The god of Equality demanded more sacrifice this week

[ajax]

From Tom Woods daily email:

The god of Equality demanded more sacrifice this week

A federal judge has just declared that a military draft that excludes women is unconstitutional.

Are we at peak crazytown yet?

The correct position is that, as Daniel Webster (not exactly a left-winger) said all the way back in 1814, the draft itself is unconstitutional.

As Webster put it in a speech before the House of Representatives that no teacher ever assigned you:

Is this, Sir, consistent with the character of a free Government? Is this civil liberty? Is this the real character of our Constitution? No, Sir, indeed it is not. The Constitution is libeled, foully libeled. The people of this country have not established for themselves such a fabric of despotism. They have not purchased at a vast expense of their own treasure and their own blood a Magna Carta to be slaves.

Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents, and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war, in which the folly or the wickedness of Government may engage it? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest rights of personal liberty?

Sir, I almost disdain to go to quotations and references to prove that such an abominable doctrine has no foundation in the Constitution of the country. It is enough to know that that instrument was intended as the basis of a free Government, and that the power contended for is incompatible with any notion of personal liberty. An attempt to maintain this doctrine upon the provisions of the Constitution is an exercise of perverse ingenuity to extract slavery from the substance of a free Government. It is an attempt to show, by proof and argument, that we ourselves are subjects of despotism, and that we have a right to chains and bondage, firmly secured to us and our children, by the provisions of our Government.

More recently, Russell Kirk, among the most influential architects of modern American conservatism, called conscription "slavery."

Kevin Gutzman and I devoted a chapter of our book Who Killed the Constitution? to precisely this issue. The case for the draft has been reduced to a bloody pulp by the time we're done with it.

Extension of the draft to women is the direction the Department of Defense favors, I might add. In 2017 DoD report to Congress, we read: "It would appear imprudent to exclude approximately 50 percent of the population – the female half – from availability for the draft in the case of a national emergency. And, if a draft becomes necessary, the public must see that it is fair and equitable. For that to happen, the maximum number of eligible persons must be registered."

I understand that the United States has had an all-volunteer military for over four decades, and that that practice is unlikely to change.

But in principle, am I, as the father of five daughters, actually expected to hand them over to the war machine? And if I lose them, am I to console myself that at least the god of "equality" was appeased?

Meanwhile, we have progressives cheering this latest advance for "equality." Why, as long as the state is enslaving us, let's make sure it enslaves everyone equally!

Reminds me of the progressives who cheer rulings in favor of transgender people in the military. Sure, the U.S. government's foreign policy is a moral, material, and strategic disaster, but yay: trans people can do some bombing, too!

The god of Equality is insatiable.

Whatever deranged religion this is, I am a heretic.

So are you.

There's a place for people like us.

The Tom Woods Show Elite.

I spend plenty of time there, and so should you. Best way I've yet found to keep sane in the world of 2019.

Are you a heretic, too?

Then stand up with me and be counted:


http://www.SupportingListeners.com


Tom Woods

[iWriteStuff]

To be fair, none of the women and children were spared from combat when the Nephites and Jaredites marched their way to destruction. Seems like we're following a well established pattern!

[gkearney]

The original logic for not subjecting women to constriction was that most military occupations were not open to women and therefor the need for large numbers of women in the military was not there even in in times of war. Today all military occupations are open to women and so it is reasonable to expect women to be subject conscription. When women demand equal right then they must accept both the obligations as well as the privileges.

[thestock]

Our current society allows women to choose their children to die for their own wicked lifestyles.....surely then it is acceptable to allow those same women the honor of dying for the society that gives them that same liberty....

[ajax]

Yes guys, we all know, this is the fruits of a very very sick society. Instead of fighting against war, let's just make sure we can participate in the slaughter too. Instead of fighting against conscription, let's just make sure we can be conscripted too! Ya hoo!

[Fiannan]

The original logic for not subjecting women to constriction was that most military occupations were not open to women and therefor the need for large numbers of women in the military was not there even in in times of war. Today all military occupations are open to women and so it is reasonable to expect women to be subject conscription. When women demand equal right then they must accept both the obligations as well as the privileges.

The average women is not demanding to be in the military. It is rich, liberal, feminists who are too old for any sort of draft. They merely want young, working and middle class women to die for their cherished Satanic ideals.

Oh, and the reason societies have never let women fight is because after the war you have to replenish your numbers. Even after WW2, when men were scarce in Russia, the government urged women to find good men, preferably married, to get babies with. The birthrate was quite high.

Of course the "elite" do not care if we go extinct.

[Fiannan]

Yes guys, we all know, this is the fruits of a very very sick society. Instead of fighting against war, let's just make sure we can participate in the slaughter too. Instead of fighting against conscription, let's just make sure we can be conscripted too! Ya hoo!

Ironically, in the event of a limited nuclear war, it is urban areas that are highly Democrat, that will be vaporized.

[Elizabeth]

There should be no compulsion, no person should be forced to attack others.

[Juliet]

I really wish this was not the case. If women are drafted then I would find a way to make the idea backfire so society learns it's lessons. You don't draft women. Women always pick the stronger side. And if you need to draft women, you are not the stronger side.

Come on ladies, flag of truce, let's break ranks and join the enemy!

[lemuel]

I'm cool with this if it leads to abolishing selective service and the draft potential.

If people don't want to volunteer for a war, that war isn't worth fighting.

