• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

57 to 1

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
So much for the 13th.
With lengthy complicated arcane rationalization, the 13th
can be construed to allow involuntary servitude, & ignore
equal protection when it serves the wants of government,
ie, cheaply paid conscripts forced to do the nation's deadly
dirty work.

Section 1. 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.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
This whole debate is largely stupid, There is not Draft and without another bill to reinstate one, all this law says that rather than the government using the information it has to send registration notices to eligible people and requiring them to return them saying yes on pain of potential 250,000 fine and or 5yrs in prison which they haven't done since 1986, they will skip the silly waste of time and say yes for you.
It won't matter because until they institute a draft nothing happens and if they do institute a draft, you can be sure it won't just be the people who returned their postage paid return card but everybody that was on their mailing list in the first place.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Women should be included in this.
Yes and no. Yes if you are for equal rights and equal treatment under the law. No if you are a Republican, want to retain the patriarchy, and lower your chances even more of winning in November.

The Republicans keep shooting themselves in the foot. This is another bill that voters need to be reminded of this fall just before the elections.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
This is interesting.
Republicans are often accused of a "war on women".
You know....taking control of their bodies.
Now Democrats show they favor a war on men, ie,
taking control of their bodies (and minds) to use them
as weapons in wars.
A female Dem leads the charge to conscript men only.
How convenient, eh.

**** the draft.
**** war lust.
**** government.
**** Republicans.
And **** Democrats, who pretend to be progressive,
but are actually war mongering, sexist, anti civil liberty
********* ****** who **** their own ***** ********* in
the ***. (Pardon me French.)

Excerpted....
It was led by Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., and passed in the House Armed Services Committee’s version of the NDAA in May. The NDAA advanced through the committee in an overwhelming 57 to 1 vote.

CONGRESS FEELING HEAT FROM GROUPS DEMANDING BAN ON CONTRACTS WITH CHINESE FIRM TAKING AMERICANS' DNA

Chrissy Houlahan

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan led the selective service measure (Getty Images)
"By using available federal databases, the [Selective Service] agency will be able to register all of the individuals required and thus help ensure that any future military draft is fair and equitable," Houlahan said during debate last month, according to Defense News.

"This will also allow us to rededicate resources — basically that means money — towards reading readiness and towards mobilization … rather than towards education and advertising campaigns driven to register people."
It was mostly Republicans that supported this. They found a foolish Democrat that was willing to be a useful tool for them and five others. Other than that it was all Republicans:

"Votes were largely along party lines, with 196 Democrats opposing the measure and a small group of six supporting it. Republicans overwhelmingly backed the bill, with 211 voting in favor and just three voting against."
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
Did I read this right? House passes a bill 57 to 1 to reenact auto draft registration for people 18 to 26. With this type of support, I find it difficult to think it won't become law. How about you? The motivation for the kind of support may or may not be evident enough to understand the "need".

Crazy, I remember growing up and fearing it, just to turn 18 - 19ish and go the recruiter's office to enlist. Must be something to it.

Thought on need, reason for, or whether it's a good idea or not?
There just making it auto. Right now at 18 all males are required to register for the draft. If you don't you won't get federal assistance for college and you could be fined and go to jail. See link

 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It was mostly Republicans that supported this. They found a foolish Democrat that was willing to be a useful tool for them and five others. Other than that it was all Republicans:

"Votes were largely along party lines, with 196 Democrats opposing the measure and a small group of six supporting it. Republicans overwhelmingly backed the bill, with 211 voting in favor and just three voting against."
Unsurprising.
But when a Pub runs for Prez, & had avoided the
draft, all of a sudden, many Dems believe in
conscription as being a duty...a male only duty
to serve.
To quote a poster here....
**** that ****
 
Last edited:

Pogo

Well-Known Member
There just making it auto. Right now at 18 all males are required to register for the draft. If you don't you won't get federal assistance for college and you could be fined and go to jail. See link

Yup so we skip all that, instead of them sending you a request they just add you to their list and no potential penalty and you can get federal loans.

And if they reinstate a draft, they are going to use their list, not just the ones who sent back the card anyway.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Yeah.....Putin & Xi would love your goal.
(They won't be extinguishing theirs.)
Sort of my point.

There is only so much that can be achieved by lending prestige and funding to military forces with the ridiculously destructive and expensive resources that now exist... and most of that is countered by the appearance of legitimacy that comes from responding in kind.

That is just an insane path.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Sort of my point.

There is only so much that can be achieved by lending prestige and funding to military forces with the ridiculously destructive and expensive resources that now exist... and most of that is countered by the appearance of legitimacy that comes from responding in kind.

That is just an insane path.
Agreed.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Unsurprising.
But when a Pub runs for Prez, & had avoided the
draft, all of a sudden, many Dems believe in
conscription as being a duty...a male only duty
to serve.
To quote a poster here....
**** that ****
I think that the interest in the draft is due to the hypocrisy of Trump when it comes to his service and what he thinks of the military.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What is his hypocrisy?
He wants all of the honors of being in the military. Of getting medals, but is not willing to take any risks. His "heroes" are also comic book heroes. He cannot see John McCain as one because he did something that was far more heroic than he, or for that matter that I could do. He was imprisoned and knew that he would be tortured and yet refused the offer to go home and leave his fellow POW's behind. That man was a real hero.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
My bad. Correction: It was the House that passed it, not the Senate.

It is part of the National Defense Appropriation Act which will eventually be passed but whether this line item will still be in it is a very different question,
the one for fiscal 2024 passed on Dec 22 of last year.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
He wants all of the honors of being in the military.
What honors would those be, other than
his having been Commander In Chief?
Of getting medals, but is not willing to take any risks.
I don't recall Trump cadging for medals.
His "heroes" are also comic book heroes.
I don't recall him stating any.
Which ones?
He cannot see John McCain as one because he did something that was far more heroic than he, or for that matter that I could do. He was imprisoned and knew that he would be tortured and yet refused the offer to go home and leave his fellow POW's behind. That man was a real hero.
OK.
 
Top