Question for everyone who supports "universal mandatory military service"

[election_2004]

1.) How do you propose curbing harassment of LGBT young people in the barracks, when they are "drafted" into "mandatory national service" against their will? (especially if "Don't ask, don't tell" is "temporarily dissolved" to meet recruitment needs?)

2.) If you are proposing that both males and females of a certain age are going to be forced into "national service," then where, pretell, are they going to obtain that pool of eligible young females (to be included with the males)? Young women are currently not registered for the Selective Service lottery.

3.) Why should a young person be randomly plucked out of college (or prevented from going to college) to clean up the mess made by half-baked neo-conservative "national security" policies? Especially if that young person happens to be a liberal or progressive VOTER?

4.) Why should someone be given the following ultimatum: either risk your life to die on a foreign battlefield, or get out of this country!

5.) How is it progressive to support a policy that would undoubtedly result in many young women getting pregnant just to avoid military service?

6.) Why should ANYONE be given the following ultimatum: either risk your life to die on a foreign battlefield, or get out of this country! (oh, but wait, you can't leave the country, due to "border control")???

7.) How will forcing young people into military service help to create the goal of a "less aggressive, less patriarchal" society?

8.) How are you going to explain your support of "mandatory national service" to all of the people (including progressive and liberal voters) whose children and grandchildren end up being sacrificed like lambs to the slaughter as a result of "national service"?

9.) Why the fuck should ANYONE be able to tell me that I have to shave my head (for basic training, for everyone who can't draw the connection) just because I have a penis?

And before you say, "Oh, but people will still be able to choose to serve in the PeaceCorps or other non-military non-combat roles as an alternative to military training..." - -

WHAT makes you think that the CHICKENHAWK-controlled Congress wouldn't create loopholes to ensure that the wealthy and privileged get to serve in non-military roles where they are kept out of harm's way? Do you honestly believe they're going to let THEIR OWN be sacrificed?!

What makes anyone think that they would place anyone other than the working-class *LIBRUL* youngins in serious danger?!

[lenidog]

1. I think you are on the wrong web site if you are looking for those who

support the draft

[election_2004]

4. Perhaps most DUers don't support the draft...

But some here have expressed support for "national military service."

This isn't flamebait...I'm just trying to understand HOW they believe that could realistically be accomplished?

[lenidog]

6. You are not talking about the draft per se but conscription.

Can't see that I have seen anyone really support that. I mean I have seen those who may wish to have the draft come about because it would put an end this war rather quickly but no one for conscription.

[election_2004]

9. So it sounds like they're talking in hypotheticals....

...rather than suggesting actual policy that they believe could be realistically implemented at this point in time?

[lenidog]

11. More or less that is the gist I have been getting from most of the threads

[Yavin4]

2. Without Asking for Sacrifices, Leaders Are Free to Indulge Their War...

wishes. The only sure way to prevent rampant, unilateral American military interventions across the global is to ask all citizens to participate. If everyone has to sacrifice, then wars of choice would come grinding to a halt.

Currently, the American people are largely apathetic about this illegal war in Iraq. They may tell a pollster that they're unhappy about it, but they won't take action. Now, if it's their kid being blown up by a suicide bomber, then they'd take to the streets.

[election_2004]

5. So then what happens....

...when those citizens who are "asked to participate" end up becoming corpses, and the NeoCon government simply replaces them with more youngins?

Now, if it's their kid being blown up by a suicide bomber, then they'd take to the streets.

So how would you feel if it's YOUR kid who has to be "sacrificed" in order to ignite the revolution?

[lenidog]

7. Touche!

[Stinky The Clown]

8. I'm not espousing this, but the logic behind it is

if everyone had a horse in the race (or a kid in the military) the neocon stranglehold would quickly loosen because of widespread calls to get off the war footing.

As I said, I'm not espousing this, but I see the logic. It is a debatable issue ... even among us lefties.

Now .... if there is a draft, then I favor no deferments. Your number's called, off you go. No college deferments, no marriage deferments, nothing .... except if your immediate family has already suffered a loss of life. The logic behind this is really the same as the logic stated above.

[election_2004]

10. But are the Neocons going to allow it?

That logic is flawed, because it assumes that the neocons would actually allow their own children to be susceptible to mandatory military service.

Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe that they're going to institute such a policy, as long as they have all the power?

