Resolved: Military Conscription is Unjust

In regards to my opponents argument against Rawl's First principle of justice, he assumes that conscription will always produce victor and give every citizen equal basic liberties, but wait. Are you truly receiving your end of the deal if you are picked (OTHERS ARE NOT) and your life is taken? No that would be a pretty crappy deal to give up some liberties to have the rest taken. My opponent has seemed to miss the meaning of this argument so I will clarify. Let's say Tommy always wanted to be a doctor, but he was born into poverty, and forced to attend a not so state of the art school. Tommy was drafted out of high school because he met the standards to be drafted. Tommy was forced to fight in the infantry because he lacked the skills to play the role of a qualified doctor. Tommy did not receive his equal opportunity because he couldn't afford to go to college and prepare himself to be qualified as a doctor. My opponent relates everything I say back to the USA, when the USA has never practiced true conscription. The U.S. Selective Service System is the furthest thing from compulsory military service and cannot be recognized as so in today's debate. There are too many ways to avoid being drafted in to the US selective service to define it as compulsory. IN WW2, a draft was desired because of the need of massive man power. My opponent needs to realize that those amounts of draftees will never again be needed because of modernized warfare. Present Day warfare, and WW2 warfare are not even in the same league. Weaponry, Strategy and training are desired much more than man power. It is the reason why the americans won the revolution. They had a much better knowledge of the land, and the tacticts they used were superior to their British counterparts. ""If, by "Protect themselves", my opponent means "Protect the people", then yes, i agree. Because that is what the government exists for."--- My opponent makes a valid point but if real world governments truly cared about protecting their people, they wouldn't wage war, much less conscript their citizens to fight the war for them. Real world governments will begin to care about protecting their citizens they day they say " To Hell With War, Let's Settle this conflict with a fist fight, or more simply an agreement" "Where is the opposition? Where are the uprisings against such "violations of Justice", as my opponent has put it?" During Vietnam people were killed in Anti-draft rallies, They lobbied against the draft so much that it eventually disappeared and is now in a state of a coma, but can be brought back if the people agree that its necessary. "since my opponent has not provided a source, i cannot comment any further." Contention 1. Conscription immensely hinders the economy. Paolo Buonanno from UC Berkeley and the University of Bergamo writes in 2007....... The card is saying that people who were conscripted earned 5 to 6 percentage points less than someone exempt from being conscripted. The economy is hurt because they are no longer able to coin as much tax dollar on the salaries of those who are now conscripted. Pat Tillman for example. Think of the money the gov't made on his salary before he served in the military. I know Tillman wasn't drafted but since he served in the military, the salary would be a valid comparison to his abnormally large NFL contract. If there was a draft, Lawyers, Doctors, Accountants, Consultants, will be in large need. There salaries will be lowered once drafted, sending tax dollars into a sprialing downfall. CONTENTION 2 - My opponent seems to have been mislead by the meaning i was trying to setforth. Conscription upholds communist ideals because it allows gov't to convene on a citizen's life when ever they feel necessary. This does not allow the gov't to uphold the principles of justice. Subpt A - Obviously the US citizenry would rebel if the president decided to become a dictator, but seeing as how not all countries have what you may call a strong minded citizenry, and an open society, this argument would hold no ground, because in the majority of countries around the world, the people have little to no say in what goes on with the government. I'm not saying every congressman is corrupt, what im saying is that what's best for the government may not be aligned with what's best for its citizens. SUBpt B. I didnt say every man, woman, child etc. will be drafted, im just saying that it would be a possibility. and I agree that no other countries have the same basic liberties as the USA which is why conscription would not be productive. In the words of John Stuart Mill, "First, by obtaining a recognition of certain immunities, called political liberties or rights, which it was to be regarded as a breach of duty in the ruler to infringe; and which if he did infringe, specific resistance, or general rebellion, was held to be justifiable." Even if this would justify conscription in the US, because if they people didnt agree they have the ability to rebel, that does not mean every third world country's citizens have that privilege. In fact, if they attempted to rebel they would probably be executed which is exactly why conscription does not provide protections of the principles of justice. "Justice has a price, the price is freedom". This may hold true in some instances, but not with conscription, at least not if your dog tags are returned home to your parents with blood stains on them. Justice is not something you can buy, it is something that is earned, and my opponent thinks that giving up a few freedoms to be conscripted is a magic key to acheiving everlasting freedom but that couldnt be further from the truth. In all reality more freedoms are in danger of being harmed if you are fighting a war similar to my opponents WW2 standard. Once again, a strict def. of conscription is the only way to provide adequate ground for debate, and seeing as how the US Selective Service System does not fall under that definition because of its seemingly endless ways of being exempt from being conscripted. Compulsory is defined by Webster's online dictionary as required by rule. If you are exempt a rule would no longer matter therefore this debate would no longer be necessary because we would no longer be debating conscription.