Is A Military Draft Constitutional?

Jarod said:
They would also have a powerless non-existent Federal Government with no ability to take any action because judicial balancing would be outlawed, if someone did not like a law all they would have to do is claim any Constitutional right was violated and the Feds would have to obey.
Click to expand...

Again for your information the Constitution provides AN AMENDMENT PROCESS. If enough of the federal government, the states and the people agree we need a federal law that isn't authorized by the Constitution we collectively can AMEND the Constitution to authorize the feds to make such a law and thereby do it CONSTITUTIONALLY.
 
Celticguy said:
You seem to have trouble seeing that conscription does not = slavery or involuntary servitude. Slaves are not paid.
Click to expand...

slavery and involuntary servitude are not the same. if it's not voluntary, it's involuntary. whether a person gets paid or not is irrelevant. are you still having trouble understanding THAT concept now?
 
Celticguy said:
Lincoln had to use the draft as nobody wanted to enlist.
Click to expand...

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude was not in effect during the Civil War. The Civil War ended in April 1865 and the 13th amendment was ratified in December of 1865.

Your argument here is totally irrelevant to the issue of constitutionality of a military draft.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it's a partisan thing. republicans shouldn't be able to use 'national emergencies' to override the limits of power, but democrats should be able to do so because they do it for the peoples own good......i mean for the good of the people. yeah, that's it.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah! I forgot the old bogus "General Welfare" horseshit perpetrated by the neo-commies, huh?
 
Celticguy said:
You seem to have trouble seeing that conscription does not = slavery or involuntary servitude. Slaves are not paid.
Click to expand...

If you're drafted and you don't want to go to war, you're forced into "servitude involuntarily". Say it isn't so!!!!!

It's known history that Jefferson gave money/payment to Sally Hemmings his concubine slave.
 
Celticguy said:
You seem to have trouble seeing that conscription does not = slavery or involuntary servitude. Slaves are not paid.
Click to expand...

So if I give you a nickle at the point of a gun or threaten to send your sorry ass to jail unless you kiss my ass, that's not "involuntary servitude" when you actually get on your knees and
I drop my pants and you actually kiss my beautiful ass, right commie?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
slavery and involuntary servitude are not the same. if it's not voluntary, it's involuntary. whether a person gets paid or not is irrelevant. are you still having trouble understanding THAT concept now?
Click to expand...
Just as with jury duty, it is possible to escape conscriptopn. It may be impossible to demonstrate consciensious objection without a demonstrated faith but that is just personal choices on the part of the individual. "Dont want to" not really enough.
 
Classic Liberal said:
For your information at the beginning of WWII volunteers were being turned away because the enlistment system couldn't keep up with the willing sign-ups. Thus most simply waited for their draft notice which they likely would have never need to get if the draft had never been in effect.
Click to expand...

Okay, so? That does not mean that the Government would have had enough troops without the draft, it just means that in the beginning more wanted to volunteer than the system was set up to take in.
 
Classic Liberal said:
Please produce the FACTS!!!!!

Then answer what fucking good is a Constitution that provides to the people a written guarantee of individual rights and limitations to government if politicians and courts can ignore the strict construction of that guarantee and Willy-Nilly make law that you call some kind of "balancing act"????? Where's this bogus balancing-act written in the Constitution?
Click to expand...
Well, Congress has the ability to call forth the militia right? And the Militia is all able bodied men age 17-45 right? So...yeah that's a draft.
 
The Balancing Test is not in the Constitution, but it is inherently necessary. Its as if GM was selling cars, but not manufacturing keys to start them.

The Constitution created the Federal Judiciary to determine cases in controversy.

If party one says, my Constitutional issue is more important than yours, who and how is that question to be determined if a balancing test is not used. How is the case in controversy is to be sorted out if the Court cant interoperate the Constitution?
 
"The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the Constitution.

Could it be the intention of those who gave this power to say that, in using it, the Constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the Constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises?

This is too extravagant to be maintained.

In some cases then, the Constitution must be looked into by the judges. And if they can open it at all, what part of it are they forbidden to read or to obey?
"

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137
 
Celticguy said:
Just as with jury duty, it is possible to escape conscriptopn. It may be impossible to demonstrate consciensious objection without a demonstrated faith but that is just personal choices on the part of the individual. "Dont want to" not really enough.
Click to expand...

and if 'I don't want to' isn't good enough then it is indeed involuntary servitude, whether you are paid or not.
 
Jarod said:
The Balancing Test is not in the Constitution, but it is inherently necessary. Its as if GM was selling cars, but not manufacturing keys to start them.
Click to expand...
sorry, this is a non-sensical analogy and cannot apply.

Jarod said:
The Constitution created the Federal Judiciary to determine cases in controversy.
Click to expand...
yes, according to the constitution, not to decide things that weren't clear.

Jarod said:
If party one says, my Constitutional issue is more important than yours, who and how is that question to be determined if a balancing test is not used. How is the case in controversy is to be sorted out if the Court cant interoperate the Constitution?
Click to expand...
is your fourth amendment right more important than my second amendment right?
 
Jarod said:
"The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the Constitution.

Could it be the intention of those who gave this power to say that, in using it, the Constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the Constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises?

This is too extravagant to be maintained.

In some cases then, the Constitution must be looked into by the judges. And if they can open it at all, what part of it are they forbidden to read or to obey?
"

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137
Click to expand...

are you really trying to use a USSC case that assumed a power to the judiciary that it was never assigned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top