Changes

'''Debate:  Was it discriminatory not to include girls and women in this draft?'''

'''Debate:  Was it discriminatory not to include girls and women in this draft?'''

Congress declared war in April 1917, and fighting lasted until 1918.  Americans suffered many tragic losses in life, but because of our late entry our overall losses were much less than that suffered by the European countries.

Congress declared war in April 1917, and fighting lasted until 1918.  Americans suffered many tragic losses in life, but because of our late entry our overall losses were much less than those suffered by the European countries.

Obviously not everyone agreed with the war or the draft.  But Congress passed laws to censor dissent.  It passed the Espionage Act in 1917, which imposed fines of $10,000 and jail time of 20 years for any person thought to be aiding the enemy, and authorized the U.S. Postal Service to ban any material found to be treasonable.  The Sedition Act, passed in May 1918, made it illegal to speak out to discourage the purchase of war bonds.

Obviously not everyone agreed with the war or the draft.  But Congress passed laws to censor dissent.  It passed the Espionage Act in 1917, which imposed fines of $10,000 and jail time of 20 years for any person thought to be aiding the enemy, and authorized the U.S. Postal Service to ban any material found to be treasonable.  The Sedition Act, passed in May 1918, made it illegal to speak out to discourage the purchase of war bonds.

When citizens challenged these limitations on the right of free speech, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Congress and against the First Amendment.  In ''Schenck v. U.S.'' (1919), the Court upheld the prosecution for any speech that created a "clear and present danger" to the national interest of enlisting soldiers.  In ''Abrams v. U.S.'' (1919), the Court sustained convictions under the Espionage Act for leafletting against American opposition to the communist revolution in Russia.  Finally, in ''Debs v. U.S.'' (1919) the Court upheld an indictment (criminal charges) against someone for speaking out against military recruitment of soldiers.  The Supreme Court's interpretation of the right to free speech under the First Amendment is stronger today than it was in 1919.

When citizens challenged these limitations on the right of free speech, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Congress and against the First Amendment.  In ''Schenck v. U.S.'' (1919), the Court upheld the prosecution for any speech that created a "clear and present danger" to the national interest of enlisting soldiers.  In ''Abrams v. U.S.'' (1919), the Court sustained convictions under the Espionage Act for leafletting against American opposition to the communist revolution in Russia.  Finally, in ''Debs v. U.S.'' (1919) the Court upheld an indictment (criminal charges) against someone for speaking out against military recruitment of soldiers.  (The Supreme Court's interpretation of the right to free speech under the First Amendment is stronger today than it was in 1919.)

'''Debate:  Was it wrong for Congress and the Supreme Court to limit free speech during World War I?'''

'''Debate:  Was it wrong for Congress and the Supreme Court to limit free speech during World War I?'''

In business, advocates of "social Darwinism" included Herbert Spencer in England and William Graham Sumner in the United States, and they felt that civilization depended on unregulated business activity so that only the fit would survive and thrive.

In business, advocates of "social Darwinism" included Herbert Spencer in England and William Graham Sumner in the United States, and they felt that civilization depended on unregulated business activity so that only the fit would survive and thrive.

Intellectuals began expanding the "survival of the fittest" theory of evolution to social issues, and advocated that the "unfit" should be eliminated from mankind just as Darwin claimed they were naturally eliminated from the animal world.  This led to the "eugenics" movement, which taught that those with the highest IQ or other advantageous traits should be favored, and those with low IQ or undesirable traits should be prevented from having children, or even eliminated themselves.  These ideas became very popular in England and Germany.

Intellectuals began expanding the "survival of the fittest" theory of evolution to social issues, and advocated that the "unfit" should be eliminated from mankind just as Darwin claimed they were naturally eliminated from the animal world.  This led to the "eugenics" movement, which taught that those with the highest IQ or other advantageous traits should be favored, and those with low IQ or undesirable traits should be prevented from having children, or even eliminated themselves.  These ideas became very popular in England and Germany.  Planned Parenthood, which does abortions today, was founded by a believer in eugenics: Margaret Sanger.  One of her many offensive views was that government approval should be required before a married couple can have a child.

In the United States, the eugenics movement and social Darwinism found its biggest following at universities like Harvard, which had already been drifting away from their Christian roots.  Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who served on the High Court for over 30 years, studied at Harvard and became a big believer in Darwinism.  Previously he had fought against slavery in the Civil War, but then he abandoned his youthful morality and instead embraced the Darwinian utilitarianism, including eugenics.  Justices Holmes thereby moved away from morality and logic, and towards his own view of the teachings of "experience".  "The life of the law has not been logic, but experience," he famously said.

In the United States, the eugenics movement and social Darwinism found its biggest following at universities like Harvard, which had already been drifting away from their Christian roots.  Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who served on the High Court for over 30 years, studied at Harvard and became a big believer in Darwinism.  Previously he had fought against slavery in the Civil War, but then he abandoned his youthful morality and instead embraced the Darwinian utilitarianism, including eugenics.  Justices Holmes thereby moved away from morality and logic, and towards his own view of the teachings of "experience".  "The life of the law has not been logic, but experience," he famously said.