If there Is A Draft....

LoneStarMadam wrote:

So, what about women being dratfed if there is a draft?

Are you asking me? Well, I think if there is a draft, women should be drafted. The state should be an equal-opportunity employer, after all.

We have the draft here, and women don't get drafted. They have the right to join, but not the duty. To me, that always seemed to be a bit unfair...

0 Replies

By the way, the question posed to me by the Madame somehow implies that i think that conscription "should be stopped." That's the only implication which i can see for asking me if i think jury duty should be stopped. But that's not what i wrote.

Article III, Section 2, third paragraph of the Constitution reads:

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.[/quote]

This guarantees that everyone has the right to a trial by jury. Therefore, there is a compelling state interest in assuring that juries can be empaneled, even if by compulsion.

With regard to conscription, i did write that i consider it justified, in narrowly-defined, extraordinary circumstances. I don't, however, know of any justification for conscription which can be found in the Constitution. It is worth noting that mass levies of troops by conscription does not appear in history as a formal government policy until the National Assembly of France declared on July 5, 1792: la patrie en danger--the fatherland in danger. There was absolutely no reason for the framers of the constitution to give consideration to the subject of conscription, since the concept of formal, government conscription of people to serve in the military was unknown at the time. The United States Constitution had been written and ratified before the concept was developed.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

It is the aspect of coercion to which I object.

Do you also object to the aspect of coercion when it comes to paying taxes, or to serving on a jury? Would you compare paying taxes with slavery?

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Phoenix32890 wrote:
It is the aspect of coercion to which I object.

Do you also object to the aspect of coercion when it comes to paying taxes, or to serving on a jury? Would you compare paying taxes with slavery?

The government needs the money to run. Although I do not approve of the waste in government, there needs to be a way to raise funds to keep things going. I would not compare taxes to slavery. It is more like having a mooching brother-in-law!

As far as a jury is concerned, in principle it is involuntary, but I don't think that you can compare a few days out of your life with serving in the military. We need juries to keep the wheels of justice going. There are ways though, that a person can get out of jury duty, if he really wants to. Personally, I think that ideally, people on juries should be interested in what they are doing, if they are going to be the most effective.

I was once on a jury, and found the entire process fascinating.

0 Replies

Re: If there Is A Draft....

LoneStarMadam wrote:

Should women be drafted as well?
I believe they should be, & not only drafted, but put on front lines. Women want equal treatment, & should have that, soooo, lets have equal treatment.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Israel does. I served with women in the Army. Fact, I married one. Women in combat? If they can pass the physical fitness requirements, which btw are lax, they yes. I race bicycles and I often train with women are can kick most men's asses. If they can handle a bicycle at 30+mph shoulder to shoulder, then combat seems doable.

But, the interesting aspect is why. Wrangle wants everyone to share the load of war, but, conscripts mixing with a volunteer force?

0 Replies

Quote:

But, the interesting aspect is why. Wrangle wants everyone to share the load of war, but, conscripts mixing with a volunteer force?

Helmut Roole- His name is Rangel. Anyhow, he knows damn well that it will never happen. He is just attempting to make some political points with some people who think that it is only the working classes who are joining the military.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

As far as a jury is concerned, in principle it is involuntary, but I don't think that you can compare a few days out of your life with serving in the military.

Right. And likewise, I don't think that you can compare a few years out of your life with slavery.

There may be some good arguments against the draft, but I think that comparing it to slavery is way too simplistic. After all, you have the element of coercion in many other things as well. And you have the element of facing (serious) consequences when not complying, too.

I don't think that's enough to call it "slavery".

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
So, what about women being dratfed if there is a draft?

If there ever is a draft, IMO, all qualified citizens should be included, no matter what their gender.

AMEN!! We agree....

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
So, what about women being dratfed if there is a draft?

Are you asking me? Well, I think if there is a draft, women should be drafted. The state should be an equal-opportunity employer, after all.

We have the draft here, and women don't get drafted. They have the right to join, but not the duty. To me, that always seemed to be a bit unfair...

The question was for anybody that hadn't answered. We agree.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

By the way, the question posed to me by the Madame somehow implies that i think that conscription "should be stopped." That's the only implication which i can see for asking me if i think jury duty should be stopped. But that's not what i wrote.

Article III, Section 2, third paragraph of the Constitution reads:

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

This guarantees that everyone has the right to a trial by jury. Therefore, there is a compelling state interest in assuring that juries can be empaneled, even if by compulsion.

With regard to conscription, i did write that i consider it justified, in narrowly-defined, extraordinary circumstances. I don't, however, know of any justification for conscription which can be found in the Constitution. It is worth noting that mass levies of troops by conscription does not appear in history as a formal government policy until the National Assembly of France declared on July 5, 1792: la patrie en danger--the fatherland in danger. There was absolutely no reason for the framers of the constitution to give consideration to the subject of conscription, since the concept of formal, government conscription of people to serve in the military was unknown at the time. The United States Constitution had been written and ratified before the concept was developed.[/quote]
No, that isn't what i meant.

0 Replies

Re: If there Is A Draft....

Helmut Roole wrote:

But, the interesting aspect is why. Wrangle wants everyone to share the load of war, but, conscripts mixing with a volunteer force?

What possible difference could it make if conscripts were mixed with a volunteer force?