Again, I'm not challenging you personally on this, but this is the question that could be posed to anyone who thinks "national service" is a good idea.

And on the matter of there being no deferments, does that mean there would be no deferments for:

- pregnant women?
- single parents?
- people with physical disabilities?
- people with cognitive/emotional disabilities who are on medication?
- young people who are incarcerated?
- people who are taking hormones/etc. in preparation for a gender-change operation?

[Stinky The Clown]

12. Those people would be judged unfit for service

Back in my day it was 4-F .... may still be the same, but I don't know.

Any draft would have to be set up in the light of day and its laws would be well known because they affect **everyone personally**. It would be almost impossible to have such classist rules this time around. After Vietnam, there's no stomach for the sorts of classist deferments that were available back then - whether dem or repub.

And this is **exactly** whay Charlie Rangel (a decorated Korean War vet, I might add) has been introducing draft legislation every now and again. He wants this issue front and center when the real draft legislation hits .... and if things keep up as they are, a draft is virtually a foregone conclusion. A draft or a mutiny or a military coup.

[election_2004]

15. As someone who would fall into the 4-F category....

I see all hell breaking loose if those of us with physical/mental barriers (that would prevent us from serving) are exempted, while "normal" people are forced to fight.

[Stinky The Clown]

16. Not so

[AndyTiedye]

41. There Is No Way A Draft Can Ever Be Fair

It would be a horrible injustice to send disabled people off to war
if they have little or no chance of surviving and functioning there.
Many would not survive basic training.

On the other hand, the wealthy have much better access to doctors who
can deliver the letters necessary to substantiate a medical exemption.

The determination of just who is too disabled to serve and who isn't
is so arbitrary and subject to corruption as to invalidate the whole
concept of a fair draft all by itself.


The well-connected can also keep their offspring out of harm's way
even if they are (nominally) in the service. Our pResident is a
sterling example of this.

[Yavin4]

20. The Whole Point of a Draft Is To Get The People To Not Be Apathetic

about war. The reason why the neocons are getting away with their agenda is that the people are not asked to make sacrifices for it. It's some other mother's kid that's dying.

If that Princeton-bound, White kid gets blown up in Iraq, then that mother is going to put pressure on her senator and congressman about the DSM. Our politicians don't care about the poor and the working class. That's why it's their kids dying in Iraq.

[AndyTiedye]

25. People Are Not Apathetic Now!

Public support for this war is already nearing the Vietnam-era toilet,
even according to their own(ed) media, which has also had to grudgingly
admit that the whole thing was a pack of lies from get go.

The people don't want the draft either. Republicans would love to
impose it, but make the Democrats take the blame for it. If we are
not very careful, they will do exactly that. Then they would have
the draft to endlessly expand their Crusade, and those who oppose them
have no place to go politically.

No draft has ever been fair, and no draft ever will be.

If there is no draft, they will have to end the war.

[MsTryska]

51. uhh...yeah they are.

you'd be surprised how many people of the conservative ilk are perfectly happy with this 16-25 y/o database thing.



it's crazy the way these alleged americans are happily giving away their rights, one by one.

[AndyTiedye]

54. A Lot of Them Wouldn't Mind Their Kid Being Forced into the Army

and turned into a good Christian Soldier drone.

[union_maid]

38. A lot of our poor and working class have stopped signing up

The poor and working class die first when there's a draft, too. The only difference is that they have even less choice about it.

[POAS]

19. Your describing Viet Nam

[Yavin4]

21. Trust Me

If there were a draft in America, we wouldn't have invaded Iraq without a hell of lot more proof, and when Bush was shown to be a liar, he would have been impeached.

The neocon agenda only works when there are no sacrifices to be made.

[Vickers]

23. "The neocon agenda only works when there are no sacrifices to be made."

There you have it, folks.

No, seriously, read it again.

[AndyTiedye]

30. I Don't Trust THEM

If there were a draft in America, we would have troops fighting in Iran
and Syria by now, in addition to Iraq.

Their propaganda machine had convinced most people that Saddam was
behind 9/11 and was about to nuke us. All lies, of course, but
repeated endlessly on every media outlet, they got most people to
believe it.

[MsTryska]

52. damn straight. nt

nt

[Lerkfish]

46. If I may interject, my impression was that some people

were stating that IF a draft occurred, that might be the only way our country gets motivated again like VIetnam to effectively protest the war.

