My father was in the army during Vietnam. I think I mentioned on another thread that when he landed at the airport after his second tour of duty (after seeing many of his buddies killed), people would spit on him and shout at him.

 

He and I have discussed Ali. He respects Ali for sticking to his religious principles. He does not respect those celebrities and individuals that protested against the soldiers. Protest the decision to go to war, but not the soldiers who fought.

 

Nice post...as the kids say today, hate the game, not the player so to speak. This seems to be the big difference between the protesters then and those protesting now. I have no respect for persons who disrespect those who choose to serve. I tried to enlist twice and was DQ'd both times for a medical condition. I have many family members who have served at various times. Thankfully, by a coincidence of ages, only a couple of them actually saw combat (WW II and Korea) so I respect those who have and are serving now. I also respect those who adhere to their convictions and refuse. Part of defending our country (which I do not believe was the case in Vietnam and is in question by many now) is defending all of our rights including freedom of religion, speech, etc.

Boxing and warfare are two very different endeavors. If you cannot see the difference in the two, you need to research both...

 

Wow, thanks for the insight.

I haven't researched him either, I just find it funny that a boxer that makes a living beating the crap out of people considers himself a pacifist.

I don't believe Ali ever claimed he was a pacifist.

Frazier beat Ali, Foreman beat Frazier, Ali beat Foreman....kinda looks like a standoff. Ali was a great boxer and a greater entertainer. I enjoyed the great fights Hagler, Duran, Hearns and Leonard, better than any Ali fight I ever saw. I think Ali beating Foreman is on par with NC State beating Houston, would not have happened again in 10 fights JMHO.

 

A lot of people stood up for what they thought and their beliefs. I think that Ali gets so much love because we (society) always seem to need an icon. Parkinsons has silenced him in a way, there are no new sound bites coming out with him saying what he thinks. I feel he would still be very controversial if he were able to be heard and alot of people would not like what he was saying.

 

As far as being picked on and being drafted, just 9 years earlier Elvis was drafted and served in the US Army. I would guess that in 1958-59 Elvis was bigger than Ali was at any point in his life.

I think of the line in n old Merle Haggard song: "they love our milk and honey but then they preach about another way of livin'". and "if you don't love it, leave it". whe I think about Cassius Clay.

and let this song that i'm singing be a warning...

How was Ali any different than the guy in the Oval Office???

The difference was Cuban Cigars and a one Monica Lewinsky

He gave up something that he loved for a period of time for what he believed in, we could use someone like that now actually.

I love Merle Haggard, but I couldn't agree more with you here, LBBC. :thumb: :thumb:

 

One of the things I love the most about this country is is the room made for dissent within the boundaries of law.

 

 

Problem with that logic is, draft dodgers are not dissenting within the boundaries of the law. They are violating the law if they are drafted and refuse to serve. I have no respect for anyone that engages in or supports the concept of civil disobedience. The law is the law and it must be complied with until it is changed. To permit those folks who disagree with it to disobey with it creates a lack of respect for the law. And that results in a break down of society. Personally I think a lot of the crime on the streets today is a direct result of the disobedience to the law in the 60's and 70's.

 

Frankly, I don't even remember if Ali dodged the draft. Bad memory I guess. In any event, I don't consider Ali some kind of American icon or hero. Then again, I've never been the jock sniffer type that gets all wrapped up in athletes. I've got more respect and admiration for the blue collar man or woman that works two jobs to provide for his or her family than I have for any pro athlete,whether its Ali, Tiger or Michael and I wouldn't go out of my way to meet either of those three. If you think I'm full of it, I had the opportunity to golf for free with Michael Jordan (in his foursome) about 15 years ago in his Foundation fundraiser. Told my client, who was on the Foundation's Board and in whose place I would be golfing, that I was not interested. My client was dumbfounded and asked why not. Told him I didn't like golf.

 

Maybe my values are warped, then again maybe not, but I chuckle in amazement when I see people fawn all over pro athletes and politicians. Its really kind of funny yet sad. Like I said, I respect the blue collar folks and the young men and women serving our country (particularly those that actually disagree with the mission but serve because their country asks them to) much more than the likes of Ali.

It's easy to label someone as a coward for not "going along" with a compulsary draft when we don't live in an age where a draft is in place.

 

It's easy to dismiss someone's character when their beliefs don't fall in line with one's own.

 

What's not easy is to stand up for one's beliefs at the risk of every personal achievement you've attained can and will be stripped from you and people will cast aspersions on your name, your motives and your foever.

 

What's not easy is to rebuild yourself after you've been destroyed.

 

What's not easy is to seek a higher purpose and bring a greater meaning to your world views by using your fame or infamy.

 

It always surprises me that people call him a coward. Are these people anxious to have the draft reinstated? Would those people "toe the line" when the government decides that regardless of your personal beliefs, you will serve?

 

The Ali Center is much, MUCH more than a museum. It's an education center and the site of future initiatives toward world peace.

 

I realize none of the above will explain the "big deal" about Ali, but I hope it at least gives some insight into the man and into the times in which he was most influential.

