[tpaine]

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?

[ctdonath2]

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.

[freeeee]

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