I don't think (or at least I don't recall reading) people WANTING the draft in and of itself, but speculating that it might TAKE a draft before enough people realize how misquided is this war effort, when it starts to threaten their loved ones.

Right now, the people fighting are people already in the reserves or armed forces, and their families were at least somewhat prepared that something like this could happen down the road.

But the general population has become complacent. Thus far, the death tolls are abstract numbers, and the butcher's bill is not coming due AT THEIR HOUSE, so they feel free to gloss over it.

Once a draft is established, EVERYONE will be forced to deal with the tiger at their door, and probably only then will some get motivated to question this war.

this is precisely why the administration is postponing the draft as long as it can, by backdoor draft and "special skills" drafts first. Once they exhaust that, they'll have to draft, but that gives them more time.
They KNOW once there's a draft, this convenient amnesia half the country is voluntarily suffering will evaporate, and there'll be some 'splaining to do.

[Stinky The Clown]

13. That was a large part of why we left Vietnam

A draft gets everyone's attention. Real fast.

[AndyTiedye]

31. It Didn't Though. Vietnam Went On for Years WITH a Draft

and ended shortly after the draft ended.

[AndyTiedye]

14. With An Unlimited Source of Cannon Fodder, They Are Free...

...to wage war against anyone they please.
They are free to declare martial law if we don't like it.

The only sure way to prevent rampant, unilateral American military interventions across the global is to ask all citizens to participate.

The current war is very likely to end soon for lack of troops, if we
can keep them from starting up the draft.

If the draft comes, they can keep this war going as long as they please,
and expand it into Iran and Syria as well. That would take millions of
troops, but they would be able to draft millions of troops.

We don't need a draft just to crank up the anti-war movement. It was
cranking up just fine until it got sidetracked by the sElection.
There was an obvious effort to keep it under wraps during the campaign
since it was thought that it would hurt Kerry chances. We put up with
Kerry's support of the war in hopes that he would flip-flop (much
better than a pig-headed mad cowboy who thinks he's on a mission from
God).

We are rapidly regaining a consensus around an immediate departure.
The majority of the country is coming around to that view.
People are staying away from the recruiters in droves. It is PNAC
who wants and needs the draft, so they may continue and expand their
Crusade. We should do everything we can to deny them that power,
which we know they would abuse like every other power they have been
given.

[Lars39]

18. Good points!

One other thing that never gets mentioned is when would the draft end, once it is started up.
How many generations are we willing to feed to the PNAC plan?

[Yavin4]

22. It's Just The Opposite

The current war is not going to end any time soon. Bush is under no real pressure to bring the troops home. More Americans care about Gay marriage as an issue than they do about Iraq. In fact, there's strong evidence that Bush is gearing up for an invasion of Iran.

[AndyTiedye]

26. **'s Invasion Plans Are The Best Reason To Oppose the DRAFT

The current war is not going to end any time soon. Bush is under no real pressure to bring the troops home.

No pressure? How about a 40% recruiting shortfall? The troops that
are there are starting to frag their commanding officers. Public support
for the war has dropped 20 points in 6 months. The whole basis for
the war has now been shown to be a bunch of "facts" that were "fixed
around the policy".

More Americans care about Gay marriage as an issue than they do about Iraq.

They probably want their kids to be good little Christian soldiers.
Their kids may have other ideas, but nobody is asking them.

It isn't nearly MOST, fortunately.

In fact, there's strong evidence that Bush is gearing up for an invasion of Iran.

What will he use for troops? He can't do that without a draft, certainly.

[Yavin4]

28. You Keep Making Two Key Mis-Assumptions

1.) Bush and the neocons care about depleting the military

They don't care if the military is thin. They'll pull troops from the other branches of the service if they have to. They'll pull troops from other American outposts if they have to. They don't care. They only care about their agenda. The next step will be to pull people out of our prisons and make them fight.

2.) Believing that poll responses = political action

People will say anything in a poll, but come election day, they'll "vote" against what they've said in a poll. At any time, Bush and Rove can easily crank up the propaganda machine and make the people believe whatever they want the people to believe, with one clear exception, personal sacrifice. Once they ask people to personally sacrifice something to further their agenda, the jig is up. No amount of right wing media blather can get fat, lazy-ass Americans to actually pick up a gun and fight.

