Start the draft, or get out

[Universe Prince]

Guess away. I would hate for you have think enough about it to ask me.

[BT]

are you against jury duty?

[Universe Prince]

No, I'm not.

[Lanya]

Why not?

[Universe Prince]

Why am I not against jury duty? Well, frankly in this case I actually accept the social responsibility argument. Also, I think jury duty is significantly different from military service. Serving on a jury is not surrendering liberty to the orders of the government in the way the military service would be. I do have a problem with demanding other people surrender their lives to military service, but quite a bit less so with expecting someone serve on a jury. Jury duty does not take over one's life. Yes, it is an inconvenience and it is coerced in the sense that there is a threat of jail time (which probably would not be necessary if we didn't have a slowly moving justice system). But getting out of jury duty isn't really that hard either. (Which reminds me of the old saying that a jury is 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty.) So it isn't as if jury duty is something that demands you surrender your liberty. You still have a certain amount of choice in the matter. And serving on a jury, imo, is less serving the desires of the state than it is serving community in which you live.

And thanks for asking. I appreciate it.

[Lanya]

No problem, Prince. Thanks for responding. 
I see the points you've made.  I can agree with them, pretty much.  Jury duty is a whole lot less arduous than military service during a war.
But what if there were another Pearl Harbor-type attack?   

[Universe Prince]

Do you mean merely what if another country attacked the U.S.? Or do you mean what if there was massive multi-country war and the U.S. was attacked? I am guessing you mean something like the latter question, the assumption being that without a draft we couldn't have won the war against the Axis.

I find speculating about what might have happened usually undesirable because there is no way to genuinely know what might have happened. We can guess at immediate consequences of some actions or inactions, but beyond that, we don't really know what would have occurred and why.

Would I support a draft in the event of an attack from some member of a new Axis-like threat? No, I really think I would not. I'm not saying I wouldn't join or that I would discourage others from doing so. I probably wouldn't even try to escape the draft, in this particular circumstance. But my objections to conscription would be the same so I don't believe my position would change.

[BT]

Your reasoned thinking seems to be inconsistent.

Apparently your dislike of loss of liberty is based on cause, duration, source  and ease of shirking rather than principle.

[Plane]

I understad Jury duty as a very simular duty to military service , identical in principal.

Yes it is very diffrent n consequnces to the person , but the principal of the society haveing a right to demand the service that the society needs is he same.

[Universe Prince]

Your reasoned thinking seems to be inconsistent.

Apparently your dislike of loss of liberty is based on cause, duration, source  and ease of shirking rather than principle.

Yeah, I kinda figured you'd say something like that. You seem to be mostly interested in proving you're better than me. You see jury duty and military conscription as the same in principle, or at least it serves your purposes to do so in this thread, so therefore you fault me for not having principle. But you're not correct.

Jury duty and military conscription are quite different. And no, ease of shirking is not it. The fact that a person basically has a choice to serve or not on a jury is one of the significant differences. The ability to make a voluntary choice is part of the the whole liberty thing. I'm not opposed to people choosing to serve on a jury any more than I am opposed to people choosing to serve in the military, which is to say not at all. My opposition is to taking the choice away and forcing people to serve against their will. My reasoning and my principle are both quite consistent and intact.

[Universe Prince]

I understad Jury duty as a very simular duty to military service , identical in principal.

Yes it is very diffrent n consequnces to the person , but the principal of the society haveing a right to demand the service that the society needs is he same.

Neither jury duty or military conscription is about society demanding anything. In any case, the person called to jury duty can call on a multitude of reasons to not serve on a jury. There are not any reasons I know of to get out of military conscription. Even a conscientious objector gets put to work as I recall. Jury duty and military conscription are not the same.

[Plane]

I understand Jury duty as a very similar duty to military service , identical in principal.

Yes it is very diffrent n consequences to the person , but the principal of the society having a right to demand the service that the society needs is he same.

Neither jury duty or military conscription is about society demanding anything. In any case, the person called to jury duty can call on a multitude of reasons to not serve on a jury. There are not any reasons I know of to get out of military conscription. Even a conscientious objector gets put to work as I recall. Jury duty and military conscription are not the same.

"Neither jury duty or military conscription is about society demanding anything."

I don't understand.

"In any case, the person called to jury duty can call on a multitude of reasons to not serve on a jury. "

As can someone who is being drafted , last I heard simply being Gay would not disqualify one from a Jury.

"There are not any reasons I know of to get out of military conscription."

Flat feet , low IQ, Tuberculosis , being Jehovah's Witness , being Gay etc...


"Even a conscientious objector gets put to work as I recall."

Theodore Roosevelt is supposed to have stated that he wouldn't make them shoo but would let them get shot at and so he favored making conscientious objectors into stretcher bearers , who of course have to go into the line of fire but don't shoot the enemy as a part of their work.

" Jury duty and military conscription are not the same."

Difference in detail doesn't change the original principal being similar.

[Mr_Perceptive]

Your reasoned thinking seems to be inconsistent.

Apparently your dislike of loss of liberty is based on cause, duration, source  and ease of shirking rather than principle.

It appears that if your life is threatened, then you disagree, otherwise, as in jury duty, it is not. Interesting. By that reasoning, we wouldn't be the greatest nation on the face of the earth. There are times when your country needs you, regardless whether they ask you or force you, sometimes you jsut gotta get out of your couch and Serve.

[Universe Prince]

"Neither jury duty or military conscription is about society demanding anything."

I don't understand.

Let me put it this way, the letters don't come from society.

"In any case, the person called to jury duty can call on a multitude of reasons to not serve on a jury. "

As can someone who is being drafted , last I heard simply being Gay would not disqualify one from a Jury.

That might be one reason. But that would be a reason to exclude not to allow one to be excused.

"There are not any reasons I know of to get out of military conscription."

Flat feet , low IQ, Tuberculosis , being Jehovah's Witness , being Gay etc...

Only one of those is really a choice. (I suppose one could choose to get TB to get out of the draft, but that seems both extreme and impractical.)

" Jury duty and military conscription are not the same."

Difference in detail doesn't change the original principal being similar.

I am not convinced the original principle is similar. Even if it is, they are different in actuality.

[Plane]

"Neither jury duty or military conscription is about society demanding anything."

I don't understand.

Let me put it this way, the letters don't come from society.

Government is an instrument of our society.

I recall a long and unresoved discussion you and I had about how a nation is defined.

I said that a nation is defined by its people , not its government .

You seemed to be saying that a Nation is defined by its government   , but now you are drawing the distinction the other way?