Selective Service... is it constitutional???

[ATOMonkey]

You should have told them that back in the 60's when i was drafted. I guess I should say "I wish I would have known that" I could have taken them to court and lost.

When you look at the history of this nation during the Progressive movement of the last century, it should come as no shock that the supreme court, appointed by Progressives would rule Progressively.

Since the beginnings of the Progressive movement with Ted Roosevelt, we've have the Federal Government confiscate land from the State, the implementation of a National Federal Reserve Bank, the implementation of the welfare state...TWICE, and on and on and on.

When people are used to their rights being trampled daily, it is not surprising to me that people are conditioned to surrender their very freedom and lives to a government that has shown itself to be corrupt over and over and over.

So, who is the crazy person? The guy telling everyone the sky is falling, or the people denying it is happening as the sky lands on their head? It's been raining **** on people for so long, they don't even notice any more.

 

[Pocketman]

Well this may be hard for you to deal with, but the Supreme Court of the United States gets to make the rules on constitutionality. They rule...really they do.

Bob is correct. The U.S. Constitution established an independent Supreme Court as the third branch of government. Over 200 years ago, Federalist such as Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall pretty much solidified SCOTUS' role as being the interpreter of the Constitution. Therefore, we can all have opinions about what is and is not Constitutional, but only one opinion counts as law. While not perfect, this is a good thing. If everyone was free to their own interpretations, we'd experience chaos and anarchy.

 

[RockofStrength]

Bob is correct. The U.S. Constitution established an independent Supreme Court as the third branch of government. Over 200 years ago, Federalist such as Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall pretty much solidified SCOTUS' role as being the interpreter of the Constitution. Therefore, we can all have opinions about what is and is not Constitutional, but only one opinion counts as law. While not perfect, this is a good thing. If everyone was free to their own interpretations, we'd experience chaos and anarchy.

Except that even the Supreme Court is not permitted to simply ignore the Constitution, which they have done before with the 2nd Amendment at least. The 13th clearly speaks against involuntary servitude except in the case of criminal forced labor, and the Supreme Court saying that the draft is legal despite what plain English says does not make them right.

 

[thebishopp]

Bob is correct. The U.S. Constitution established an independent Supreme Court as the third branch of government. Over 200 years ago, Federalist such as Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall pretty much solidified SCOTUS' role as being the interpreter of the Constitution. Therefore, we can all have opinions about what is and is not Constitutional, but only one opinion counts as law. While not perfect, this is a good thing. If everyone was free to their own interpretations, we'd experience chaos and anarchy.

And this is one of the many reasons our "inalienable rights" are now "privileges".

As I've said before, we've already lost, it just came so quietly people don't even realize it (and those who have just don't want to admit it).

 

[ATOMonkey]

Bob is correct. The U.S. Constitution established an independent Supreme Court as the third branch of government. Over 200 years ago, Federalist such as Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall pretty much solidified SCOTUS' role as being the interpreter of the Constitution. Therefore, we can all have opinions about what is and is not Constitutional, but only one opinion counts as law. While not perfect, this is a good thing. If everyone was free to their own interpretations, we'd experience chaos and anarchy.

On the flip side of the coin, allowing people to rule without regard to the preservation of Liberty results in tyranny.

Is it not Patriotic to stand up for Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and that when a government becomes destructive towards these ends, to stand against that government?

It would be unwise for us to forget the power of the words that declared our independance from tyranny.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Do you know that Amendment 13 was enacted at the end of the Civil war, during a time when men were being drafted into the military and drafted men were still in the military?

Great Books - TeacherVision.com



There was even conscription during the Revolutionary War, and later proposed by Adams, Jefferson, Madison & Washington.

Indeed, Conscription has a long and dreadful history. No man would stand in favor of a practice that rends families, and sends young men to their deaths so that despots can increase their own holdings.

Would you fight for a Lord so that he could gain more land, more taxes, more food at his table?

