US Senate votes to enslave women into military

While the Orlando killings had the country distracted, the US Senate voted to require all women to register for military slavery. Most of the opposition, from Republicans, isn’t principled opposition to the draft but merely opposition to including women. Ted Cruz said, “The idea that we should forcibly conscript young girls in combat to my mind makes little sense at all” Forcibly conscripting young boys into combat makes perfect sense to him, though. Rand Paul introduced a bill to abolish Selective Service, but it appears to be going nowhere. Whether Trump or Clinton gets elected, we’re going to have a president who makes Obama look as if he deserved his Peace Prize.

The government will never end the registration of people for forced, life-endangering service while people comply. People have to refuse. If you’re called on to register for the draft, don’t register. If you’re a teacher instructed to direct your students to register, refuse. It’s time to finish what the abolitionists started.

Advertisements
Posted in General. Tags: , . 4 Comments »

4 Responses to “US Senate votes to enslave women into military”

  1. Eyal Mozes Says:

    I don’t think you answered any of my points in my comments to your last post on this subject, and I stand by everything I said there.

    The one thing I have to add is that you provide no argument at all for your claim that refusal to comply would be effective towards ending draft registration; and your claim makes no sense at all.

    I can see, theoretically, how widespread refusal to comply with an actual draft could lead government officials to decide to end it; if they can’t get enough soldiers, and if so many people refuse to comply that they can’t afford to prosecute any significant portion of them, then they might decide that just ending the draft is less trouble. But when we have registration for a non-existent draft, how does widespread refusal to comply cause any problems for the government? Its only effects are to lower the cost of maintaining the registration lists, and to give government officials an extra weapon; they can’t prosecute everyone who refuses, or any significant portion of them, but they can selectively prosecute, or threaten to prosecute, those who haven’t registered and then become outspoken critics of the government or make trouble in some other area. Why would government officials see failure to comply as a problem, and what possible incentive can it give them for ending registration?

    And of course, we don’t need to theorize about this. As you acknowledged in your comments on your last post, compliance rates with draft registration are already very low. If widespread refusal to comply were an effective means towards ending registration then it would have ended already. I certainly agree that it would be good to end registration (though with all the bad things government is doing that actually have consequences, I would question the high priority you’re giving it); but if registration is ever ended it would be as a result of public debate, not of disobedience.

    Failing to register for the draft is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison. The probability of actually getting prosecuted are clearly low, but I don’t know what exactly the probability is. I also don’t know to what extent being an outspoken critic of the government or of the present administration would increase the probability of getting prosecuted for failing to register; or what other consequences there might be to one’s future prospects and what doors may be closed as a result even without getting prosecuted. It’s unreasonable to ask young people to risk even a small chance of such consequences for a purely symbolic and totally ineffective protest.

    • Gary McGath Says:

      I stand by what I said. The more people who refuse, the weaker the government’s position will be. Refusal is one of the best ways to create public debate, other than the current debate between registering everybody and registering just some people. Some advocates of the legislation are arguing that women could be forced to serve in other ways besides combat; this could lead to expanding the draft to general compulsory national service, and reactivating it on that basis.
      When people just passively obey, nothing changes.

  2. Curt Smothers Says:

    Gary,
    As a retired U.S. Navy Officer, who would have been drafted had I not enlisted in 1962, I believe your characterization of military service as “slavery” is a bit extreme. It was definitely involuntary during the years when youngsters were drafted to fight in an unpopular war, but now it is absolutely voluntary. If you don’t wish to serve, I understand. I served with many who joined the Navy to avoid the going to Viet Nam, and they were less than a credit to their families and cared not much for serving their country.

    Registering for the draft for both men and women is, as you undoubtedly realize, is a precaution in case of the unlikely requirement for a quick military call up. However, if someone’s libertarian principles (or whatever else causes them to hate our government) are so overriding, I’d suggest a conscientious objector application or (in the case of one of my brothers-in-law, a move to Canada).

    Or you could just do like that old Peter Paul and Mary song goes, “Take your place on the great mandela…” :-)

    But, puhleeze! Don’t call us military people slaves. How many slaves do you know draw thousands per year in retired pay and benefits, a good college deal for their kids, and the satisfaction of serving this kind and great country.

    Peace.

    • Gary McGath Says:

      You chose to enlist. I’m not calling you a slave.

      However, the purpose of draft registration is to force people to serve in the military. People who are forced to leave their homes do jobs or be thrown in jail are slaves. How well they’re compensated is irrelevant. Merely claiming to be a conscientious objector amounts to saying, “Don’t enslave me, enslave somebody else.” Fleeing the country doesn’t help those who can’t flee.

      I was in college during the Vietnam years. I remember when many of us were gathered in the lobby of our dorm as the numbers for the first lottery were called out. Those who got low numbers had to choose to submit, to go to jail, or to flee the country. None of them cheered at the great pay they were going to be forced to accept if they lived.

      Also, opposition to the draft isn’t grounds for conscientious objector status.


Comments are closed.