While I'm away, here's an exercise for you to receive 2 extra credit point on your quiz average!
Due next Tuesday, September 23.
"Constitution Week is an American observance to commemorate the adoption of the United States Constitution. The observance runs annually from September 17 to September 23. It was officially enacted on August 2, 1956 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower from a congressional resolution petitioned by the Daughters of the American Revolution, but it was George W Bush who officially declared the inception of Constitution Week in September 2002.The purpose of the observance week is to promote study and education about the constitution which was originally adopted by the American Congress of the Confederation on September 17, 1787." Wikipedia
In celebration of Constitution Week, listen to Dr. Sandel's lecture at Harvard on military conscription. Do you think it is right for you to pay someone to take your place in the draft so you can avoid going to war in the case the draft is implemented to supplement the current volunteer force?
Write a review of the main points made and your opinion on the above question. Post online here, as in previous assignment.
Worth 2 points on your final Quiz Average! Due online here byTuesday, September 23.
The main point of this video is finding out what are the rights of each individuals. The government have a lot of rights toward the citizens, but cannot rule over their basic life. As Dr. Sandel said the military higher officers have lots of power to control the military but still cannot take any money from their pay. This means that even thought there are several rights but it have some limits. There are some rights in United States, which can effect a lot of people's life negatively and positively. As stated above in the video, it was not against a law to pay someone to go in the war for you. This means that you are giving them money that is worth their life, because they might die in the war. So, they are selling humans, which should be against the law. If we look it it other way, it is not bad because person who is taking the money have rights to sell himself. Therefore, he can take the money to go to war. In my opinion, i do not think it is alright to pay someone to go to war for them. I value everyone's life equally, therefore no money can buy others' life. So i believe that you should not buy others to go to war for you.
ReplyDeleteI believe the main points of this video have to do with consent of the people, and how far the government is allowed to go in telling people what to do, such as in the case of the draft. It talks about how we are governed by consent, but with an issue such as the draft people may be forced to go to war, therefore it would not be consensual. In the case of the draft being implemented I do not believe it is right to be able to pay for someone to take your place. In doing this you strongly favor those of higher income, leaving no other option for people with less money than to have to fight in the war. It would be unfair to allow such a thing to take place as; seeing as how the draft is already a lottery, it is fair that whomever is selected must serve. Being able to pay someone to take your place so that you will not run the risk of death is unfair.
ReplyDeleteGavin Demali
The main point of this video is to address the rights of individuals and what extent the government can go with the rights of American citizens.
ReplyDeleteYes I do think it is right to pay someone else to take your place in the draft, but only if they want to. If war is against your religion or if you have a family you have to look after, then I honestly believe that this idea is fine.
Kejja Powell
What if you don't want to go, but have no $$$$?
DeleteThe main point of this video deals with rights of American citizens and the involvement of government in their personal rights. There is a controversy with the draft because the government preaches equality and consent but in the case of a war breaking out, men would be forced to fight. In the case of conscription, men being drafted into war have the option of hiring substitutes to fight in their place. Dr. Sandel asks students whether they believe this policy is just, and many disagree due to the fact that paying people who are less privileged to risk their lives just because you don't want to is unfair. I personally believe that it is fair to be able to pay an individual to take your place in the draft. If you are offering money to someone to take your place then you are not forcing or threatening them, you are only offering them a wager; it is that persons decision whether they accept or not. The money received by that person in an extremely positive way. Another reason I find conscription to be fair is because maybe one does not feel the desire to fight in the war due to the fact that one is an immigrant to the United States. Another reason is maybe one has a dying or ill family member in need or a newborn child or even a child on the way. Either way, there are many reasons someone would not want to fight in a war and if this person is willing to pay someone else to take their place then i do not see anything wrong in that.
ReplyDeleteKati Mdzinarishvili
I believe paying someone else to go for you is illegal. During the Civil War it was legal ($300), according to my sources! What if you're tooo poor to pay someone? Is that fair?
DeleteAlso, there has never been a draft which included women. Since women will be able to be fighting with men on the front lines, should the draft include them too? Just asking........
DeleteThe main points in this in dealing with the topics of a paid draft, a voluntary Army, or anything dealing with the Human reproduction discussion all go back to one explicit point, and that is individual human rights. Whether it was paying someone to perform your service in the military, pay a person to carry your child, from any angle there are human rights to look at. There was a human right to take someones money to do their duty for them. I do not feel that is right and unless there is a medical issue that prohibits a person from serving their country, a person should have to serve if they are drafted. But it all comes back to the fact of individual rights, and at the time of the Civil War according to the video a person that the right to hire someone else to serve for them. I truly believe though, this country gives us so many freedoms, if need be in the future there is a draft, if eligible to be drafted one should defend the freedoms we all share.
