Heavy ****.




The draft existed (and was used) during the US Revolutionary War.

How much more "in line with our ideals" can you get?

 

Probably because she's giving it? I think we should wait until it's history to judge.
When it was given, I doubt anybody thought Neville Chamberlain's "peace in our time" speech would be historic for the reason it ultimately became so. Maybe there's a lesson in there - let's hope there's not a parallel.

 

So the DNC is on

 

I guess this is why no mo booing?

 

The draft is one of the worst violations of individual rights. Just because we did it, doesn't mean it's an American Ideal. It negates man's right to life and it suggests that man belongs to the State. If the SC ruled on it, they would find it vastly unconstitutional. see: 13A


I guess you also believe slavery is an American Ideal? Since we participated in that as well. Why are you so racist?

 

She's given plenty of speeches, and so have other DNC nominees. What makes this so historic?

 

I'm guessing it's because she's the first genetically dickless nominee.

 

Yes, being impressed into military service involuntarily probably sucks. I wouldn't know, as I've been fortunate to have been a teenager / 20-something during an era free of large-scale conflict, but in general, I tend to agree with you.

On the other hand, this is one of those sticky situations in which, as Spock would say, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Speaking from a detached and neutral standpoint, the existence of the draft during the revolutionary and civil wars was less bad than the country not existing at all. And the existence of the draft during WW1 and WW2 was less bad than a world dominated by national socialism.

I'm not even going to address the draft during Korea and Vietnam. Proxy wars suck.

 

And yet, during the tens of thousands of criminal convictions which have resulted from charges of abandonment / draft-dodging during the history of the US, not a single one has a resulted in an acquittal based upon that defense.

I'd say that the odds are against you on that one. Just because you don't like something doesn't make it unconstitutional.

(And, seriously, stop devaluing the word "unconstitutional" by throwing it around so freely. It's as bad as those SJW's who shout RAPE! every time a straight white cis male looks at them.)

 

I already said they haven't ruled on it.

I don't have the power to rule something unconstitutional, but i have the 1A right to claim everything is. But I don't see how the draft is not "involuntary servitude", unless being an american citizen over the age of 18 is a crime and conviction upon itself. Had there been no draft, we wouldnt of had shitty "wars" like Korea or Vietnam because all those hippies wouldn't have signed up to fight in that BS. Of course a freedom hating liberal like Carter would try to reestablish it.


But nice dodge on the slavery being an american ideal question.

 

**** spock, he's no human.

and **** people, they arent me.

 

Yes, slavery was an American ideal at the time of the founding of the nation. Our whole economy was based on it.

In fact, one of the principle arguments which was put forth in favor of the passage of the second amendment, along with guarding against foreign enemies and a tyrannical state, was the need for citizens (and, specifically land-owners) to be able to put down "domestic insurrection," which was, at the time of the authorship of the Constitution / Bill of Rights was a polite way of saying "slave uprising."

However, the founders understood that times change, and so must laws and constitutions. That's why they wrote Article V, which lays out the method by which the constitution may be amended to reflect changes in society and its requirements, and why they wrote Article III Section 2, which appointed a specific judicial body (the Supreme Court) to be the final word in interpreting the constitution in the context of their age.

These points, and especially the latter, seem to be lost on some people who would call themselves strict constitutional literalists. If you truly believe in the constitution, then you must accept that it is both changeable and open to interpretation- because it clearly says that it is.

 

'Twas no dodge, I was busy doing real work at my free-market, non-government-bureaucracy job and you snuck in your reply before I could finish.

See previous post for my response.

 

no.

 

Your being offended by my interpretation of a word does not require me to re-define it.

 

no, it's just plain wrong. you know exactly what i mean by american ideals, but you're just being a ---- like normal.






dont worry, ---- means something different to me than you.

 

Hillary is Jesus...

https://www.facebook.com/modemparty/videos/10153905941464624/

and here I always thought she was the Devil. My mistake.

 

I tend to disagree that the draft is a violation of individual rights - I do believe that the "male only" aspect of it has become sexist in a nation with so many self-proclaimed feminists running around - if I, being a male and as such, historically the breadwinning gender and head-of-household can be drafted, then today's "women" who "don't need no man" can be drafted as well.

The draft is an extension of individual rights, not a violation of them. You, as an American, have the right to all of the things the constitution says that you have a right to, but only because you agree, as an American, to be called to service to your country in times when the individual rights of the group are threatened. You also have a right to give up your rights, leave the country, and become a citizen of someone else's country who doesn't institute a draft.

 

said the slave.

 

how do we not have a popcorn emoji? oh wait, there it is.