[AndyTiedye]

29. You Misunderestimate The Power of Their Propaganda Machine

At any time, Bush and Rove can easily crank up the propaganda machine and make the people believe whatever they want the people to believe, with one clear exception, personal sacrifice.

But if that propaganda machine can pin the blame for the draft on the Democrats, then Boosh** hits the trifecta again! If there are ANY
Democratic fingerprints on the draft bill when it goes through, we
will be blamed for it at the polls.

[Yavin4]

32. One Problem: Dems Don't Have The Power

At the end of the day, Bush has to sign the Draft into law.

[AndyTiedye]

36. Which He Will, While Going On About the Bipartisan Support It Received

from the likes of Rangel, and Lieberman, and Biden.... :puke:
The talking head on Faux and its clones will eat it up, of course.

They may start out putting in language that makes it look "fair",
but we must not be fooled! There has never been a fair draft, and
there never will be. Any language that seeks to impose fairness will
be watered-down or removed in the conference committee, when it is too
late to do anything about it. If we support ANY draft bill, we will
be left holding the bag.

Democrats must be consistant in opposing the draft, or we face the worst
of both worlds -- Rethugs with unlimited access to our kids for cannon
fodder, and Dems taking the rap for it!

[bowens43]

48. complete bullshit.

Every once in while some one heres brings up this tired old argument. Keep your fucking hands off of my kids. If you want to fight , do it. If you want to offer up your children to bushes oil wars , that's between you and your children.

[iconoclastic cat]

3. It would be good if there was a choice, say between civil service,

military service, peace corps, etc. Choose one and go for 24 months, or something.

[AndyTiedye]

37. And What Does That do to Those Who Do Those Civilian Jobs Now?

Mandatory civilian service would be the ultimate union-busting tool
for those jobs that can't be outsourced. They could cut salaries and
benefits to the bone, and if the workers complain, fire them and hire
civilian conscript labor at sub-minimum wages.

[rockymountaindem]

17. Conscription doesn't exactly mean everybody is going to die.

Israel has nearly universal military service, except for the ultra-orthodox Jews who recieve deferments. However, all of the frontline combat and counter-terrorism units are filled by voulnteers. This means that those who are drafted, but don't want to fight are placed in support roles, which are important to any army. So, there's sometimes a difference between a draft and forcing unwilling people to fight.

I'm not sure if I support universal military service in America, but I can see both sides of the argument. And before anyone asks me, I am an 18 year old male who is registered with the selective service.

[AndyTiedye]

39. So In Israel, The Most Hard Core of their Religious Right ARE EXEMPT?!?!??

Israel has nearly universal military service, except for the ultra-orthodox Jews who recieve deferments.

Is that true??

That's like saying everybody here has to go except the Fundies, isn't it?

[rockymountaindem]

43. That is for several reasons.

First of all, yes, it is true. Recently, however, there has been a combat unit formed of exclusively ultra-Orthodox Jews who wish to serve.

The ultra-Orthodox are pacifists, similar to the Amish. Many believe that God can fight His own battles, and that the army isn't necessary because Israel will be protected by miracles. Others are actually anti-Zionist, and believe that the Jewish state should only exist in the time of the Messiah, and as such Israel is an offence to God.

Either way, this isn't the mindset that the secular Israeli army is looking for in commandos and infantrymen. Within the past couple of years, however, some ultra-Orthodox have begun seeing themselves as modern-day warriors of God, and have joined. They recieve special dispensation not to cut their sidelocks, which is forbidden in ultra-Orthodoxy.

Here in the US, ostensibly the fundies wouldn't mind serving because they are not pacifists by any measure.

[Lowell]

47. You are exactly right

I think that public service is an important part of citizenship. I don't exactly think everyone should serve in the military, but there are other areas where their efforts can benefit the country. Peace Corps, Job Corps, etc. But as long as nothing is expected from our citizens, nothing will be offered.

I don't support the draft, but I do know that it is beneficial in many ways. It levels the playing field and makes people aware of shared sacrifices. I was a victim of the draft in 1966. Got sent to Nam and survived. I also found that I enjoyed foreign travel and military lifestyle and stuck around for another 11 years in the army. The draft raised the caliber of troops serving. They were better educated and not brainwashed. I enjoyed serving with them and understood why they got out and why I stayed in.

