Suing the U.S. government for select service

[DurdenParticipant 1051]

Ever since I swallowed the red pill I wonder why a man is forced to sign a card saying he will fight for his country if they deem it necessary. Mainly because of two reasons. The first reason is because respect is earned. It’s not something to be handed out like red bulls at college campuses or spring breaks. As far as I am concerned my country has deeply disrespected since I was born. They therefore do not have my respect and thus I should not have to die for something I simply don’t believe in. I have more respect for a jihadist than my country. Bads~~~ crazy as they may be they truly believe in what they preach. “German” men who are being more deeply disrespected than immigrants flooding their country. I say f~~~ nationality. It’s been gone for decades.

The second reason is sexism. Why should women get to vote and have all the privileges (your rights died a long time ago) I have if they don’t have to die for the privileges I have. Stick them in an all female squad and let them prove their worth. If they don’t like it f~~~ the “equal” opportunity s~~~ they are given.

So I wonder if one were to sue the U.S. on grounds of discrimination could he win or would it simply be a righteous statement. Considering our “country” will be filled with Islamic refugees soon it only seems fair. I’d love to see the looks on women face when they have to join the military for their privileges.

It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything

[OracleSummonParticipant 179]

Durden wrote:

Ever since I swallowed the red pill I wonder why a man is forced to sign a card saying he will fight for his country if they deem it necessary. Mainly because of two reasons. The first reason is because respect is earned. It’s not something to be handed out like red bulls at college campuses or spring breaks. As far as I am concerned my country has deeply disrespected since I was born. They therefore do not have my respect and thus I should not have to die for something I simply don’t believe in. I have more respect for a jihadist than my country. Bads~~~ crazy as they may be they truly believe in what they preach. “German” men who are being more deeply disrespected than immigrants flooding their country. I say f~~~ nationality. It’s been gone for decades.

The second reason is sexism. Why should women get to vote and have all the privileges (your rights died a long time ago) I have if they don’t have to die for the privileges I have. Stick them in an all female squad and let them prove their worth. If they don’t like it f~~~ the “equal” opportunity s~~~ they are given.

So I wonder if one were to sue the U.S. on grounds of discrimination could he win or would it simply be a righteous statement. Considering our “country” will be filled with Islamic refugees soon it only seems fair. I’d love to see the looks on women face when they have to join the military for their privileges.

Good luck with trying to get Government to actually be fair with men. It would be true equality if women had to serve on the front lines and get drafted in order for them to be allowed to vote; however, society puts women above men and I doubt that will change any time soon in the near future.

[hellraiderParticipant 2837]

try suing the goverment is tantamount to suicide, you´re painting a target on you´re self.

[RockmaninoffParticipant 1641]

Too late, bro. Someone already had the idea you have, brought it to the Supreme Court, and lost. The precedent has been established, and from what I know about English common law, once a precedent’s been established, to change the law pretty much requires a revolution.

". . . elle, suivant l’usage des femmes et des chats qui ne viennent pas quand on les appelle et qui viennent quand on ne les appelle pas, s’arrêta devant moi et m’adressa la parole"—Prosper Mérimée

[DurdenParticipant 1051]

hellraider wrote:

try suing the goverment is tantamount to suicide, you´re painting a target on you´re self.

We all have targets on our backs. Just some more than others. Considering DHS and other law enforcement have purchased civilians targets I would not trust them too much. Hell they bought ones of pregnant women and old men.

Don’t you think its a little odd and messed up you fear the government. Last time I checked the government should fear the people. You know since there are about 350+ million of us. But people are too glued to their cell phones and TVs to seem to care. Seems if people feel “targeted” for protesting things have gone sour. But hey they have been that way for decades and western society has only itself to blame.

It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything

[DurdenParticipant 1051]

Rockmaninoff wrote:

Too late, bro. Someone already had the idea you have, brought it to the Supreme Court, and lost. The precedent has been established, and from what I know about English common law, once a precedent’s been established, to change the law pretty much requires a revolution.

Thanks for the info.