Is it only acceptable to draft men in America since we fight for Freedom? At least, that's the montra, isn't it.

Our founders were imprefect men. Jefferson in particular. A man who could so eloquently declare the Independance of a nation and freedom of man, could posess another. A man who railed against government debt, went into record debt to purchase land.

Power corrupts, and it is fortunate that there were men in the house and senate to temper that power and NOT pass such legislation to allow the government force men against their will into the service of the government.

 

[ATOMonkey]

We suspend freedom so that we can preserve freedom, we abandon the free market so that we can preserve the free market...

What else will we give to the government in the hope that one day we might be able to preserve it for long enough to give it up again?

Freedom sucks. Freedom means making difficult choices that are neither expedient nor convenient. It means sacrifice and hardship, but of our own choosing, not at the behest of another.

 

[thebishopp]

There was even conscription during the Revolutionary War, and later proposed by Adams, Jefferson, Madison & Washington.

And several of our founding fathers realized that there were tyrants in all of us. The Constitution is supposed to chain that beast down whenever it tries to rear it's head.

Give a man power and he wants more, no one is incorruptible. This is true for even the best of us. That is what it means to be "constantly vigilant", not only for the enemy without, but also for the enemy within. We can be, and often are, our worst enemy.

Take note that in the beginning Jefferson did not favor the U.S. even having a standing army. He wrote a series of letters in 1787 urging Madison and others to write it into the Constitution (no standing army).

His idea was that instead of a standing army, every able-bodied man in the nation was to be a member of a local militia. If the nation was invaded word would come down to the local level and every man in the country would be the army.


You include Jefferson in the list of people who support the draft though you were not clear on his reasonings.

As president, Jefferson slashed the size of the army to just over 3000 soldiers, closing forts and cutting costs. But because the citizen militia had never been formalized at a federal level he couldn't get rid of it altogether.

Jefferson wrote to Monroe: "We must train and classify the whole of our male citizens, and make military instruction a regular part of collegiate education. We can never be safe till this is done."

Once Jefferson left office, he came to the conclusion that if he couldn't get rid of the army, then every man should be a member of it, if only for a brief time. This would insure diversity of opinions in the army, and minimize the chances of a military coup or a military culture that could become so powerful it would influence the government or seduce the president into playing commander-in-chief too often in foreign adventures."

That last bit sound a little prophetic? It should, it's been happening for awhile now.

In fact it also illustrates his thoughts about exactly what our "army" would and should be doing. Which is defending our nation should it be needed, and NOT running around the world playing police man or supporting our government's political agendas.

It was to defend ourselves in an INVASION. He was pretty clear on this.

What people fail to realize is that we have never been arbitrarily attacked, for no reason. People either just don't known about our "prewar" involvement in situations, or don't want to acknowledge some of the things we do to illicit an "enemy's" response.

As I noted above, Jefferson was opposed to getting involved in the politics of other nations. Specifically he stated:

"The true theory of our Constitution is surely the wisest and best, that the States are independent as to everything within themselves, and united as to everything respecting foreign affairs. Let the General Government be reduced to foreign concerns only, and let our affairs be disentangled from those of all other nations, except as to commerce, which the merchants will manage the better, the more they are left free to manage for themselves, and our General Government may be reduced to a very simple organization, and a very inexpensive one; a few plain duties to be performed by a few servants."

Of course Hamilton's desire for a federalist government and nation was quite different and more closely matches the system we have today.

 

[badwolf.usmc]

War of 1812 – A regular army is authorized by Congress. Recruitment efforts include thirteen-month enlistment periods, a sixteen-dollar sign-up bonus and the promise of three months' pay and one hundred sixty acres of land upon discharge. Despite these enticements, the army is never effectively recruited and Congress authorizes President James Monroe to call up one hundred thousand state militia. Some states refuse to order any men to be sent out and the soldiers who do serve are largely untrained and frequently unwilling to face the enemy.