A national draft is the surest way to end the neocons military adventurism. It would put this stinking war on page 1. It should be on the news every single night in the same vivid brutality it was during Vietnam.

And you are absolutely, "conscription doesn't exactly mean everybody is going to die."

[AndyTiedye]

24. It Tends to Militarize the Whole Society

7.) How will forcing young people into military service help to create the goal of a "less aggressive, less patriarchal" society?

It does the opposite, of course. It miliarizes the whole society.
Bullying of the weak in school is encouraged, because "they need to be toughened-up"
in hopes that they will survive the military when forced into it.

The military enforces a kind of un-natural selection on all who fall into its clutches.
Those who don't make the grade all too often get Tharped.

[XemaSab]

27. I think if there was a draft

the American people would think more seriously about which wars to fight in.

It's easy to sit on your deck at home and wave your $2.99 Wal-Mart flag while shouting "USA, USA, USA!" if you haven't taken seriously the possiblity of your son or other close relative coming home in a box.

[Yavin4]

33. Exactly

We live in a culture of abundance and indulgence, and asking for sacrifices means a thorough questioning of the agenda. If White, Upper Middle class kids have to go to Iraq and fight instead of going to Princecton, then there would be a hell of a lot more questions and investigations asked for by the American people.

[AndyTiedye]

42. The White, Upper Middle Class Parents Are Already Questioning

why they can't afford to send their kids to Princeton anymore.

Though I think most would send them to the Sorbonne before they'd let
Uncle Sam have them for the Crusade.

[Arkana]

34. Wha...?

National military service? Hello?! I don't want to be in the Army fighting wars that I most likely will not support.

[ClassicDem]

35. I thought slavery was illegal?

n/t

[Massacure]

40. I have some answers.

1) Harassment is dealt with by court martial, probably a fine if it is minor to jail time if it is major.

2) Women can be registered just as easily.

3) You don't have to pluck them out of college. You can do a one month a year boot camp to train a militia.

4) Just because everyone is trained doesn't mean you are going to war.

5) Why get pregnant when your not guaranteed to be forced to fight?

6) Dupe

7) An armed population is a polite population

8) They won't be slaughtered.

9) I don't get the head shave either. If you can maintain it properly in the allotted time, then you should keep your hair. A hair cut should only be for those who are too slow.

Let me explain further now. You make a lot of assumptions for required military service. The Swiss and Israelis both have excellently trained military forces. Israel must actively maintain a contingent of full time soldiers while the Swiss do not have a need to do so.

The required boot camp keeps people physically fit which leads to a healthier population.

The training in guns makes people more safe around them and reduces accidents. They are also use what they are meant for more: hunting and self defense.

I believe women should be forced to as well. Too often women end up disadvantaged against male aggressors. This would even the playing field between the male who is 300 pounds of pure muscle and the 110 pound scrawny lady.

Front line units and even full time administrative staff can still be filled by full time military. Nothing would obligate you to serve more than your one month of training per year.

Of course the U.S. government is liable to screw just about anything up, but that doesn't mean mandatory military service is not feasible.

[AndyTiedye]

44. None of That Justifies Such an Assault on Our Freedom

1) Harassment is dealt with by court martial, probably a fine if it is minor to jail time if it is major.

Unless the harassment is condoned by the command chain, in which case
you're screwed. This applies not only to gays, but to people who have
the "wrong" religion, or even those who just come in last in the drills.
Especially them. Bullying the weak seems to be part of basic training.

3) You don't have to pluck them out of college. You can do a one month a year boot camp to train a militia.

So much for that summer job that most students are counting on to help
pay for college.

4) Just because everyone is trained doesn't mean you are going to war.

With these mad cowboys in charge? Yes it does!

5) Why get pregnant when your not guaranteed to be forced to fight?

7) An armed population is a polite population

Except when they're not, which all too often leads to the demise of uninvolved bystanders.
It would be better if people didn't settle their differences with
automatic weapons in the city.

8) They won't be slaughtered.

Basic training lasts how long? Sure you may be able to turn a football
jock into a soldier in a couple of months, but what kind of chance
do the clumsy, unathletic kids have? Their life-expectancy on the
battlefield would be exceptionally short, if they make it that far
(as some get Tharped during training).

9) I don't get the head shave either.

Something to do with their need to crush our individuality, and
psychologically prepare us to be good little robots, I think.