ReplyDeleteKyle Shaffer
Even though i believe its not right to pay someone to carry out your duties such as paying someone to take your place in a draft, i feel each individual is entitled to their own belief and should make their own choices. if someone is willing to get paid and risk the chances of his life, why not? at least he made his choice. Michael Sandel gives us an impression on the morale on what is right in terms of religion, politics and how individuals can take matters in their own hands considering the fact that the government is present to make laws. he also brings the idea of how we are forced to make decisions whether right or wrong to our own benefits. for instance, are we willing to go to the extent of committing crimes or lies in order to guarantee our own safety or lives?. He gives us the impressions and philosophies of human behaviors and traits etc.
ReplyDeleteGood thoughts.
DeleteThe main point of this video is about the rights of American citizens, paid draft, volunteer army, and the involvement of government in citizens' rights. I think it is perfectly okay to pay someone to take your place in the war. If a person is willing to accept money to fight in a war, that is their preference. I'd rather there be people who actually want to be in the war fighting (whether it's for money or just strong patriotism), than a ton of people who are opposed to the war completely.
ReplyDeleteSophie James
Pouint taken. But doesn't this allow only rich people to stay home? What if I had a dying father, but no money?
DeleteI believe that the main topic of the video are the rights that American citizens have that they were born with. The government should only use volunteers to fight their wars. If the people think that the war is not worth it then there wouldn't be enough volunteers to fight in that war. If that would that happen then the Government should either withdraw from the war or increase the pay for the people who volunteer to fight.
ReplyDeleteVictoria Lynner
WWhat then?hat if our nantional security is in jeopardy by an invasion.
DeleteI believe the main point is that the government may have power of the people, but they are still limited due to the need for consent. In a way consent limits their power over individual rights. No, I do not think that it is right to pay the govt. for not wanting to be drafted. Draft is no a personal choice. People who are drafted did not choose to be in the military, so why should they pay? I do not thinks that its right for the govt. to charge for a civil right. We should be able to choose not to fight, without paying. On the other hand, a voluntary govt. is different. If one volunteers for the military and tries to back out than they should pay for wasting someone's time, and energy.
ReplyDeleteIf the volunteer army is too small, and we need more, what should we do? Should people be allowed to stay home instead?
DeleteI think that the main point of this video is that the rights of citizens and how much the government can intervene with our personal rights. It is also saying that we consent to what the goverment can do therefore we limit the power of the government.
ReplyDeleteI believe that people should be able to pay others to be drafted. I do believe that there are times when this is necessary, for example:If it is against someone's religion. Also if they are a single parent and have to take care of their family. I believe if someone else is willing to go to war in their place than they should be allowed.
I do not believe in drafting anyways, that is why we have a voluntary army, we don't need a draft. But if there were a draft, I would think that people should be able to pay others to go in their place.
-BreeAnn Loucks
What if one is poor? what if you can pay, and I can't?
DeleteDennis Smith,
ReplyDeleteI believe if some one needs money and doesn't mind going to war then why not. Being a veteran of war I would take someone’s money if they are not willing to fight for this wonderful country. If you look at all the mercenaries we have fighting and accomplishing thing others wouldn't want to even think of. We pay them to fight our battles, is there a big difference in that? The government will protect our right as well as we will not let them run our lives. In return we are aloud to pay somebody who may be better suited for war then others. I also believe that if you live in the United State of America and love the benefits of being free and having all these rights handed to you, then why you wouldn’t want to give back some how is beyond me. Our government will protect us but there are some things we have to do for our selves, and fighting those who try and destroy our way of life could be one of those situations. I do understand some individuals just can't go to war, I will not judge anyone who would pay another to fight but they better be grateful and understand what they are paying for. We as Americans have a responsibility to protect our own and I consider America part of my own.
Well said.
DeleteI believe the main points of this video are the rights that we have as citizens, and to what extent the government can intervene with those rights. Although paying someone to take your place does not seem morally correct, i agree with Emily in this video, it is essentially similar to what is happening now. We pay our soldiers a salary and give them benefits.But it is also very different because you are not forced to be a part of it. The volunteering comes first, then money, so their motivation may be very different than that of someone accepting money during the Civil War. I think as a Country we should stick to the volunteer only army, unless we need men and women to fight to support our Country. If somehow we end up in a war and do not have the necessary men and women i believe reenacting the draft will be the appropriate measures.
ReplyDeleteWith that being said, i do not believe it is morally correct for an individual to pay someone to take their place. You have to look at it from all points of your. Not all people have the money to pay someone to fight for them. For example a man might have 4 kids and a wife that he doesn't want to leave them behind in fear that something will happen to him. He is a minimum wage man and has just enough to get his family by. No matter how hard he tries he cannot come up with the money to find someone to take his place. So morally i think that method is not correct.
Anna Derr
I think I'm on the same page as you on this, Anna.
DeleteI believe that as Americans we have certain rights, but when it comes to the draft it is our duty to go and defend our country and protect what we stand for because it is our right to be free and have the freedoms given to us by the founding fathers on July 4 1776, so therefore it is our right to take the draft as it comes, when it comes instead of passing it off to someone else because then how would we feel if we stayed behind when we know that we could've helped make a difference and fight for our country.
ReplyDeleteGood points.
DeleteThere are many points that were made throughout this lecture, but the main point is the governments rights towards it's citizens and how far they can enforce power on ones life. I believe that the point of our draft is to defend and protect our country, and any measures should be taken to make sure this is being done. If someone wants to pay someone else to take their place in the draft, I don't see the problem. Draft is forced, so why should someone pay their way out of something they didn't want to be involved with in the first place? It would be different if they wanted to be involved first & then decided to back out, but not in this case.
ReplyDeleteI think that the main points made in this video are that it is not right to pay for a human being. To barter or trade money for a human is dehumanizing and in most cases coercion. I personally don't believe that it would be the right thing to do to pay someone to take my place in the draft if I were picked. I know that the draft isn't ongoing in today's society, but I would feel like I was almost putting someone down by giving them an amount of money to go fight in a war and potentially die. I owe our country for our freedom just as much as the next guy and I deserve to fight for it just as much as anyone. It would not be right for me to put a price on the life of another human being.
ReplyDeleteKristony Norman
Several of you have problems paying someone to take one's place.
DeleteZach Taylor
ReplyDeleteI think in the case of an involuntary draft, paying somebody to take your place would be acceptable. I think it is between those people. As 'freedom' becomes more and more complex in our society, I think the free become increasingly slaved to the conventions that we call normal. While I could have someone take my place in the draft without being too morally stressed, I feel others may slave over this decision for days or weeks. It's not that they don't love the country per se, it's just an extremely courageous thing to do, and I can understand why an individual would opt out of it.
This video demonstrates the government continuous attempts to control and over power
ReplyDeleteTell me more!
DeleteProblems?
DeleteBTW-
ReplyDeleteFor Coscientious Objectors Department of Defense Documentation
5.2. Religious Training and/or Belief
5.2.1. In order to find that an applicant's moral and ethical beliefs are against
participation in war in any form and are held with the strength of traditional religious
convictions, the applicant must show that these moral and ethical convictions, once acquired,
have directed the applicant's life in the way traditional religious convictions of equal strength,
depth, and duration have directed the lives of those whose beliefs are clearly found in traditional
religious convictions. In other words, the belief upon which conscientious objection is based
must be the primary controlling force in the applicant's life.
5.2.2. A primary factor to be considered is the sincerity with which the belief is held.
Great care must be exercised in seeking to determine whether asserted beliefs are honestly and
genuinely held. Sincerity is determined by an impartial evaluation of the applicant's thinking and
living in its totality, past and present. Care must be exercised in determining the integrity of
belief and the consistency of application. Information presented by the claimant can be
sufficient to convince that the claimant's personal history reveals views and actions strong
enough to demonstrate that expediency or avoidance of military service is not the basis of the
applicant's claim.
These are all great, thoughtful comments. Thanks for your hard work wen I was gone!!
ReplyDeleteI feel that voulntary military service is far more better than civil war system. Civil war system is more based on draft where people where trying to by out there way to fight and not serve there country. Civil war system is more based on wealthier people like Clarke who have money and can pay lower class people who don't have money at all that are willing to risk their lives to get a financial gain. Where as voluntary military service people have the right to go fight and decide how valuable there life is really worth and what financial gain they can benefit from doing so. Where as the government is funding and gives benefits to soldiers that compensates them putting their life on the line especially if you come form a poor family. Even though the market is adverstising coercion who is to say what is really right or wrong.
ReplyDeleteJordan Wells