Skip to comments.
Universal National Service Act of 2003
Congressional Record ^
Posted on 02/14/2003 11:52:24 AM PST by floridarocks
Universal service for males and females ages 18-26. New Senate Bill s.89. Can see it at http://thomas.loc.gov
TOPICS: Activism/Chapters
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-153 next last
Is America ready for the draft and compulsary universal service?
To: floridarocks
This is unconstitutional (13th amendment):
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction
Also, it's prohibited under the 9th and 10th amendments.
2
posted on
02/14/2003 11:57:06 AM PST
by
Mulder
(Guns and chicks rule)
To: floridarocks
Personally, I have no problem whatever with a Universal Service program. It needn't just be the military, but could apply to all sorts of programs.
Given the spoiled rotteness of the run of our youth out there, I think it would do all young people between 18 and 25 a lot of good to give service to their nation, either in the military or in some other area.
Let the flames begin.
To: floridarocks
Everytime I see this kind of liberal crap it reminds me of the Clintoons . GOD I can't wait to pi$$ on his grave .
4
posted on
02/14/2003 11:58:30 AM PST
by
Renegade
To: Mulder
That's what I thought. So what is up with s.89.
To: floridarocks
--hopefully a resounding "NO"---
--if any grandchild of mine is faced with anything but a military draft out of national necessity, I'll pay for their way to anywhere to escape it--
To: MineralMan
Personally, I have no problem whatever with a Universal Service programWhich other parts of the Constitution do you want to trash?
7
posted on
02/14/2003 12:01:05 PM PST
by
Camachee
To: MineralMan
Given the spoiled rotteness of the run of our youth out there One of the biggest reasons that kids are spoiled is because of massive gov't involvement (public schools)in their lives from the age of 5-18.
So even more gov't involvement from the age of 18-26 is going to fix the problem? I don't think so.
I think it would do all young people between 18 and 25 a lot of good to give service to their nation, either in the military or in some other area.
Just like the public schools do them a world of good? Folks who think you're going to have some ex-marine drilling the concepts of honor and integrity into these kids are smoking crack.
It's going to be nothing less than PC indoctrination with severe penalties for those who don't go along with the program, or commit "thought crimes" during the duration of the program.
8
posted on
02/14/2003 12:04:21 PM PST
by
Mulder
(Guns and chicks rule)
To: Mulder
The Eight!
9
posted on
02/14/2003 12:05:32 PM PST
by
Abcdefg
To: Mulder
The original intent of the 13th Amendment was to prohibit chattel slavery, as existed in the South prior to the Civil War. Keep in mind that the Union commenced the first Federal military draft in 1863, and that President Lincoln and the Republicans, who supported and passed legislation to effect said draft also supported this amendment. However, the limitation of the Federal government to certain, specified powers by the 9th and 10th Amendments would appear to preclude a Federal draft. The Constitution authorizes the Federal government the authority to raise armies and provide for a navy. However, that authority cannot be construed to include a military draft.
Nonetheless, none of these amendments preclude State governments from establishing conscription. The English common law concepts that underlie the establishment of militias place all able-bodied males within certain age ranges (like 18 to 50) as members of the unorganized militia. These men are, under the common law, eligible to be called up by State governments to repel invasions or to suppress insurrections.
To: MineralMan
Personally, I have no problem whatever with a Universal Service program. It needn't just be the military, but could apply to all sorts of programs. let me guess, your over the age of 26? If it passes, how many bills are we away from being hauled off to collective farms?
To: floridarocks
The state doesn't own the individual. The individual owns the state. Compulsory National Service is sickening totalitarianism. It's the one proposal out there that I actually think would justify armed resistance.
People came to this country to get away from rulers who thought they could get away with that stuff.
12
posted on
02/14/2003 12:12:06 PM PST
by
XJarhead
To: floridarocks
Hee hee.
I say go for it by all means, neo-cons!
And our pathetic 1% Libertarian vote will overnight become more than enough to sweep ALL your sorry selves from office!
They ought to call this the "Universal We Don't Want to Be Re-elected Act" LOL!!
13
posted on
02/14/2003 12:12:33 PM PST
by
freeeee
To: Wallace T.
"The Constitution authorizes the Federal government the authority to raise armies and provide for a navy. However, that authority cannot be construed to include a military draft.
"
Apparently, that authority exists, since we have had a draft in place or on standby since the Civil War. Those who say it is unconsitutional to have a draft are arguing against what is well-established. I have not researched whether the draft has been before the SCOTUS, but I'd guess it has.
To: rmmcdaniell
"Personally, I have no problem whatever with a Universal Service program. It needn't just be the military, but could apply to all sorts of programs.
let me guess, your over the age of 26? If it passes, how many bills are we away from being hauled off to collective farms?
"
I am, indeed, over the age of 26, and served my nation in the USAF in the late 60's. My father served in WWII, and my grandfather in WWI. None of us were drafted, but volunteered for service.
I realize that my view is unpopular, but I hold it despite that fact.
To: Mulder
"I also think there are prices too high to pay to save the United States. Conscription is one of them. Conscription is slavery, and I don't think that any people or nation has a right to save itself at the price of slavery for anyone, no matter what name it is called. We have had the draft for twenty years now; I think this is shameful. If a country can't save itself through the volunteer service of its own free people, then I say: Let the damned thing go down the drain!"
Robert A Heinlein
Guest of Honor Speech at the XIXth World Science Fiction Convention, Seattle, 1961
sums it up for me.
16
posted on
02/14/2003 12:22:08 PM PST
by
Kozak
To: MineralMan
I am, indeed, over the age of 26, and served my nation in the USAF in the late 60's. My father served in WWII, and my grandfather in WWI. None of us were drafted, but volunteered for service. I realize that my view is unpopular, but I hold it despite that fact.
Tell me what business it is of the government to force people into service in non-military applications? You may have served in the military but you picked the wrong country to serve. If you had really wanted to defend you way of life and thinking you would have found a better fit in the red army.
To: MineralMan
The first test of the Constitutionality of the military draft occured in 1918, where the defendant cited the 13th Amendment as the reason the draft was invalid. Inasmuch as the 13th Amendment was clearly intended to ban chattel slavery, not service in the Federal military, the grounds were invalid and the Supreme Court at the time correctly ruled in this matter.
The problem with Supreme Court and lower court decisions since at least the New Deal era is that previous jurisprudence and traditional interpretations were abandoned in favor of a view of the Constitution as a living document. In order words, it means whatever the justices say it means, rather than the original intent of the framers. This concept has led to a massive expansion of Federal power at the expense of states rights and individual liberties. Even jurists like Antonin Scalia and Robert Bork, generally considered conservative, accept the "living document" view of the Constitution to some extent. Also, many "law and order" advocates look at the draft as a type of right-wing social engineering and therefore approve it even if they scream at left-wing social engineering like affirmative action.
If we are to be true to the Constitution's original intent, there cannot be a Federal military draft unless it is amended to do so. Anything else is just another example of the "penumbras" that liberals see in the document and that conservatices decry.
To: rmmcdaniell
I don't think so. Service to my nation is deeply ingrained in my family. And that nation is the USA. When did you serve?
To: MineralMan
I agree that it wouldn't do them any harm, but this is going to be HORRENDOUSLY EXPENSIVE. Can you imagine? It's just a giant government jobs program. I thought that was why we have fought communism all these years?
20
posted on
02/14/2003 12:32:41 PM PST
by
walden
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-153 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson