p>Perhaps the concept of a draft is inherently flawed. Any war worth fighting should not need to force members of a free and open society to fight it, they should be willing to do so of their own volition.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This would imply that the civil war, in fact, was not worth fighting.</p>
<p>The issue at hand however is whether I, as a citizen, can decide what is “worth fighting” and what isn’t worth fighting. Surely I can personally make my own decision, but the point of a draft is getting troops when supplies are low. If our supplies are low, and they decide to introduce a draft, then you don’t get to decide if it’s worth fighting or not…essentially the people you vote for get to decide this. </p>
<p>Now, that’s not to say you should be “surprised” or “astounded” if you are drafted. Sure, if there was a draft the chances of actually being drafted are low, but in living in this country (something you are not forced to do, whatsoever) you accept the terms of this contract, just as you accept the laws that are in place. Sure, I don’t agree on all laws, but either I accept them or face the punishment for not doing so. Just as the draft, if re-instated, is a law, you accept it or face the consequences of not doing so.</p>
<p>Your argument is tantamount to the tired and flawed “If you don’t like it, then leave” mentality, which is absurd.</p>
<p>Why try to change anything, then? Why not just let this country go to hell while everyone moves away?</p>
<p>If the draft is instituted as a means to supply an army for an unjust and immoral war, than it is my duty as a citizen of the world to boycott it. Simply because I was born in the USA does not mean that I am at the mercy of any gang of crooks that manage to take power and subvert the moral fabric of this nation. Every war since WW2 has been unconstitutional, for starters, so don’t tell me I have to play by the rules when nobody else does. I can make up my own mind for myself. </p>
<p>And I never implied that the Civil war was not worth fighting. However, we have the benefit of hindsight. At the time there were many, I would guess, who did not see the war in the two dimensional light that it is commonly viewed now. Many had reservations about strengthening the power of the federal government. Thats really a separate issue though and isn’t particularly relevant to the topic at hand.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When you sign up for the selective service you are agreeing to a contract. It’s not just something you sign and click a button and you’re done…it’s a contract. You can decide not to sign up for it and suffer the consequences, or you can leave because you don’t agree with the contract. However once you sign it you are stating you are willing to follow what is stated in the contract. You are breaching a contract when you refuse to report (if you are drafted) and as such you should be punished…</p>
<p>I shouldn’t be held responsible for signing something when I have no choice about the matter. If you want to make an argument about choosing not to sign and facing the consequences, then at least let the person get to the age of 25. But at 18? Is leaving your family, country and everyone you know before you have any real job or any kind of degree really an option?</p>
<p>Its a ridiculous catch 22 and it holds no more validity than a forced confession.</p>
<p>And on another point, I signed a document agreeing to selective service for any war that, as per my understanding, is declared by congress under the constitution of the United States. As I stated above, every war since WWII has been unconstitutional and therefore, I have NO responsibility to oblige the will of a maverick presidential administration that is acting against the best interests of the American people.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uhhh…you have a choice, but nice try. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ummmm…maybe you should do a little research before you post. You signed a document that allows you to be called into military action, whether that action was authorized by congress or not. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ummm yes? I’ve been supporting myself since I was 18, paying rent, working a job, paying for everything (school included)…it’s called growing up.</p>
<p>eddyx,</p>
<p>You misunderstood me. I’m not saying that I would support a draft for the current war in Iraq. In fact, I said that I doubted the situation in Iraq would escalate to a level where a draft is needed.</p>
<p>What I said was that IF a draft was reinstated, then it would almost certainly mean that our country and our way of life was in imminent danger and that therefore there is no excuse not to serve.</p>
<p>I would say yes. Should they constitute infantry? Probably not. Should they do any actual fighting? Doubtful. But they could work in hospitals, in tech. jobs, at command centers, as interpreters. I don’t think women are as good at the whole “fighting” thing as men. I think there is biological and psychological evidence supporting that, too.</p>
<p>I don’t think the draft should ever be reinstated unless, like, China attacks. In which case, yes, they should.</p>
<p>Dang if china attacks, the world will be in a very war filled zone and deathly zone. Indian would get involved, Pakistan would, Tiawan, Middle east is already a mess, the european powers would get in. Russia will wind itself up in all this. Like the only safe country would be Canada with their mounted state troopers lol.</p>
<p>Canada has Terrance and Phillip! Canada FTW!</p>
<p>On an unrelated note, no, I don’t think women should be enlisted in draft.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t just believe women ought to be drafted, I think all physically capable adults ought to be eligible for drafts. In addition, they ought to have equal placements in both combat and non-combat roles. I believe that if you can vote, and enjoy all the advantages of an adult, you have the same obligation as an 18 year old male to fight for your country. Of course, I don’t believe in the draft, involuntary conscription is little better than slavery. I’d only be in support of a draft for a war that challenges human rights everywhere, so far I’ve never seen a war in history that would satisfy my definition of a justifiable one.</p>
<p>Nobody should be drafted. If there are insufficient numbers of troops, then we should suffer the consequences should the need for a military force arise. If Americans are willing to risk living in the 21st Century without effective levels of troops, then we take our chances. I appreciate America but I think military service to our nation should remain a choice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A contract that is signed under duress or coercion. And is NOT legally enforceable in court. If you’re going to treat it as a matter of contract law, then yes, it’s an unenforceable, forcibly agreed upon contract, that will NOT hold up in court.</p>
<p>In addition, you don’t get sent to jail (or any criminal punishment) for failing to uphold your side of the contract.</p>
<p>Exactly. Breach of contract is legally a CIVIL matter that can only be litigated in CIVIL court, not criminal court. Not upholding your end of a contract is NOT a crime, and belongs in civil court.</p>
<p>If you were to treat selective service as a matter of contract law, there’s a good chance the contract might be nullified by the court on the basis of the lack of the “meeting of the minds.” When one party forces or coerces another to sign a contract, there is no meeting of the minds, which is to say that the two parties did NOT willfully signed the contract. Last I checked, the government is NOT above the law.</p>
<p>Constitutionality: I’m taking a class in administrative law this semester and we talk about due process a lot. In Goss v. Lopez, the supreme court ruled that you cannot be deprived of a property interest without due process of law. Conscription deprives you of a property interest in that it forces you to defer your career, education or basically your life, (Goss v. Lopez also established that education is a property interest=property) and thus can’t be taken away by the government without due process of law. In another case, the court also defined due process and basically ruled that arbitrary legislation is NOT due process.</p>
<p>The thing is, national security is a compelling government interest. It would be very hard to argue for your right to education while the government is saying its existence is at risk.</p>
<p>Conscription is usually a bad idea, but when it is needed, the needs of the individual are barely considered.</p>