Three New Rules for U.S. Presidency

#51
#51
There should really only be one qualifier for President... a genuine will to protect and defend the US Constitution by its original intent. That would include an ideal position to lead amendment efforts where the Prez thinks the USC insufficient.
 
#52
#52
golfballs03 said:
Ok, but the point still stands. Parents - who are over 18 - are forced by the government to send their kids to school.
Click to expand...

no the kids are forced and the guardian is just held responsible. They chose that role willingly
 
#57
#57
sjt18 said:
Not sure what good 2 or 3 would accomplish. Lincoln, Jefferson, Reagan, and FDR are just four President's considered "great" who did not serve in the military.

#1 is pretty dumb IMO. MOST of the harm done by Presidents has been after they no longer had to face voters. Obama has already given hints that he will become much more radical and ignore Congress/Judiciary/Constitution even more if re-elected.

Unfortunately the most likely alternative is the same guy politically speaking but with a country club membership.
Click to expand...


Lincoln served as a Captain in the state militia and Reagan was a 2LT who served in California during WWII, both told great stories about their time in the service. I think it was somewhat formative for Lincoln as he learned he had innate leadership abilities, but I think he would agree that it was meaningless in dealing with his Generals.
 
#58
#58
utvolpj said:
not at all. The parents entered into it willingly and well aware of their responsibilities as the guardian.
Click to expand...

however they sacrifice some of the freedom to raise their child as they see fit due to government interference.
 
#60
#60
utvolpj said:
yes but they do it willingly
Click to expand...

Yeah, the advancement of society through procreation is a choice all should reconsider if they don't want their freedoms infringed upon by a government.

I guess you're all for the Chinese 1 child policy too? After all, they are choosing to procreate!
 
#61
#61
golfballs03 said:
Yeah, the advancement of society through procreation is a choice all should reconsider if they don't want their freedoms infringed upon by a government.

I guess you're all for the Chinese 1 child policy too? After all, they are choosing to procreate!
Click to expand...

wow quite a leap there.

The discussion was around "compulsory" actions right? How does a contract entered into willingly have anything to do with that?
 
#62
#62
utvolpj said:
wow quite a leap there.

The discussion was around "compulsory" actions right? How does a contract entered into willingly have anything to do with that?
Click to expand...

it's as big of a leap claiming that parents aren't really forced to send their kids to school - they are just held responsible.
 
#63
#63
Requiring everyone to pay taxes and requiring everyone to serve their nation - aren't totally different.

It's not a strongly held opinion at all, I just think there are merits to it that most people ignore because they personally wouldn't want to serve. Not very different than how most people personally wouldn't want to pay taxes. It's really just a matter of opinion to which is preferable.
 
#65
#65
golfballs03 said:
Requiring everyone to pay taxes and requiring everyone to serve their nation - aren't totally different.

It's not a strongly held opinion at all, I just think there are merits to it that most people ignore because they personally wouldn't want to serve. Not very different than how most people personally wouldn't want to pay taxes. It's really just a matter of opinion to which is preferable.
Click to expand...

I agree. In principle, both are slavery to the state. You basically have to pay in order to live.
 
#68
#68
I have mixed feelings about whether the President should be required to have military service.

On the one hand I realize it is one of the best ways to form a person's character. You learn what it means to serve others and to sacrifice for your buddy as well as the ideals of our nation. These things are important.

(Unfortunately, I don't believe many of our politicians, especially the last 3 presidents, could have served honorably or successfully. The amount of self inflation and deceptive behavior required to be a successful politician would have gotten most of them discharged quickly.)

On the other hand, I would rather not have someone who was forced to serve use that as evidence of a selfless nature. I want volunteers--men and women who know that only .45% of the nation currently chooses to join and still decide to so themselves. I want men and women who are fully aware that we are at war and that they could ultimately give everything to the country and yet, they willingly make that commitment. I want a president who understood all of that and made that decision as a young adult without being forced. That is the type of person who truly understands what it means to serve and what it means to commit men and women to war.
 
#70
#70
Amongst other things, I still wouldn't serve my military in conflicts I do not believe in. However, if you asked for public service that would be better, but still, forcing adults to do anything is not my idea of conservative government.

The other things being that in no way do I think I needed the military. I needed an education, I got it. It was my own free doing as it should be.

edit: I believe many of the things our military does is not to protect our freedom. I absolutely believe soldiers, individually are sacrificing for their country. But that does not mean I will blindly (or under force) support our military and participate. I will always support the soldiers that serve. However, under circumstances where I do believe our freedoms, and future generations, need protecting, I would volunteer.
 
Last edited:
#71
#71
I also believe that we give away the franchise too easily and that a person should have to earn their citizenship. This paper sums it up nicely...
 

Attachments

  • fedrlsvc.pdf
    102.3 KB · Views: 2
#72
#72
Weezy said:
Amongst other things, I still wouldn't serve my military in conflicts I do not believe in. However, if you asked for public service that would be better, but still, forcing adults to do anything is not my idea of conservative government.

The other things being that in no way do I think I needed the military. I needed an education, I got it. It was my own free doing as it should be.

edit: I believe many of the things our military does is not to protect our freedom. I absolutely believe soldiers, individually are sacrificing for their country. But that does not mean I will blindly (or under force) support our military and participate. I will always support the soldiers that serve. However, under circumstances where I do believe our freedoms, and future generations, need protecting, I would volunteer.
Click to expand...

I respectfully submit that it isn't service if you get to choose the things you will do.

For example, if you volunteer to serve in a soup kitchen but will only serve soup, but not bread, or won't mop up afterwards, have you really committed to serve?

One of the things I've seen with organizations such as Americorps is there is still a lot of choice among those serving. I don't think you really learn about truly selfless service unless you are willing to say "Pick me and I'll go wherever I'm told and do my duty."
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top