It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything

[Maraudrz1Participant 2250]

I would like to see everyone have to perform some kind of service to the country before they are allowed to vote. Especially ever since women got the vote. Since women got the vote the country has gone down hill and socialist programs have proliferated. The tax burden has gotten so high and the national debt so large that we are a debtor nation. All because women aren’t treated the same as men.

Women's brains and vagina have one thing in common. There is nothing in there until a man puts something in there.

[Biggvs_DickvsParticipant 3725]

In the majority opinion, Justice William Rehnquist wrote “[t]he existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicates the basis for Congress’ decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them.” Implicit in the obiter dicta of the ruling was to hold valid the statutory restrictions on gender discrimination in assigning combat roles. Men and women, because of the combat restrictions on women, are simply not similarly situated for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft therefore, there is no violation of the Due Process Clause.

Interesting. I think a new challenge could be brought now that women are allowed in combat.

This is always a fun one to bring up in a *ahem* discussion of equal rights in a SJW/feminist context.

"Data, I would be delighted to offer any advice I can on understanding women. When I have some, I'll let you know." --Captain Picard,

[OldBillParticipant]

Biggvs_Dickvs wrote:

Interesting. I think a new challenge could be brought now that women are allowed in combat.

Beat me to it, BD.

While Rockmaninoff was correct about there being a precedent, the precedent in question contains the solution.

In 1981, women were legally barred from combat and were therefore not required to register. In 2016, there are no combat roles which are closed to women and therefore no reason for women to no longer register.

I expect a case on this issue to begin working it’s way to the Supreme Court this year. It will be fun watching feminists tie themselves in knots over the Selective Service just as it’s been fun watching them “explain” Sweden’s recent feminist-inspired male “abortion” law.

Do not date. Do not impregnate. Do not co-habitate. Above all, do not marry. Reclaim and never again surrender your personal sovereignty.

[Anonymous 3]

Durden wrote:

Don’t you think its a little odd and messed up you fear the government. Last time I checked the government should fear the people. You know since there are about 350+ million of us. But people are too glued to their cell phones and TVs to seem to care.

If they were too glued to their cell phones and TVs to care we would be better off.

The problem is a good 90% of that 350 million strongly support the government and push this agenda. If it really were just a matter of fighting 1000 people and another 350 million just stood around doing nothing, the elites would have lost a long time ago. There are way more awake non-elites than there are elites.

However the major problem is the supporters for the elite far outnumber either group.

People consider Marx a dirty word, but if you never read his stuff and understand how class revolts work you’re missing a large part of how this current system is setup. We HAVE Marxism right now. Revolts can no longer happen. The funniest part of it is the non-elites can’t figure it out.

There’s nothing to be done about it. I gave up a long time ago. I realized as long as I have money and I avoid women I win this game. Why should I risk that all? Especially in the current environment where just hiding your money still gives you full access to women with no repercussions, if you so choose.

[AttonParticipant]

One small well funded men’s group could really change the laws when it comes to things like this. Their really is a lot of debate going on about selective service but no one has the drive to actually do anything about it. But I could in-vision a small group of men’s right’s activists with the right skills slowing gaining control over the goverment. We don’t really need the approval of the majority or even social change to effect legal change. The LGBT has quietly chipped away at law’s they find to be less than fair.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[narwhalParticipant]

I honestly don’t want women drafted into combat roles. It sounds extremely expensive to me, and the amount whining we would hear about it would drastically limit our ability to wage wars.

I’m not sure I’d consider drafting women to non-combat roles. Would they have the same sense of duty and honor a man would, feeling that what they did mattered for a greater cause? Would they focus on themselves only?

I do think the right to vote should not be granted to those who do not contribute to the government. That could be enlisting or simply paying taxes.

Lastly, although we are ‘free’, we take for granted that the government does provide protection and services that we take for granted, and that cannot even really be refused. I don’t think people should be allowed to live in this country and refuse being drafted. Sure, you are told you must risk your life, but is that not the case for every country? Would you not be forced to risk your life if there was no government to protect you from others?

Not saying I don’t recognize a person’s ability to disagree with whatever the US is doing, and how it would be great to have the option to refuse to do the government’s bidding. I just see it as one of life’s catch-22s.

Ok. Then do it.

[Author]

Posts