 

He may or may not have been a coward. My guess is only Ali knows.

 

If he refused to serve and did dodge the draft (I honestly don't remember) then I have big problems with him. And as someone who volunteered to serve my country I have every right to have those problems with him.

 

I don't agree with the draft. Never have. But this country cannot be successfully run if we allow (or even worse, show some kind of great respect for) people who disobey every law that they don't personally agree with. People who bomb abortion clinics because they don't agree that abortion should be legal, are wrong. People who don't wear seatbelts or require their children to wear them because they don't agree with the law, are wrong. People who smoke pot because they think it should be legal, are wrong. And people who refused to serve when they were drafted, are wrong. "Standing up for your beliefs" when it violates the law, is wrong. People in this country used to understand that principle, but its been lost. If you disagree with the law, work hard to have it changed, but until then comply with it. Perhaps if we had more respect for authority and the law, we would have near the discipline problems we have in school and on the streets. When we hold people up for their noble defiance of the law, just what message are we sending?

 

Rockmom, I've got a feeling that if one of your children disobeyed one of your rules, even if they legitimately felt you were wrong, you might not be as understanding and supportive of their position as you seem to be of Ali. But that's just my guess:banana:.

He may or may not have been a coward. My guess is only Ali knows.

 

If he refused to serve and did dodge the draft (I honestly don't remember) then I have big problems with him. And as someone who volunteered to serve my country I have every right to have those problems with him.

 

I don't agree with the draft. Never have. But this country cannot be successfully run if we allow (or even worse, show some kind of great respect for) people who disobey every law that they don't personally agree with. People who bomb abortion clinics because they don't agree that abortion should be legal, are wrong. People who don't wear seatbelts or require their children to wear them because they don't agree with the law, are wrong. People who smoke pot because they think it should be legal, are wrong. And people who refused to serve when they were drafted, are wrong. "Standing up for your beliefs" when it violates the law, is wrong. People in this country used to understand that principle, but its been lost. If you disagree with the law, work hard to have it changed, but until then comply with it. Perhaps if we had more respect for authority and the law, we would have near the discipline problems we have in school and on the streets. When we hold people up for their noble defiance of the law, just what message are we sending?

 

Rockmom, I've got a feeling that if one of your children disobeyed one of your rules, even if they legitimately felt you were wrong, you might not be as understanding and supportive of their position as you seem to be of Ali. But that's just my guess:banana:.

 

For the record, I don't consider anyone who filed for a waiver as a concientious objector a draft dodger. The provision was set up through our government to provide a legitimate route to pursue as a reason to not be drafted. To me, this is no different than those who chose to pursue higher education instead of being drafted. The governement provided that option. The fact that the status of concientious objector had to be approved by the government on a case by case basis means to me that there is at least a fairly significant subjectivity in the process.

 

I consider a "dodger" one who completely by-passes the pursuit of a legitimate route. Ali did not just "run". He stood up for his beliefs, followed the proper routes, and bore the consequences.

 

LNeck, I don't like it when one of my kids disobeys my rules, but I do recognize at times they will, and my job is to make sure they know the consequences. I've rarely forbade my kids from anything. But I have always let them know what the consequences could/would be if they chose a particular course of action. I've always made sure that those consequences were meted out when the time came as well. I don't believe in blind obedience. I believe that kids need to develop an ability to reason and make decisions for themselves, and have always worked very hard to make sure I stick to that principle in raising my children. Have they done things I don't approve of? Oh, ABSOLUTELY! However, there have been times that when they've chosen to go against my "rule", I've realized at a later date my rule was not the "right thing". I'm not above admitting that I erred in my "laying down the law".

For the record, I don't consider anyone who filed for a waiver as a concientious objector a draft dodger. The provision was set up through our government to provide a legitimate route to pursue as a reason to not be drafted. To me, this is no different than those who chose to pursue higher education instead of being drafted. The governement provided that option. The fact that the status of concientious objector had to be approved by the government on a case by case basis means to me that there is at least a fairly significant subjectivity in the process.

 

I consider a "dodger" one who completely by-passes the pursuit of a legitimate route. Ali did not just "run". He stood up for his beliefs, followed the proper routes, and bore the consequences.

 

LNeck, I don't like it when one of my kids disobeys my rules, but I do recognize at times they will, and my job is to make sure they know the consequences. I've rarely forbade my kids from anything. But I have always let them know what the consequences could/would be if they chose a particular course of action. I've always made sure that those consequences were meted out when the time came as well. I don't believe in blind obedience. I believe that kids need to develop an ability to reason and make decisions for themselves, and have always worked very hard to make sure I stick to that principle in raising my children. Have they done things I don't approve of? Oh, ABSOLUTELY! However, there have been times that when they've chosen to go against my "rule", I've realized at a later date my rule was not the "right thing". I'm not above admitting that I erred in my "laying down the law".

His CO was the result of joining the Black Nation of Islam who were against the war due to the feeling that blacks were fighting for a nation in which they were not equal. This is not a legitimate reason for a CO. You stated earlier that he had risked everything he achieved for his beliefs. I say he risked his beliefs and achievements to save his hide. There is no greater calling than to serve. He was the very face of a doger.