Read more on TeacherVision: Great Books - TeacherVision.com
​

I would think the war of 1812 disproved the theory that if our nation was invaded a massive number of people would join up. Good thing the British considered the US a sideshow in their war against France.

 

[Pocketman]

Except that even the Supreme Court is not permitted to simply ignore the Constitution, which they have done before with the 2nd Amendment at least. The 13th clearly speaks against involuntary servitude except in the case of criminal forced labor, and the Supreme Court saying that the draft is legal despite what plain English says does not make them right.

At the risk of being insensitive, what you interpret as plain English doesn't hold the same weight as what the SCOTUS interprets. While we've been focusing on the Supreme Court, we have remedy through the Congress. Court says the draft is constitutional, but it is Congress that enacted the legislation. We, the people, have the ability to let our representatives know our feelings on such things. Congress can repeal the draft.

We complain about this right and that law, yet it is we who have blindly sent the same people back to Washington. Slaves do not select their masters.

 

[thebishopp]

At the risk of being insensitive, what you interpret as plain English doesn't hold the same weight as what the SCOTUS interprets. While we've been focusing on the Supreme Court, we have remedy through the Congress. Court says the draft is constitutional, but it is Congress that enacted the legislation. We, the people, have the ability to let our representatives know our feelings on such things. Congress can repeal the draft.

We complain about this right and that law, yet it is we who have blindly sent the same people back to Washington. Slaves do not select their masters.

While in theory this is true, in practical application it is not.

We vote out the republicans because we think they are messing things up, then we vote out the democrats the next time because they didn't do the things they said they were going to do and are messing things up, then we vote out the republicans because they didn't do the things they promised and are messing things up, so then we vote back in the democrats and then the republicans and then the democrats and then the republicans.... I can go on forever.

In the end they aren't all that different.

The problem is that being a politician is a full time job. They have the keys to the coffers and each batch of new politicians or old one's re-elected only care about keeping a hold of those keys.

If we really wanted representatives that gave a damn, they wouldn't be making as much money as they do and would have to have jobs back "home".

Give them a small salary, say 30k a year and expenses to and from Washington when it's time to vote.

Problem is that it is not going to happen. How many politicians are going to vote for a DECREASE in their salaries? Know anybody running (other than Ron Paul) that might do that? If you do, are there enough of them that actual reform could occur? I bet not.

 

[Pocketman]

While in theory this is true, in practical application it is not.

We vote out the republicans because we think they are messing things up, then we vote out the democrats the next time because they didn't do the things they said they were going to do and are messing things up, then we vote out the republicans because they didn't do the things they promised and are messing things up, so then we vote back in the democrats and then the republicans and then the democrats and then the republicans.... I can go on forever.

In the end they aren't all that different.

The problem is that being a politician is a full time job. They have the keys to the coffers and each batch of new politicians or old one's re-elected only care about keeping a hold of those keys.

If we really wanted representatives that gave a damn, they wouldn't be making as much money as they do and would have to have jobs back "home".

Give them a small salary, say 30k a year and expenses to and from Washington when it's time to vote.

Problem is that it is not going to happen. How many politicians are going to vote for a DECREASE in their salaries? Know anybody running (other than Ron Paul) that might do that? If you do, are there enough of them that actual reform could occur? I bet not.

There is no doubt the career politicians have made themselves a class all their own. Our current fiscal problem is largely due to Congress making political promises to keep themselves in power and then expecting us to pay for those promises. More than once I've voted against an incumbent for that reason alone. It's not a small task turning things around, but not impossible.

IMO, the root cause is self interest. Politicians and voters are human and naturally look out for their own interests. To be quite honest, I'm all for mom and apple pie, but I'm more interested in my investments, taxes and personal freedoms. As I once posted, a tax deduction benefits me. A tax loophole benefits someone else.

 

[tenring]

For those who fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know!

 

[rambone]

Joslar can I ask you a question? You just posted this in another thread.

Happy effin birthday Barry Insane O'Bummer! Thanks to your brilliant leadership, you've driven us out of the ditch and over the cliff. Your transformation of the United States is almost complete. American exceptionalism will no longer eclipse the exceptionalism of your average third-world banana republic.

... and you said this earlier.

Really, what does it matter that someone on the internet thinks those who are unwilling to answer the call of country are worthless pussies barely above welfare-cheat scumbags?

If you think the country has been transformed into a banana-republic (AKA a dictatorship)... then HOW can you support the draft?

You seem to believe that the country is being destroyed from within. Me too!!

Isn't it a little strange to want your dictator to have unlimited power to forcibly draft the "free" citizens to serve his globalist interests? Can you admit that the actions of a banana-republic government might not be in the best interests of the citizens? Shouldn't the people be able to protest a rogue government by not participating in its destruction, and the destruction of others?

Really I want everyone to think about this. If you think the U.S. is on its way to tyranny, that the president hates America, that we are becoming a socialist/fascist/whatever nation, that the Commander-in-Chief is a Marxist Radical Pinko Terrorist Blah Blah Blah... then HOW can you not see the insanity of supporting the draft?

Total, unstoppable power to rip away your sons and daughters to be used to attack anyone that the dictator wants. What could be more patriotic?

Shouldn't there be checks and balances somewhere in this discussion? Isn't that an still an American ideal? Like providing citizens with a choice, and give their consent before aiding the oligarch's master plan?

In good times or in bad, I think its a horrible and naive idea to give so much power to your government. I guess I'm not as trusting of my government as some "conservatives."

 

[ThrottleJockey]

In case it hasn't already been said, throw that card away, join oathkeepers and then just SERVE. If you join the armed forces you don't need to worry about the card. Also if you volunteer, you get to choose what branch but if you are drafted you have no say. Example...you want to lessen your risk, join the coast guard but if you get drafted you will be infantry/cannon-fodder. Oh and DON"T carry the radio!

 

[sloughfoot]

There is a draft? I know young folks have to register for the draft, but I did not know that people were being drafted.

I think it might be time for folks to calm down and take a breath.

We live in dangerous times and I think I would be proud to stand up with every person that has posted in this thread. And it might even come to that.

Funny, as I read the wide and diverse views throughout this thread, I can imagine that the Continental soldiers with bleeding feet and empty bellies were saying the exact same things at Valley Forge in that terrible winter.

Maybe I am just a romantic, but we are a nation of rebels who hold our liberty near and dear.

I am honored that I can read all the firey speech on this matter. Where else in the world can that happen?

My best regards to you all, but I have to admit that this thread has grown tiresome to me. I am going away now.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

There is a draft? I know young folks have to register for the draft, but I did not know that people were being drafted.

I think it might be time for folks to calm down and take a breath.

We live in dangerous times and I think I would be proud to stand up with every person that has posted in this thread. And it might even come to that.

Funny, as I read the wide and diverse views throughout this thread, I can imagine that the Continental soldiers with bleeding feet and empty bellies were saying the exact same things at Valley Forge in that terrible winter.

Maybe I am just a romantic, but we are a nation of rebels who hold our liberty near and dear.

I am honored that I can read all the firey speech on this matter. Where else in the world can that happen?

My best regards to you all, but I have to admit that this thread has grown tiresome to me. I am going away now.

Apparently due to the advent of "twitter" just about everywhere except China. Most recently, all over the middle east.

 

[Duncan]

Since so many of the anti-draft people also worship the 9 black robed despots, you will feel better knowing that they have spoken on the issue.


Conscription in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did not know this thanks ... it blows my theory of a 14th And. violation ... but...

can you be forced to " volunteer " ?

Duncan

 

[Expat]

They force kids to volunteer in the schools now. They are often required to volunteer so many days of community service for school.

 

[rambone]

They force kids to volunteer in the schools now. They are often required to volunteer so many days of community service for school.

Have they started teaching kids that 2+2=5 yet?