You mention compulsory military service isn’t mentioned in the Constitution.
Wrong.
Unless specifically exempted, ALL able bodied men were in the militia. The draft just naturally grew out of that.
Sounds like you may have forgotten to register and required, and now find out you screwed yourself over.
I just don’t understand how anyone can refuse to do their civic duty when called upon.
“Indentured servitude” sounds like slavery and the gimedats wanting restitution.
Apparently you missed the part where I emphasized that I wasn’t talking about the moral rectitude of the draft. I’m looking at it from strictly a logical, legal point of view.
But you can’t rise above your prejudices long enough to examine the objective framework of the argument.
I repeat: the Constitution does NOT compel military service IN ANY FORM. If you can city the article where it does, I will withdraw my statement.
Involuntary servitude IS slavery. That’s my point exactly! A draft meets the legal definition of involuntary servitude, which means a draft violates Amendment 13. Yet the courts, through some contorted “logic,” have ruled that it doesn’t.
This isn’t about whether I believe in a draft or not. It’s about the obligation of a super-judiciary body to base its rulings on logic and principle rather than political convenience.
“I just don’t understand how anyone can refuse to do their civic duty when called upon.”
Our courts are abused to the point that it not a civic duty to entertain these bogus lawsuits.
“Unless specifically exempted, ALL able bodied men were in the militia.”
Actually, the constitution doesn’t specify who is in the militia. It just says the States may appoint officers and the president can call upon them. It doesn’t lay claim that all abled body men were in the militia. In fact, laws were passed to try state who may be in the militia and those laws determined that by age.