Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site unmvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!unmvax!cliff
From: cliff@unmvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Military conscription/slavery
Message-ID: <608@unmvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 25-Jan-85 17:24:43 EST
Article-I.D.: unmvax.608
Posted: Fri Jan 25 17:24:43 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 29-Jan-85 07:18:28 EST
References: <308@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <376@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Lines: 15

>      Put those two together, and it seems to me that conscription, or
> the taking of your labor for a period of years, might be justifiable
> under the principle of Eminent Domain, but the payment to the 
> conscripted soldier must be equal to the market value of his (her)
> labor during the years of conscription.  Please do not make the
> mistake of thinking I agree with this opinion.  I am merely drawing
> a conclusion from US law as it exists.
> 
The amendment abolishing slavery was written after the other two.  It is
interesting to note that there was a loophole in the selective slavery
laws that said young men that would be making sufficiently more money as
a civilian would not have to serve.  (i.e. we only want to eliminate the
poor people).  That loophole was removed.

						--Cliff