If people won't volunteer to defend a nation from its enemies, that country isn't worth defending.

[Jamescm]

It's funny that as recently as a couple of months ago I could hear an ad on the radio state: "Be a man! Sign up for selective service if you're a male at least 18 years of age."

Then the same wretched politically correct central government beast can turn right around and chew me out for being toxically masculine.

[[email protected]]

I can't think of a demographic more worthless for, and unsuited to, modern combat operations than American females aged 18 - 35. Seriously.

[markharr]

It's part of the lucifarian agenda to masculinize women and femonize men until we all little Baphomets, the lucifarian diety who is both male and female.

The gadianton robbers are now 90+% control of the courts, the government and all forms of media. Neither major political party is immune to their influence. That should be apparent to anyone who is paying attention. If you want to know who isnt under their control look who they oppose the most.

The days of righteous laws coming out of our corrupted government have passed. There may be exceptions but they will be few and far between.

You are being openly and subtly mocked on a daily basis even with things as simple as magazine covers, and car commercials. They are in control. They know it, and they are certain there is nothing you can do to stop them.

22 And it came to pass that they did have their signs, yea, their secret signs, and their secret words; and this that they might distinguish a brother who had entered into the covenant, that whatsoever wickedness his brother should do he should not be injured by his brother, nor by those who did belong to his band, who had taken this covenant -Hel 6:32

Here is a car commercial that shows how subtly they can plant ideas of gender confusion in your head.

Even Taylor swift who we are told is Hollywoods good girl is not immune from planting little lucifarian seeds of self worship and gender confusion.

It's no wonder that so many are deceived. We are bombarded by it.

[ElizaRSkousen]

I once heard someone say that if men had to be drafted to sacrifice their bodies, time, happiness, convenience, family, etc for the war, then women should also, but in the form of a birth draft.

Interesting

[nightlight]

There should be no compulsion, no person should be forced to attack others.

Captain Moroni says different....

IMO,
If a people were invading your home/country, and you are a military aged male,but won't fight, for whatever reason....it's life in prison.

Forcing someone to fight a foreign war is immoral. But....if someone is coming to kill your family and neighbors, and you won't fight...you don't deserve freedom or a family. Save...those who spent their life murdering, and then went into covenant to bury their weapons. But those things will never apply to our people.

[JohnnyL]

There's a difference between defending your country from attack, and attacking another country.

[EmmaLee]

I would have no problem at all defending my family and home and neighbors. I'm a really good shot. If I'm wrong in my beliefs on this, the Lord will hopefully correct my thinking.

As to if foreign troops (or invaders of any type) came and attacked us, I would do whatever I could to dispel them, if the Lord told me to. Going to other countries and fighting? No. And I don't believe there should be a draft at all, for men or women.
'Just war" principles taken from the Book of Mormon seem right to me. I agree with Connor here and think this is a really good article worth reading -

'Preventive War and the Book of Mormon' - http://www.connorboyack.com/blog/preven ... -of-mormon

More info on the 'Just War' theory - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory

And Connor again - 'To Renounce War and Proclaim Peace' - http://www.connorboyack.com/blog/to-ren ... laim-peace

[captainfearnot]

I'm cool with this if it leads to abolishing selective service and the draft potential.

If people don't want to volunteer for a war, that war isn't worth fighting.

If people won't volunteer to defend a nation from its enemies, that country isn't worth defending.

I used to agree, but this guy convinced me that universal conscription would more likely lead to fewer wars, less death, and better military outcomes.

[The Airbender]

Kill 90 percent of the men and a nation can recover in a generation. Kill 90 percent of the women and it would be devestating and take several generations to recover.

[Fiannan]

Kill 90 percent of the men and a nation can recover in a generation. Kill 90 percent of the women and it would be devestating and take several generations to recover.

It would actually never recover. It would be taken out by any of its surrounding powers the next generation.

Muslims had a great idea. In their wars of conquest they often took women from the vanquished nations as wives and concubines. Even if they lost men the women back home could become wives of the surviving troops, and the winners could also have wives taken in battle. So the next generation saw a substantial population increase.

Come to think of it, the wars in the days of Moses were the same way.

[FattyArBeltBuckle]

You guys are getting warm.

[Michelle]

This is a ridiculous discussion.

Only a people so depraved and far from truth could suggest that women should be sent to war as long as any able bodied men are available. (Yeah, I know. We crossed that line long ago.)

Problem 1: No one should be sent to war. The righteous defend, they do not go on the offense.
Problem 2: Women are to bear and nurture children, not take life. Men are to protect and provide. Once you start requiring women to take life, they will be a lot less likely to give it.
Problem 3: Women are not built for war, especially against men. Like most things in life, we can do what we have to do, even if it is not what we were meant to do. Are all the men dead yet? Then it isn't time to draft women.

Really big problem: it appears that drafting women does not exempt mothers.

Take a mom from her baby and see how well she holds up against the enemy. She isn't going to be worth much as a fighting "tool" at that point anyway.

[djinwa]

Why age discrimination?

If old politicians had to fight in wars, most of them wouldn’t have happened

[tdj]

If our govt actually starts to send women draft notices, I guarantee most of them will probably be sent back with menstrual blood wiped all over them.

[Sarah]

Ironically, North Korea requires many of their young women to be in the military. Their living conditions are gross as you would imagine. They are given one pad and they have to wash in out every time in shared water etc. So sad.