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 am exactly on topic. If women are now allowed into combat positions, then they should also be required to register with Selective Service. Or is "EQUALITY" one of those words you choke on and only give lip-service? Prior to women being allowed to serve in combat MOS' women were exempt from registering with the Selective Service. All that has changed now.
Nobody knows whether any man or woman will meet the requirements for a combat MOS, or any MOS for that matter, until they have gone through boot camp and got training in their MOS. In my all male boot camp platoon in the Marine Corps only 57.5% completed and graduated. The rest washed out or were set back. If women were subject to the exact same standards as men, that percentage of wash outs would be considerably higher.
Liberal freaks are not interested in "EQUALITY." They are only interested in political correctness, no matter how many are killed in the process. I know that for a fact, since I was on active duty at the time Carter and the Democrat controlled Congress significantly lowered the standard for women in the military purely for the sake of increasing the number of women in the military.
As long as women continue to meet sub-standard requirements, there will never be "EQUALITY." It will continue to ruin unit cohesion, earn them no respect from their male counterparts, and destroy morale. All for the sake of political correctness.
Wrong again buckaroo, Selective serice is NOT the topic here, want to discuss whether women should be required to register for the draft then start a thread, it should be an interesting discussion.
You assume that the women that would try and become combat soldiers would be a representation of all women, hence your thought that even more would washout of training. The problem with that is the vast majority of women that would even want to join or think they had what it takes would NOT be run of the mill women, and they may actually have lower washout rates since they would be the tougher gals to begin with. I saw more than a few men washout during AIT, many you could tell had no business in a combat unit and fortunately for everyone they did not make it. My point is and always has been, IF a woman can pass the training, with No considerations for her gender, then she should be allowed to serve in that MOS. If you disagree with that scenerio then come up with a good reason and state it, so far I have seen no one give one valid reason that women should not be allowed to fight along side the men.
Pssst, if you knew what Equality actually means you would have no issue with women that can serve doing so
Wrong again buckaroo, Selective serice is NOT the topic here, want to discuss whether women should be required to register for the draft then start a thread, it should be an interesting discussion.
You assume that the women that would try and become combat soldiers would be a representation of all women, hence your thought that even more would washout of training. The problem with that is the vast majority of women that would even want to join or think they had what it takes would NOT be run of the mill women, and they may actually have lower washout rates since they would be the tougher gals to begin with. I saw more than a few men washout during AIT, many you could tell had no business in a combat unit and fortunately for everyone they did not make it. My point is and always has been, IF a woman can pass the training, with No considerations for her gender, then she should be allowed to serve in that MOS. If you disagree with that scenerio then come up with a good reason and state it, so far I have seen no one give one valid reason that women should not be allowed to fight along side the men.
Pssst, if you knew what Equality actually means you would have no issue with women that can serve doing so
There is a serious flaw in your argument. Liberal freaks have already given women "considerations for her gender" by lowering the standards for military service. Democrats hate the military so much they would rather see Americans die just so they can support their politically correct stupidity.
Not a single women in the military today is required to meet the same standards as men must meet to be in a combat MOS, or any MOS for that matter. Until that changes, and true equality exists, no women should be allowed anywhere near a combat MOS.
As long as women continue to meet sub-standard requirements, there will never be "EQUALITY." It will continue to ruin unit cohesion, earn them no respect from their male counterparts, and destroy morale.
"A male corporal, Kyle Schmidinger, said his unit couldn't have asked for a better commander than Collette.
'She did what any leader would do. She fought for us and she took care of us. There was never any doubt she couldn't do the job as well as a male commander,' Schmidinger said.
So Canadian women can earn respect from male soldiers, but American women are not capable of doing so?
Which is not surprising since absolutely every Democrat utterly despises the Fourteenth Amendment.
Not true. I know plenty of self-proclaimed Democrats who like the 14th Amendment. Your claim is false.
Also, you don't know how the military works do you? If you change the physical standards for men and women NOW it'll cost A LOT of money and A LOT of time. Exactly where is that money going to come from and who is going to foot the bill?