For the record, I don't consider anyone who filed for a waiver as a concientious objector a draft dodger. The provision was set up through our government to provide a legitimate route to pursue as a reason to not be drafted. To me, this is no different than those who chose to pursue higher education instead of being drafted. The governement provided that option. The fact that the status of concientious objector had to be approved by the government on a case by case basis means to me that there is at least a fairly significant subjectivity in the process.

 

I consider a "dodger" one who completely by-passes the pursuit of a legitimate route. Ali did not just "run". He stood up for his beliefs, followed the proper routes, and bore the consequences.

 

LNeck, I don't like it when one of my kids disobeys my rules, but I do recognize at times they will, and my job is to make sure they know the consequences. I've rarely forbade my kids from anything. But I have always let them know what the consequences could/would be if they chose a particular course of action. I've always made sure that those consequences were meted out when the time came as well. I don't believe in blind obedience. I believe that kids need to develop an ability to reason and make decisions for themselves, and have always worked very hard to make sure I stick to that principle in raising my children. Have they done things I don't approve of? Oh, ABSOLUTELY! However, there have been times that when they've chosen to go against my "rule", I've realized at a later date my rule was not the "right thing". I'm not above admitting that I erred in my "laying down the law".

 

 

 

The bolded part seems to me to just be more rationalization for agreeing that people have the right to not follow laws that they disagree with. If the law permitting CO's required govt approval and he did not get it, subjective or not, then he has to follow the law and serve unless and until he gets the approval. Period.

 

 

As to your children, if you think they needed to develop the ability to reason, then you wouldn't have made the rule, you would have said, "here's my advice on why you shouldn't do this, but you make up your mind yourself". But in those circumstances when you specifically told them they cannot do something and they did it anyway, I sincerely doubt you would say, "its okay that you intentionally and willfully broke the rule I set forth because you were just standing up for something you believed in".

 

As for the blind obedience issue, I have zero problem with raising concerns about rules and expressing those concerns to the law makers. But until the law maker (be that the President, Congress, your school teacher, the police officer on the street or you, as the parent) changes the rule then the rule is followed.

 

Just think what a mess you would have running a business or supervising employees if every time you told a subordinate to do something that they disagreed with, they could refuse to do it. It would be a mess. If Ali refused to serve because he disagreed with the justification of the war, it is no different. If he thought the war was illegal, then he resorts to the courts to have that determination made. Until that happens, he complies with the law.

 

I have to admit that as an attorney, I am totally disappointed with the justification for disobeying the law that I have read on here. Extremely disappointed.

His CO was the result of joining the Black Nation of Islam who were against the war due to the feeling that blacks were fighting for a nation in which they were not equal. This is not a legitimate reason for a CO. You stated earlier that he had risked everything he achieved for his beliefs. I say he risked his beliefs and achievements to save his hide. There is no greater calling than to serve. He was the very face of a doger.

 

 

There in lies the Catch-22 of the government's status of conceintious objector. You think his reason wasn't legitimate. He believed it was. How can one person (or governmental entity) say what is to be a legitimate "conscience" of another?

It is my belief that the anti-war element in this country needed a "hero" to symbolize their cause. Clay/Ali seemed to fill the bill particularly since he refused/dodged the draft. Thus, he was "drafted" into the cause.

 

Through the years, his "importance" has been magnified far beyond any level of reality.

 

He was a fine fighter. He was a marvelous "entertainer". However, pound for pound, he was no Sugar Ray Robinson. Nonetheless, as is often the case, hype has far surpassed reality and Clay/Ali has thrived on all the hype.

The bolded part seems to me to just be more rationalization for agreeing that people have the right to not follow laws that they disagree with. If the law permitting CO's required govt approval and he did not get it, subjective or not, then he has to follow the law and serve unless and until he gets the approval. Period.

 

 

As to your children, if you think they needed to develop the ability to reason, then you wouldn't have made the rule, you would have said, "here's my advice on why you shouldn't do this, but you make up your mind yourself". But in those circumstances when you specifically told them they cannot do something and they did it anyway, I sincerely doubt you would say, "its okay that you intentionally and willfully broke the rule I set forth because you were just standing up for something you believed in".

 

As for the blind obedience issue, I have zero problem with raising concerns about rules and expressing those concerns to the law makers. But until the law maker (be that the President, Congress, your school teacher, the police officer on the street or you, as the parent) changes the rule then the rule is followed.

 

Just think what a mess you would have running a business or supervising employees if every time you told a subordinate to do something that they disagreed with, they could refuse to do it. It would be a mess. If Ali refused to serve because he disagreed with the justification of the war, it is no different. If he thought the war was illegal, then he resorts to the courts to have that determination made. Until that happens, he complies with the law.

 

I have to admit that as an attorney, I am totally disappointed with the justification for disobeying the law that I have read on here. Extremely disappointed.

 

 

Another excellent post LN....:thumb: