Compelling young Atlasians to work for the State, and to fight, kill, possibly die or become severely wounded in a war, is slavery. There is no way of getting around this, from a moral perspective. Continuing to even allow conscription to be an option enables the government to reach beyond its moral boundaries and jeopardizes the ability of one to own one's self by shaping how they live their lives. To put it simply, if the government wages war to defend a free nation and uses conscription to do it, then there is no longer a free country to defend.
As wormyguy has said, this country is very capable of defending itself in the event of an attack- both in the homefront, and the domestic front. If a foreign military dares to threaten this country, their plans will swiftly be put to a stop.
Scott- this is going to come across grumpy and condescending but know that isn't my intentention...
There is a difference between theory and reality. Theoretically the last statement in your first paragraph makes sense...but in reality the draft exists as an option to ensure the freedoms we have now will continue. Wormyguy says that in the event we needed a draft- citizens would rise up and if thy wouldn't- the nation deserves to be defeated. However- people are individualistic... if there is an existential threat to our nation, it is one to evry citizen as well and I don't see young men signing up in droves to bet placed on the front lines...do you?
The way you and wormyguy make it seem- it's as if we mandate military service or draft kids every other day. It hasn't happened for nearly four decades and all of us- even me, the biggest hawk here- agree it shouldnt be used except in extraordinary cases. Why don't we amend this to have the Senate authorize conscription by a 3/4 vote?
I posted above and see that you posted more in response to Joyce...
OK...as I mentioned in my response to wormyguy- neither our constitution or any speech by a Foudning Father is a suicide pact. But in case it sways you, here is what Jefferson said- "[a] strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means." This regarded the Louisiana Purchase which he wasn't permitted to do and which would've been as Washington put it- an imperial Presidency. Bt he did it and we're glad he did! Look at what Lincoln pulled during the Civil War- he recognized that in exceptional cases- we must act for self-preservation
