Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Universal National Service Act of 2003
self

Posted on 11/12/2003 9:49:33 AM PST by hsmomx3

Anyone hear about this?

"The Universal National Service Act of 2003 "amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females" and declares "that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 26 to perform a two-year period of national service"


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: draft
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-235 next last
To: tpaine
You anti-military? Anti-constitutional?

You illiterate?

I said I was pro-professional military. But your type only responds with hyperbole and misdirection when trying to muddy the waters.

Thomas Paine would be ashamed of your devotion to big government.

181 posted on 11/12/2003 1:15:20 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
And how many is "all of them?"

Just so we know where you're really coming from.

182 posted on 11/12/2003 1:17:07 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
You have no damn idea what I have and have not faced in life. Unless you have proof otherwise, pretend to be a man and apologize.

I refuse to apologize to someone who seeks to enslave me and others to laws to do not apply to herself.

You want to talk life, you have no idea how much socialist double-standard BS I have been force to endere in my life. I know who people who personally enjoyed and got off seeing me suffer.

Given everything I have been through, I am a very polite person. But if an Ivory Tower Socialist Urban Ditz (ITSUD) like you seeks to make me your enemy and wants to further enslave me to the state, you better watch you back because I am going seek to ram that tyranny right back down YOUR throat.

183 posted on 11/12/2003 1:19:19 PM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
Just because *I* don't agree with it doesn't mean that I get to pick and choose. This isn't a freelance thing, you know.

Um...it IS a freedom thing. Freedom to not risk death at some socialist's whim. Freedom to defend one's country when a threat is perceived...and freedom to care for one's own when a threat is not perceived. Would you REALLY blindly trust your life to those in Congress?

Interesting they seek to eliminate the 2nd Amendment, and replace the void with conscription.

184 posted on 11/12/2003 1:23:47 PM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: RunningJoke
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." --- William Pitt

Great quote. W.H. Auden had an epigram similar: "The tyrant's device: Whatever is possible, is necesssary"

185 posted on 11/12/2003 1:25:32 PM PST by avenir (Who's Afraid of the Art of Noise?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
The military draft factor is a red herring here. This bill goes WAY beyond legitimate national defense needs - it is a whole new form of taxation.

Congress has taxed workers financially about as much as possible (cumulative 50-75% rates), they are considering taxing your life. This bill is not about conscription during special needs of the nation, it is about FORCING people to spend two years of their lives working directly for the government. For deficit-spending congresscritters, that is a LOT cheaper and more efficient than trying to squeeze more money out of you: rather than attempting to extract what little is left of your income and pay that to a well-compensated federal employee, they just take YOU and make you work for little or no pay.

This isn't about defending the country.
This is about taking taxation in new and horrifying directions.

186 posted on 11/12/2003 1:28:52 PM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
freeeee wrote:


I support our Constitution. It says no slavery, its SCOTUS that once again doesn't respect it.


BTW, you usually come out on the side of freedom. I'm surprised seeing you pro-draft. Why is that?





You're not supporting our commmitment to defend our Constitution by inanely babbling about that obligation being a form of slavery.

We could fulfill that duty easily by a short term 'boot camp' for all young people while retaining our all professional armed forces.

Freedom would be served.. What possible ~logical~ objection do you have?
187 posted on 11/12/2003 1:29:31 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but FRs flying monkey squad brings out the Rickenbacker in me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: CholeraJoe
Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918)

Very interesting. This presumes/trusts the conscription is for legitimate national defense. Read the bill carefully - it is not.

188 posted on 11/12/2003 1:30:01 PM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
You're the one unable to read my comments 'doc'.. Be ashamed of your own hype.
189 posted on 11/12/2003 1:32:02 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but FRs flying monkey squad brings out the Rickenbacker in me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
"Given everything I have been through, I am a very polite person."

Whoaaa, hold on there toad. Given all the heated rhetoric you've been spouting here, you've been anything but polite. You call someone a "liar" when you have no idea about the person you are talking to.

As far as I'm concerned, your term "Ivory Tower Socialist Urban Ditz (ITSUD)" applies more to your attitude than anything I've seen in this discussion.

And personally, I find your claim that those who disagree with you are seeking to "enslave" you to be simply overinflated, overheated and stupid rhetoric. Cry me a river.

So, chill out bud, and get a grip. You are defeating your own arguments with this type of nonsense. You sure as hell don't convince me. Probably because you are wrong.

190 posted on 11/12/2003 1:33:16 PM PST by el_texicano
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
It also might pull college students out of school in order to further feed the ravenous state.

More dumbing-down; more deconstruction.

According to "Business Week," U.S. colleges are now 60 percent female to 40 percent male. What happened to 50-50?

Doe anyone really think Chelsea would get drafted into this? It's simply to thin the male herd. Pathetic.

191 posted on 11/12/2003 1:35:27 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Freedom would be served.. What possible ~logical~ objection do you have?

The objection is the absence of the freedom to say "no".

The 2nd Amendment explicitly provides for the security of the nation by allowing citizens to arm themselves - without compulsion. As others have pointed out in various ways: if the threat is real enough, people will defend the nation...but if you must force them to, either the threat is not real or the nation gets what it deserves.

'tis absurd to disarm the people yet make service compulsary.

192 posted on 11/12/2003 1:35:32 PM PST by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: el_texicano
Whoaaa, hold on there toad. Given all the heated rhetoric you've been spouting here, you've been anything but polite. You call someone a "liar" when you have no idea about the person you are talking to.

You call me toad than complain about me calling someone a liar.

You sir are a hypocrite.

193 posted on 11/12/2003 1:36:10 PM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
grow up sir, your immaturity is showing. You are a sir aren't you?
194 posted on 11/12/2003 1:37:03 PM PST by el_texicano
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
This isn't about defending the country. This is about taking taxation in new and horrifying directions.

I beat you to that logical conclusion in post 61.

But good point.

195 posted on 11/12/2003 1:38:28 PM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
You're not supporting our commmitment to defend our Constitution by inanely babbling about that obligation being a form of slavery.

Come now, tpaine. I'm not inanely babbling. I'm using logic and reason. Please be civil.

We could fulfill that duty easily by a short term 'boot camp' for all young people while retaining our all professional armed forces.

Defend the Constitution, with draftees? Are you going to use them to seige Congress? Really, you of all people ought to know that the biggest threat to our Constitution is right here at home.

Freedom would be served.

Freedom is slavery? (where have I heard that one...)

What possible ~logical~ objection do you have?

Vietnam
Korea
Kosovo
Somalia
Bosnia
Panama
Lebanon
Iraq

196 posted on 11/12/2003 1:39:46 PM PST by freeeee (I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: el_texicano
grow up sir, your immaturity is showing. You are a sir aren't you?

You are the one who needs to grow up. I am not the one who is baselessly name calling. I called NYC Chick a lair because that is what she did, she has not faced that situation yet and therefore does not know if her views will not change.

197 posted on 11/12/2003 1:42:03 PM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup; NYC GOP Chick
Besides, I could have called you an "ass", because that was how you are acting in this discussion.

But...I called you a toad because you are getting "run over" on the highway of logic, reason and argument.

198 posted on 11/12/2003 1:44:39 PM PST by el_texicano
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
Your post #186 is a gem.

I wish more people would look hard at this bill. All they see is a flag.

199 posted on 11/12/2003 1:45:49 PM PST by freeeee (I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Careful. There's a world of difference between Vietnam and Iraq.
200 posted on 11/12/2003 1:46:51 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-235 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson