Novus America wrote:Cisairse wrote:
I strongly disagree, and I doubt this disagreement can be reconciled in this case.
From a fundamental standpoint, on civil liberty grounds, birth is not optional. In order to preserve liberty, options must, then, be preserved by the state due to the lack of optionality of birth. Forcing proactive responsibilities on someone due to the geographic location of their birth is, as I said before, antithetical to civil liberty — that is, the existence of such a situation cannot coexist with principals of civil liberty.
There is a difference between "follow[ing] certain rules" (ie there are things you can't do — reactivity) and "you must do these X things" (proactivity).
Because it's true that being a part of society is, objectively, an accident of birth. Unless you propose having alternative requirements for birthright citizens compared to naturalized citizens, which, honestly, I find it more difficult to be opposed to. Saying you have to go track down a specific building to fill out a specific form by a specific age no matter what you're doing in your life is silly and we shouldn't have such a system.
Now if you want to condition social engagement (ie government programs) on conscription, that is more agreeable on ethical grounds, but I am still opposed. I question why military service? Military service seems to be a substantial waste of human resources with little benefit for the nation.
We already condition unemployment benefits on the payee actively seeking employment, with job offices generally assisting in the matter. Why not have public service work and, if allowable, military work be part of that "assist" in finding employment?
Oh well then I did not express myself clearly enough. We mostly agree it seems. Because you do not choose to be born you should still get the rights guaranteed in the constitution, like freedom of speech, due process and such. After all even foreign visitors and illegal immigrants get those rights.
But getting a basic right, and additional benefits like government paid college education, voting and running for office should entail something more.
So basically yes it would be that there would essentially be two levels of citizenship. That you get from birth, giving you all the rights of a permanent resident PLUS the fact that unlike a green card holder it cannot be taken away (as no person should be made stateless against their will) and then the higher level of responsibilities those get by truly being a member.
So that addresses the ethics problem. No one is denied their basic rights as a human being.
And it is voluntary. You could live your life fine without doing it.
And a do agree there should be a non-military option. I have said this, that only those most willing and fit for military service should be called up for it, those not should be given and alternative non-military means to contribute. Like you said, and I agree not everyone is best suited to contribute via military service. If you are no fit or willing to serve in the military maybe you could work at school or hospital in a disadvantaged area, help fix a national park (we should bring back the CCC BTW) or such.
Yeah the CCC was based, we should absolutely bring it back.