Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I voted too quickly. I want to be the first person to say "Transgenders Only". The appropriation of womanhood should stop where the draft begins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabrrita
Since this country still has stall passage of the Equal Rights Amendment and thus our Constitution does not recognize women as equals, why should women's be compelled to be "equals" by the government for convenience? Pass the ERA and I say not only register for Selective Service but draft us As Equals!
Come do my job for one day & tell me if you still think us females are "equal" on a battlefield. "My job" involves wrangling with a 6 foot 5, 280 lb teenager with severe autism who developed puberty onset aggression with explosive rage. The only advantage I have over him that I wouldn't have against a soldier hopped up on 'performance enhancers' who carries a gun; is that he doesn't have a gun. Come do actual hands on combat, every day with a man & tell me if you think we are equal on the battlefield.
On the other hand, I am not equal to a man for another reason. I'm not equal, because I am superior to men; because besides this one disabled son I have, I gave birth to another SIX able bodied young men who would be equals to any man on a battlefield. I'm a natural resource & I should be protected, just as all future mothers should be.
"Not equal" doesn't mean "less than". I am less equal in strength & endurance but superior in my ability to contribute. . (laugh emoji because I'm imagining the reactions to my post)
Should females be required to register for Selective Service just as males are required to do?
I understand that we currently do not have a draft running. This discussion is for future drafts.
I think it is terrible that we subject a portion of our citizenship to conscription. However it would seem a bit more 'fair' to open the net wide to hazard all of our citizenship, rather than only the males.
I served on Active Duty for 20 years, during which time females had very restrictive roles in the military. Today I think that nearly all roles have been modified and opened to females.
Any task a man would have been expected to perform, now females can be trained to be proficient to perform.
Sure...but it's a moot point - hasn't been a draft for more than 50 years and there won't be another one. Most of the public can't even be troubled to put a mask on - you think they'll send their kids to war?
I voted too quickly. I want to be the first person to say "Transgenders Only". The appropriation of womanhood should stop where the draft begins.
Come do my job for one day & tell me if you still think us females are "equal" on a battlefield. "My job" involves wrangling with a 6 foot 5, 280 lb teenager with severe autism who developed puberty onset aggression with explosive rage. The only advantage I have over him that I wouldn't have against a soldier hopped up on 'performance enhancers' who carries a gun; is that he doesn't have a gun. Come do actual hands on combat, every day with a man & tell me if you think we are equal on the battlefield.
On the other hand, I am not equal to a man for another reason. I'm not equal, because I am superior to men; because besides this one disabled son I have, I gave birth to another SIX able bodied young men who would be equals to any man on a battlefield. I'm a natural resource & I should be protected, just as all future mothers should be.
"Not equal" doesn't mean "less than". I am less equal in strength & endurance but superior in my ability to contribute. . (laugh emoji because I'm imagining the reactions to my post)
Not sure if that is the appropriate comparison for your job is probably harder in that you have more restrictions than someone in battle.
That was one of my advantages in that I didn't recognize the restrictions that it appears so many men live by. I was rated as "unhonorable" because I would out turn others and take them out from behind.
But.....that's Men for one. I remember another comrade telling me, "Tamara, you worry me for you seem like the kind to jump out of the bushes and try to shoot me.".
"Heck, you don't have to worry about that. If we ever come to blows, I'll take you out at a couple of hundred yards with a sniper rifle." (I love the M-14/AR-10!)
"Coward...,".
Fight, "civilized"......probably. Fight using whatever you have? Maybe not....... (mind you, I am just saying here and pretty much not about the question of drafting women; I've already answered that question)
Women shouldn't be subject to a draft until the armed forces are able to guarantee female recruits safety from harassment and assault by their own officers and fellow enlisted personnel. No way no how.
No woman should be subject to work in Hollywood until the entertainment industry is able to guarantee female actors safety from harassment and assault by their own producers, directors, and fellow actors.
The utility of a draft is dependent on the kind of war you're going to fight.
A draft requires a war that permits continuous accession above the rate of voluntary accession. It provides "cannon fodder"--troops to sustain a long, relatively low-intensity, and fairly low-tech war with a high casualty rate.
If the war is very high intensity or high-tech (think the Persian Gulf War), a draft has little utility. If the war is of low enough intensity and high-tech with low enough casualty rates (think of the Afgan War), it can be maintained with voluntary accession.
A war with Russia (or China) would be a "come as you are" war. It would be high intensity and high-tech, moving too fast for the slow pace of draft accession and training. The US is likely to run its arsenal dry before the first draftee finished accession training, and the war would likely be decided before a draft board can even get into operation.
A war with anyone else will be fought either like the Persian Gulf War or the Afghan War. There's not going to be another Vietnam War.
especially china, as all Chinese citizens are required to serve at least a year in the service so 90% of there population has atleast basic military training and since they are the largest population on the planet they can throw more solders at us than we have bullets so even taking nukes and "high tech" off the table on their side(if we used modern equipment and they used tech from the 50's) we would still have a hard time winning a war against them based on the sheer numbers of their potential fighting force and the production speed they are capable of to build planes and tanks. unlike in WWII we can't retool all of our factories to make tanks and planes like we did in the 40s, most of our factories moved to Asia and South America decades ago
It is not equal protection under the law and reverse discriminatory to only have men do it at age 18.
The US Constitution allows Congress to have a system of preparing for forced conscription for military service but it applies only to men. Women are not included in the US Constitution for compulsory military registration or service. This is why under the law, selective service registration and any draft is limited in the US to men. And, because the US has not passed the Equal Rights Amendment, the Constitutional authority granted Congress is still limited to men.
So, Congress has attempted several times to use targeted equality legislation (similar to Title VI style legislation) to say women and men are considered equal for the purpose of the Selective Service process. But, they have TWICE ran afoul of the US Supreme Court that essentially has not allowed the inclusion of women in selective service registration because the military itself is not equal for men and women.
It's clear that the SCOTUS does feel it should be unconstitutional to force men and not women to register, but without passage of the ERA, it falls on Congress to address the issue. And since the military itself does not treat men and women equally, SCOTUS refused to accept a challenge (June 2021) to an Appeals Court ruling that women can't be force to registers because they are not being treated equally in the military. I believe it was Justice Kavanaugh that wrote that that the Court will not accept the challenge while Congress holds the ability to fix the equality issue. Basically, Congress can make the military equal for men and women; they just haven't.
I just don't get why this is so hard for people to understand!!!!!
especially china, as all Chinese citizens are required to serve at least a year in the service so 90% of there population has atleast basic military training and since they are the largest population on the planet they can throw more solders at us than we have bullets so even taking nukes and "high tech" off the table on their side(if we used modern equipment and they used tech from the 50's) we would still have a hard time winning a war against them based on the sheer numbers of their potential fighting force and the production speed they are capable of to build planes and tanks. unlike in WWII we can't retool all of our factories to make tanks and planes like we did in the 40s, most of our factories moved to Asia and South America decades ago
That really only applies if the US attempts a land battle with the Chinese in Asia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. (laugh emoji because I'm imagining the reactions to my post)