State militia served with the Continental Line at Brooklyn Heights, White Plains, Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine, Paoli, Germantown, Ticonderoga, Lake Champlain, Bemis Heights, Freeman's Farm, Monmouth Court House, Camden, Hannah's Cowpens, Guilford Courthouse and Yorktown--and that's just the Revolution.

Of course, you might object that the militia weren't conscripts--which would be reasonable, although the point is that one needn't be a voluntary, professional soldier to serve. Of course, i entertain a very low opinion of the performance of militia in American history, so . . .

In World War I, we put slightly over three million men into Europe by the end of 1919--more than two and three quarters million of them were conscripted.

In the Second World War, fifteen million Americans served in the Armed Forces, and more than ten million of them were drafted.

That's a silly objection to make.

0 Replies

Re: If there Is A Draft....

Helmut Roole wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
Should women be drafted as well?
I believe they should be, & not only drafted, but put on front lines. Women want equal treatment, & should have that, soooo, lets have equal treatment.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Israel does. I served with women in the Army. Fact, I married one. Women in combat? If they can pass the physical fitness requirements, which btw are lax, they yes. I race bicycles and I often train with women are can kick most men's asses. If they can handle a bicycle at 30+mph shoulder to shoulder, then combat seems doable.

But, the interesting aspect is why. Wrangle wants everyone to share the load of war, but, conscripts mixing with a volunteer force?[/quote

Women are conscripted in Israel. Women should have to have the same physical requirements as do men in the military. I believe, under a previous administration that womens physical requirements were not as stringent as are the mens, the Pentagon lowerd [i]expectations[/i]of women, I found that to be discriminating.

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

We have the draft here, and women don't get drafted. They have the right to join, but not the duty. To me, that always seemed to be a bit unfair...

Indeed, but not unconstitutional (Basic Law: article 12a)

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

old europe wrote:
We have the draft here, and women don't get drafted. They have the right to join, but not the duty. To me, that always seemed to be a bit unfair...

Indeed, but not unconstitutional (Basic Law: article 12a)

<shrugs>

Nothing that can't be changed, Walter. I do believe in equality, and that concerns all facts of life, and all rights as well as all duties. We're living in the 21st century, after all.

0 Replies

I agree that both women and men should be included should we get to a point in time of needing to institute a draft.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
I agree...starting with the bush twins.....

Chelsea as well, she could make up for her dads lack of service.

nothing about bush that can't be excused without mentioning clinton is there?

personally I'd like to see NO ONE drafted......

Libs taking shots at conservative presidents for lack of service is a little like Ted Kennedy taking shots at someone for drinking too much. Laughing

0 Replies

Ronald Reagan dodged WWII as well and he slept thru most of his meetings.

0 Replies

talk72000 wrote:

Ronald Reagan dodged WWII as well and he slept thru most of his meetings.

You are lying to claim that Ronald Reagan "dodged WWII". Other popular urban Reagan legends include but are not necessarily limited to liberal's accusations that Reagan slept through meetings, that his eventual affliction of Alzheimers affected his presidency, that Nancy Reagan planned Reagan's schedule according to astrology or that the rich grew richer and the poor grew poorer during Reagan's presidency. During the Reagan years, the other legend was that we should institute a unilateral nuclear freeze because Ronald Reagan was bringing us to the brink of World War III with his "jingoistic cowboy" foreign policy.

This is a side note that really doesn't have much bearing on LoneStar's topic.

Reagan was enlisted in the reserves, and although disqualified for front line combat duty due to poor eyesight, he served in the Army between 1942 to 1945, as a lieutenant, and made training films for military personnel.

Carter and Clinton are the only presidents since FDR that did no wartime service, although Carter served as a Lieutenant Commander in the Navy.

My opinion is that military service doesn't matter a wit in this accusation, but only for the letter "R" after the president's name, to identify their political affiliation.

Furthermore, if Ronald Reagan could dismantle the Soviet Union and end a fifty year cold war without firing a shot by dodging wars and sleeping through meetings, then he did more under those circumstances than other presidents did while wide awake.

0 Replies

Monte Cargo wrote:

talk72000 wrote:
Ronald Reagan dodged WWII as well and he slept thru most of his meetings.

You are lying to claim that Ronald Reagan "dodged WWII". Other popular urban Reagan legends include but are not necessarily limited to liberal's accusations that Reagan slept through meetings, that his eventual affliction of Alzheimers affected his presidency, that Nancy Reagan planned Reagan's schedule according to astrology or that the rich grew richer and the poor grew poorer during Reagan's presidency. During the Reagan years, the other legend was that we should institute a unilateral nuclear freeze because Ronald Reagan was bringing us to the brink of World War III with his "jingoistic cowboy" foreign policy.

This is a side note that really doesn't have much bearing on LoneStar's topic.

Reagan was enlisted in the reserves, and although disqualified for front line combat duty due to poor eyesight, he served in the Army between 1942 to 1945, as a lieutenant, and made training films for military personnel.

Carter and Clinton are the only presidents since FDR that did no wartime service, although Carter served as a Lieutenant Commander in the Navy.

My opinion is that military service doesn't matter a wit in this accusation, but only for the letter "R" after the president's name, to identify their political affiliation.

Furthermore, if Ronald Reagan could dismantle the Soviet Union and end a fifty year cold war without firing a shot by dodging wars and sleeping through meetings, then he did more under those circumstances than other presidents did while wide awake.

Outstanding post. RR was the best president of my lifetime, I don't think there'll ever be another like him.

If there Is A Draft....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know