This year, thousands of 18-year-old males (including the seniors here at WHS) will receive small slips of paper in the mail from the United States government. These seemingly benign cards are reminders to sign up for the Selective Service (a registry that harbors information for potential conscription), and they carry quite a bit of weight behind them. Failing to register is a felony punishable by prison sentences and hefty fines, and registration is a prerequisite for federal loans (which, for some students, may be their only way to handle college expenses) and some federal jobs. Many mindlessly comply without realizing that such a system is unnecessary and unethical.

Many patriotic emotions are tied to the draft. In both war and peacetime, military service is often upheld as a civic duty, and a refusal to lay down one’s life for the country is seen as cowardice; however, in the event of a future war, their commitment may not even be desirable. In 2009, the Pentagon found that only 25 percent of males aged 17 to 24 years old qualified for military service. Reluctance to fight and other psychological barriers would also prevent those conscripted from being effective soldiers. At best, this makes the Selective Service an instance of bloated government bureaucracy.

There is another dimension to this: morality. Asking young men to work (even if that work may be on the battlefield) under governmental coercion is a violation of basic human freedom. Additionally, if the United States were to come close to considering a draft, it would leave society under extreme stress because these young men are often brothers, sons and friends.

I cannot recommend a refusal to register as a wise tactic, but I’m not convinced this is the only way to resist the Selective Service. Current and future senior boys at WHS should sign up as conscientious objectors, as a draft is useless if its subjects aren’t open to enlistment. The best way to resist the Selective Service, however, is to become more conscious of individual political activity; we must substitute support for policies that promote international conflict with support for global peace activism before the Selective Service becomes a serious problem.