The required boot camp keeps people physically fit which leads to a healthier population.

It isn't up to the government to force people to exercise. It also
isn't necessary. Just stop teaching people to loathe exercise in
phys ed class. Stop shutting down raves. Let the people dance!

The training in guns makes people more safe around them and reduces accidents. They are also use what they are meant for more: hunting and self defense.

I'd settle for making people get some firearms training before owning one.

I believe women should be forced to as well. Too often women end up disadvantaged against male aggressors. This would even the playing field between the male who is 300 pounds of pure muscle and the 110 pound scrawny lady.

Of course, if everybody's packing heat, that includes her attacker as well.
:-(

I'm not sure our country needs even more guns.

Front line units and even full time administrative staff can still be filled by full time military. Nothing would obligate you to serve more than your one month of training per year.

Where do all these full-time military come from? We have a recruiting
shortage for them too.

Of course the U.S. government is liable to screw just about anything up, but that doesn't mean mandatory military service is not feasible.

Even with sane, responsible government (that we currently lack),
the forced militarization of the whole society is a bad idea,
because that government might not stay sane and responsible,
and because a sane and responsible government will not need it.

[Massacure]

45. There is no way to fix failed leadership.

That does not mean that requiring military service is inherently bad idea though.

The cops aren't always around to protect everyone. That is why it is a good thing to teach society to fill the power void, no matter how small the void is.

[AndyTiedye]

53. The Tendency of Bad People To Force Their Way Into Leadership Positions...

...is well-known. That is why we used to have all those checks and
balances in our system. Checks and balances that have been
systematically removed by this regime. People still have the right
not to join the military, for the present. If that goes, there is
nothing left. Once in the military, you don't have any rights anymore.
All at stuff in the Bill of Rights only applies to civlians.

And they don't ever have to let you out.

Under this regime, the draft would become and end-run around the
entire Constitution.

[election_2004]

50. About the head-shaving....

My dad, who is a retired veteran of the National Guard (and a Rush Limbaugh idolizing Republican) told me his interpretation for the rationale of head-shaving in the military:

Apparently, according to my dad, servicemen are required to have their heads shaved so it's easier to keep themselves clean.

However, servicewomen are allowed to keep their hair above a specified length (longer than the men), in order to give them the option of maintaining a degree of visual "femininity."

That's entirely my dad's interpretation of his military's policies.

[sunnystarr]

49. They wouldn't have to worry about a draft if

they didn't illegally invade another country that didn't do anything to us. I have every faith that if we are attacked there would be lines of young people signing up at their neighborhood recruiting station to defend our country.

Pre-emption is not a policy that encourages enlistment.

[DuaneBidoux]

55. My support rests on one observation: the really bullshit wars

didn't start until we exempted the upper class kids from serving. Once we have a draft there won't be any wars that aren't wars of true self defense. The bullshit wars have all been essentially after WW II. You'll notice that even in the Korean war we started giving outs to the upper class and rich kids. When a rich parent believes his own child should be forced to serve, then we are talking about a cause worth fighting and dying for.

[AndyTiedye]

56. A Draft Didn't Stop the Bullshit Wars Before. It Enabled Them

Have you noticed that from when they ended the draft until ** came along,
we didn't have any wars that lasted more than a few months, and not
very many of those. The fire-breathing Ronald Reagan attacked only
Grenada, and that lasted a week. Bush I had his Iraq war, but he
turned back from the full-scale invasion that has turned into such
a quagmire for his son.

During the time we had a draft, we were nearly always in a war somewhere.

There weren't a lot of exemptions during WW2 because they needed
everybody, and pretty much everybody wanted to serve anyway.
It probably would not have made any difference if they had stayed
with an all-volunteer army in WW2 -- they would have gotten plenty
of volunteers anyway, and some who were forced into the Army could
have better served their country in other ways. (It would have
been a disaster if Alan Turing had been drafted and sent to the
front instead of allowed to work on breaking the German codes).

In the more recent wars, they obviously don't need everybody,
so there is no shame in not enlisting, especially if the war
itself is on a shaky moral foundation at best. (Obviously the
chickenhawks can't make this argument!). Under those
circumstances, everyone with any pull is going to do what they
can to protect their offspring. You cannot legislate that away,
because it will happen no matter how you write the laws.

There's no such thing as a fair draft.