This is an insult to the many women that serve honorably. Historically, many women fought the germans and many others, they simply weren't given the right in the service proper. Perhaps things would have been faster had they.
"A male corporal, Kyle Schmidinger, said his unit couldn't have asked for a better commander than Collette.
'She did what any leader would do. She fought for us and she took care of us. There was never any doubt she couldn't do the job as well as a male commander,' Schmidinger said.
So Canadian women can earn respect from male soldiers, but American women are not capable of doing so?
No, not while Democrats create one standard for men, and a lower-standard for women. There is no equality in the US military, and until that changes there were not be unit cohesion, morale, or respect because it was not earned.
Not true. I know plenty of self-proclaimed Democrats who like the 14th Amendment. Your claim is false.
Not a single Democrat ever voted for the Fourteenth Amendment. So do not feed me this bull about Democrats liking something they are on record for vehemently opposing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adiosToreador
Also, you don't know how the military works do you? If you change the physical standards for men and women NOW it'll cost A LOT of money and A LOT of time. Exactly where is that money going to come from and who is going to foot the bill?
I should know how the military works. I was on active duty from 1972 through 1980. The Democrats did not have any problem changing the physical standards for men and women in 1978 during the worst recession since the Great Depression. Just like today, Democrats spent far more than they collected in revenues, yet they lowered the physical requirements for women in the military. So your argument is completely without merit.
It will obviously have to be a Republican who introduces the bill, since Democrats only believe in giving lip-service to equality.
This is an insult to the many women that serve honorably. Historically, many women fought the germans and many others, they simply weren't given the right in the service proper. Perhaps things would have been faster had they.
The insult to women was done by Democrats. After all, it was the Democrat controlled Congress and President Carter who lowered the standard for women in the military. Obviously Democrats do not think women are as capable as men. Women should be insulted. So should minorities. This is not the first time Democrats think so little of women and minorities. Affirmative Action is the biggest insult yet perpetrated by Democrats.
Women have always fought in wars. Maybe you ought to do some research and enlighten your ignorant brain of this fact.
It'll do you some good.
Yeah as camp followers, button sewing, hookers, cooks, bottle washers, powder monkey's, and nurses. In early wars there was no buttons to push, just to sew. I agree they need to start up signing in to Selective Service, BY the LAW.
hey if ya wanna be equal you have to at least do what others do who evidently are above equal. But being equal is a silly term under the law. No one is really equal to anyone else.
That's like saying a 2 year old is the equal to a 12 year old to a 22 year old to a 102 year old.. No equal there a bit.
"Deborah Sampson Gannett (December 17, 1760 – April 29, 1827[1][2]), better known as Deborah Sampson, was an American woman who disguised as a man in order to serve in the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. She is one of a small number of women with a documented record of military combat experience in that war.[3] She served 17 months in the army, as "Robert Shurtlieff", of Uxbridge, Massachusetts, was wounded in 1782 and honorably discharged at West Point, New York in 1783."
"August 30, 1862, proved to be yet another bloody day. Henry Clark was in the thick of things, fending off Federal troops in the Battle of Richmond, Kentucky, when the Confederate private caught an enemy shell in the thigh. Clark was swarmed by bluecoats and taken prisoner.
It was presumably when a Union medic treated Clark’s wound that the soldier’s tightly held secret was unmasked. Henry’s real name was Mary Ann. Indeed, she was a divorced mother of two.
When Federal troops realized that they had a woman on their hands, they moved quickly to release her—as long as she swore to return to the life of a proper lady. They even gave her a dress to wear. She agreed and was freed, then quickly cast off the frock and made her way back to the rebel army, where she was promptly promoted. Not long after, a young Confederate soldier—having joined a crowd gathered around Clark, then apparently serving openly as a female officer—wrote home: "Pa among all the curiosities I have seen since I left home one I must mention, a female Lieutenant."
A curiosity, yes, but to the surprise of many Civil War buffs even today, Clark was by no means unique. She was one of an estimated 400 women who took up arms in the war; they were not nurses, or laundresses or cooks, but actual female soldiers disguised as men, who marched, mastered their weapons, entered into battle and even gave their lives."
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.
