Draft Dodgers: Traitors?

[Dr Spin]

Tell that to the Freedom Riders and MLK.

If I saw them breaking the law that our elected government passed, I would.

This government has been in the past, and is now, destructive towards human freedom.

Ah, so you're a melodrama queen?

A young black American was not more likely to die in Viet Nam than his white counterpart.

...but the son of a senator or oil millionaire...

[Dr Spin]

Fine. Just show me in the Constitution where it says a prerequisite for citizenship is agreeing to the draft and every other unconstitutional law the government tries to enforce.

It's not unconstitutional until the judge says it is. Oh, and my buddy in law school assures me that not all law is contained in that doc. I assure you that there are many bad things you may do to land you stripped of rights in jail, that you will not find in the Const.

[DinoDoc]

As to Nazi Germany, the US had no legitimate quarrel with them,

You don't think the fact that they declared war on us gave us a legitimate quarrel with them.

P.S. How is the US refusing to finance someone else's war of agression something worth of criticism? I'll grant you that it gave Japan reason to be mad at us but I fail to see why you have a problem with it.

[David Floyd]

Dr Spin, the absence of a judicial decision does not make a law Constitutional or unconstitutional - the fact of whether or not a law IS Const or unconst is what makes it so.

And granted, not all law is laid out in the Constitution - the Constitution is meant to be a check on federal powers, and since prisons are primarily state facilities, of course it would not devote much space to them in the Constitution.

[David Floyd]

You don't think the fact that they declared war on us gave us a legitimate quarrel with them.

P.S. How is the US refusing to finance someone else's war of agression something worth of criticism? I'll grant you that it gave Japan reason to be mad at us but I fail to see why you have a problem with it.

Before Hitler stupidly declared war, we had no legitimate quarrel with Nazi Germany, and if he had NOT declared war, we would NOT have had any quarrel with them. Furthermore, we had committed acts of war against Germany to begin with, not the other way around.

And there is a difference between financing someone's war, and refusing to allow American (or other nations') companies to engage in legitimate trade with that nation.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Dr Spin


...but the son of a senator or oil millionaire...

I gave you the socioeconomic data that I have. (read back.) Sorry I don't have a study on millionare sons. Certainly you could come up with examples of politicians who had sons die in Viet Nam. Or millionaires. Or movie stars.

My Uncle did 3 Nam tours and he was not from a poor family.

[TCO]

Originally posted by David Floyd

and if he had NOT declared war, we would NOT have had any quarrel with them.

Off in hypothetical world, again, Dave? "If ifs and buts...were candy and nuts, it'd be Xmas every day."

Who cares what the case would be if he hadn't declared war??

[David Floyd]

GP you're still not addressing my point that we had no legitimate quarrel with Germany other than the declaration of war, which we brought on ourselves by being the aggressors. Sorta like saying Germany had a grievance against Poland because Poland declared war on Germany following German attacks on Poland.

[TCO]

So if libertarian Dave was living in Germany, he would say that Germany was justified in attacking the US? Come on. Are you applying a different standard here?

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by GP


You got some better statistics? Bring 'em on. We'll look at 'em. Otherwise...I don't know what else I can do for you.

Nah - I was just idly trolling. In the end I just wanted to see how many times you and Sloww would reply

I'm glad the thread has now moved on to other subjects.

But thanks to both of you for the stats - I found them interesting.

[Dr Spin]

the fact of whether or not a law IS Const or unconst is what makes it so.

And how would you propose to decide that without a judge? We've DEFINED constitutionality based on whatever the judges are saying right now. Otherwise what's your source? Stone tablets?

Sorry I don't have a study on millionare sons. Certainly you could come up with examples of politicians who had sons die in Viet Nam. Or millionaires. Or movie stars.

I can come up with almost anything. It won't be factual though.

Of course, I was being a wise-ass. But you knew that.

[David Floyd]

GP, I'm saying that Germany had a legitimate causus beli against the US, because of some of the actions of the US against Germany, while the US had none against Germany.

Dr, some laws are or would be CLEARLY unconstitutional, such as a law saying I DON'T have freedom of speech, no matter what a judge says.

[TCO]

Originally posted by David Floyd
GP, I'm saying that Germany had a legitimate causus beli against the US, because of some of the actions of the US against Germany, while the US had none against Germany.

Dr, some laws are or would be CLEARLY unconstitutional, such as a law saying I DON'T have freedom of speech, no matter what a judge says.

How was Germany right to declare war on us? How does this match your Libertarian principles?

[David Floyd]

How was it right for the US to attack German U-Boats, ship war materials to Britain and Russia, or escort British convoys into war zones?

I never said Germany was RIGHT to declare war on the US, only that they had a reason to, that the US lacked.

[Dr Spin]

Dr, some laws are or would be CLEARLY unconstitutional, such as a law saying I DON'T have freedom of speech, no matter what a judge says.

There are several confounders. Define 'freedom of speech'. We've pulled libel and slander from the mix. They're not protected. Someday, a judge may decide the anti-slander laws are unconstitutional... but not today.