Hello Richard,   
      
    LL>> Politicians do not want responsibility or accountability.   
    LL>> That is why reinstatement of the draft (regardless of form)   
    LL>> will never happen.  We have the mercenary army the pols   
    LL>> have always wanted.  As such, if it ain't broke, why fix it?   
      
    RW> YEs, that's what they want, it's only those without good   
    RW> options who go now.   
      
   Some proponents of reinstating the draft have made the point that   
   doing so would force politicians to be responsible and accountable   
   for their actions in matters concerning war and peace.  There is   
   some merit in that argument, but I would prefer an emphasis on peace,   
   without the requirement for a draft.   
      
    RW>> YOu might end up toting a rifle,   
      
    LL>> Conscientious objectors will never tote a rifle of any kind.   
      
   RW>Too bad, then they can forfeit their rights to vote and   
   RW>otehr such imho.   
      
   Why should anybody be forced to give up a *right* that everybody   
   else has, just because they object to war?  Muhammad Ali was a   
   consientious objector, refused to enter the draft, was jailed and   
   imprisoned, and stripped of his boxing title.  The courts overturned   
   his conviction, and Ali went on to regain his championship by winning   
   another title match.  But he never should have had to suffer the   
   indignities forced upon him by our society in the first place.   
      
   Today it is much harder for an individual to attain "conscientious   
   objector" status than it was in Ali's day.  Our society did it to Ali   
   because he was black and had made a name for himself through boxing.   
   We wanted to make an example out of Ali.  And we did.  However, Ali   
   got even once the courts overturned his conviction...   
      
    RW>> or you might be helping build a road or dig a well, or, as you say,   
    RW>> counting penguins, whatever's needed.   
      
    LL>> Conscientious objectors will also refuse to go along with other   
    LL>> kinds of service, on the grounds that doing so would be supporting   
    LL>> the war effort, even if there is no war going on at the time.   
      
   RW>See above.   
      
   We did away with slavery (for the most part) after the Civil War.   
   Slavery still exists (sort of) in prisons.  We do not need to make   
   slaves out of conscientious objectors.  Nor should we.   
      
    LL>> Physical and/or mental disability would disqualify many from   
    LL>> serving, even if they wanted to.  Not really an issue for   
    LL>> conscientious objectors, since they would refuse to serve regardless   
    LL>> of their physical/mental capacity to do so.   
      
   RW>Why should so-called physical disabilities exempt you?   
      
   Some folks are simply physically and/or mentally unable to do   
   anything worth doing.  I am not saying that all who have a physical   
   and/or mental disability should be excluded from military/community   
   service, as many folks in that category did serve honorably in   
   previous wars, such as in WWII.   
      
   RW>See earlier in this thread.  Does being blind disqualify a diesel   
   RW>mechanic or a computer programmer?  Except for the severely disabled   
   RW>who can't do much useful even for themselves anybody and everybody   
   RW>should serve imho.   
      
   There are many things that can be done.  Some folks are limited   
   in what they can do, but not in all things.  As such, everybody who   
   is able should not be exempt, with the exception of conscientious   
   objectors.   
      
    RW>> Imho it just makes sense, helpsyoung people prepare for life as   
    RW>> citizens over adn above hs, and gives us the bodies we need, whether   
    RW>> it be to fight a war, or provide international aid or bodies for   
    RW>> public projects that do us good that need bodies to happen.   
      
    LL>> It makes far better sense to denounce war in all its various forms,   
    LL>> and promoting and practicing nonviolence in its place.   
      
   RW>Dream on!   
      
   Nonviolent resistance is not passive, but a very active form   
   of resistence.  Gandhi knew it well.  So did MLK.  Not only did   
   they dream, but they achieved.  Isn't that wonderful?   
      
   --Lee   
      
   --- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb   
    * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)