HI Bob,   
      
   On Mon 2012-Mar-12 01:50, BOB KLAHN (1:123/140) wrote to LEE LOFASO:   
      
   BK>  I would prefer a world of prosperity with no one going hungry    
   BK> without the need to put any corporate executives in prison.  Neither   
   BK> of us are likely to get what we want.   
      
   Ain't that the truth!   
      
   BK>  If you want peace, work for justice.   
      
   YEp, and sometimes to work for justice you gotta be willing   
   to lay your life on the line, or they'll know they can   
   always force you to back down.   
      
      
      
    LL> Why should anybody be forced to give up a *right* that   
    LL> everybody else has, just because they object to war?   
      
   BK>  Every sane person objects to war. So the insane win? Why does    
   BK> anyone have to protect you if you won't do your part?   
      
   That's the big question i always had for the true   
   "conscientious objector.  i object as much as the next guy,   
   but that doesn't mean I'll change my name to doormat.   
      
   BK>  It should be impossible to avoid service.   
      
   This is as I look at it.  YOu benefit from this free   
   society.  STand up and do your part to keep it that way.   
   For all of its problems and the plutocrats trying to take it over, I'd still   
   prefer it to most anywhere else.   
      
    LL> We did away with slavery (for the most part) after the   
    LL> Civil War. Slavery still exists (sort of) in prisons.  We   
    LL> do not need to make slaves out of conscientious objectors.   
    LL> Nor should we.   
      
   BK>  We should not have to force anyone to serve, but turns out too    
   BK> many won't if they are required to.   
      
   Did you mean if they "aren't required to?"   
      
    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?   
      
    LL> Some folks are simply physically and/or mentally unable to   
    LL> do anything worth doing.  I am not saying that all who have   
    LL> a physical and/or mental disability should be excluded from   
    LL> military/community service, as many folks in that category   
    LL> did serve honorably in previous wars, such as in WWII.   
      
   BK>  Don't see much of any physical disability that make it   
   BK>  impossible for the subject to contribute in any way. If nothing    
   BK> else he can proofread tech manuals.   
      
   YEp, so long as he can read and write.  Tehre's something   
   just about anybody can do.  Proofread manuals, man a guard   
   post, operate a drone; peel potatoes.   
      
   BLL> Nonviolent resistance is not passive, but a very active form   
    LL> of resistence.  Gandhi knew it well.  So did MLK.  Not only   
    LL> did they dream, but they achieved.  Isn't that wonderful?   
      
   BK>  You have to be willing to die for it if you want it to succeed.    
      
   That's right, because, if not, then there's a place you   
   won't go, and the opposition will use that.  But, if you die without putting   
   up a fight, then the cause you support still might lose as you didn't fight   
   hard to live another day and   
   pursue it.  Most social movements in 20th century America   
   haven't had to deal with that one though, it's a matter of   
   advocacy instead of physical fighting.  This is also one of   
   the many reasons the confederacy failed.  Other folks did   
   the fighting and dying.  There were larger reasons, but that was one.  for   
   every Robert E. Lee who was a person of   
   privilege and status that fought (as a general, not front   
   line troops of course) there were a lot that stayed home and sent paid   
   mercenaries.   
      
   Regards,   
              Richard   
   ---   
    * Origin:  (1:116/901)