Some people believe those under 21 serving in the military should be allowed to drink alcohol even if non-military citizens are not. The crux of the argument is, “if I am old enough to die for my country, I am old enough to drink.” Still, America’s Founding Fathers clearly believed the military, as an extension of the government, should serve the people rather than the other way around, so, one could argue, military members should be held, not only to the same standards as non-military citizens, but to an even higher standard.
- For the assignment this week, write a 500-750 word paper arguing whether military personnel should or should not receive rights and/or liberties not afforded to non-military citizens. In the paper, include the opposing position along with your rebuttal (of that opposing position).
- For instance, if you wrote a paper arguing that military personnel should receive rights not afforded to non-military citizens (and why), then the rebuttal would be that military personnel should not receive rights not afforded to non-military citizens (and why).
- Note: A rebuttal is a form of evidence that is presented to contradict other evidence that has been presented by an adverse party.
- Include a title page, and use 3-5 references to support your position (Wikipedia may not be one of your sources).