Resolved: Military Conscription is unjust.

First of all I would like address something that my opponent said in their response to my contentions, "Second, I will present my arguments against my opponent's syllogism. The negative's "burden," if you will, would be to prove this syllogism false. Hence, while I don't technically have an offensive negative advocacy, I don't feel that this debate requires one. If my opponent disagrees, I will provide one in round 2." You do need a case as the negative even if you can prove my syllogism wrong, because i have only stated one reason that the military graft is unjust. My opponent needs to disprove me and prove why it is just, showing how I am wrong is not sufficient because there could always be other reasons, therefore just disproving this one does not make it just. Secondly I would like to go over my opponents rebuttals of my syllogism. 1: A: I am sorry for not citing Ayn Rand i had it and did not copy it properly into my argument. B: If the government can claim the right to take a living person who is naturally entitled to the freedom and liberty that all people should justly enjoy and put their very lives at risk than yes they are claiming them to be property of the state that the entity that put him at risk is treating him as property? Also my opponent said, "The draft does not imply that a person has no right to life. Rather, it utilizes the social contract in order to defend the liberties and rights that a democratically minded state is founded upon." Well is you take a quick look back to the resolution which states, "Military Conscription is unjust". It says nothing about the country or nation that is drafting their military is a "democratically minded state", it only says that it is unjust. 2: A: My opponent says that i am equating the draft with a dictatorial government forcing people into military service, and that is the the truth. The Draft is where the government can take all the young people out of their homes at a certain age and FORCE them to participate in the military. There does not have to be any consent on the side of the person or people joining the service, therefore they are being forced. Also in my opponents rebuttal they said, "This is the state's job, and if the state is comprised of its citizenry, then its citizenry has an obligation to chip in. This would, obviously, include military service." Again i would like to say they say if it is comprised of citizenry, well like before when you took a look back to the resolution it does not state that this only applies to democratic states or non dictatorial governments it applies to every state that is in existence. B: I'm sorry i was preparing this argument for a Christian School that i attend and did not intend to put this in my argument as I know it does not apply to many people including my opponent, but if they would still like me to prove this concept I would be happy too. 3: A: I know that conscription has opt-outs and that is great, but it still does not justify people who have no reason to opt-out being forced, yes forced, to join the military or any other branch of its governments army. You keep going back to how my definition does not apply to the entire concept well neither does my opponents, it is only talking about those countries that have a free government. The resolution does not just talk about democratic or free governments, but is talking about all nations and countries no matter what there type of government. Also you say that if you do live in a free government then you have the obligation to protect it. Well not all people are cut out to be serving in the army, some people could be better helping their country in a different field as work, the draft in the long run could easily do more damage than it does good. We need to let those who are built to be in the army to serve their country where they should be, the military, but those who have other gifts and could be helping their nation more in other ways should not be forced to do something else. B: A conscription may equally distribute the burden of its nations defense better, but is this a good thing if it is distributing this weight to people who, like I said earlier, could be doing more for their nation in some other branch of work. Also my opponent said that the elite sometimes choose not to serve because of the high amount of criminals involved. If the elite is truly the elite they would stop at nothing to serve their country, these are the kind of people we want protecting our nation. Therefore because my opponent so far supplies no reasons that the draft is just and because their responses fail to negate my arguments, I urge you to vote Affirmative. Thank You.