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.
Well, I guess it is theoretically possible that there could be a future war requiring drafting over two million soldiers.
And I suppose it is theoretically possible that some young women would purposely get pregnant and thus commit to the expense and effort of raising a child for at least 18 years so they could put off being drafted for 9 months.
Sure, that's a totally logical and reasonable argument to make against this court decision.
I wonder why the lawyers didn't use it?
I'm not trying to make an argument against it.
This is a discussion board, no? Just discussing a possible theoretical issue.
Better to stick with "oh well the pretty, pretty princesses cant cut it because they will miss their salon appointments or well now those feminists will see what its like to get blown to bits on the front line, serves 'em right!
Who are they? what privileges do they want, what responsibilities of being a man do they not want.
I'd consider access to government grants for college and the potential of being hired into a government job as privileges. I would also assume that, given the choice, most women would prefer NOT to have the responsibility of signing up for the draft in order to acquire those privileges.
I'd consider access to government grants for college and the potential of being hired into a government job as privileges. I would also assume that, given the choice, most women would prefer NOT to have the responsibility of signing up for the draft in order to acquire those privileges.
Thats one.
I would not have considered it a privileged as women were not permitted until just recently to serve in combat or in just any military position. If you are not allowed in then exclusion isnt really a privilege.
I would assume that most men would prefer NOT to have the responsibility either. It has been mostly men who have fought against female conscription.
Thats one.
I would not have considered it a privileged as women were not permitted until just recently to serve in combat or in just any military position. If you are not allowed in then exclusion inst really a privilege.
I would assume that most men would prefer NOT to have the responsibility either. It has been mostly men who have fought against female conscription.
I'm not talking about conscription, or combat. I talking about holding a job in ANY government position. Whether it's working for the IRS, Dept of Child Services, the SEC, FTC, FCC, any of them. There are no stipulations for a women to work in any of those. Yet, to this day, men are allowed ONLY if they've registered with the selective service (the draft). That's the inequality we're talking about here. And, again, this isn't even touching on the government grants for education.
Declaring the all-male draft unconstitutional is just a vehicle they're trying to use to get the selective service requirement abolished. It's a good thing.
I'm not talking about conscription, or combat. I talking about holding a job in ANY government position. Whether it's working for the IRS, Dept of Child Services, the SEC, FTC, FCC, any of them. There are no stipulations for a women to work in any of those. Yet, to this day, men are allowed ONLY if they've registered with the selective service (the draft). That's the inequality we're talking about here. And, again, this isn't even touching on the government grants for education.
Declaring the all-male draft unconstitutional is just a vehicle they're trying to use to get the selective service requirement abolished. It's a good thing.
Being a retired U.S. Army "Combat Arms" senior NCO, I say heck yeah, make females register with the selective services. It's about time!!
You want equal rights and now you got them!! Welcome to the wonderful World of the Infantry, Artillery, Armor, Combat Engineers and the Cavalry!!
You'll have fun... Especially when it's time to fight to the last soldier, in order to hold the line at all costs. And all you have left to fight with is a bayonet, axe handle, an entrenching tool and whatever you can take off of the enemy YOU killed in some "hand to hand" combat.
Don't worry if you can't hack it with one of those "Combat Arms" jobs/MOS. The Army will always have needs for "bullet stoppers" and "self propelled mine detectors."
The end result will be that more men end up having to fight while the women mostly stay in the rear with the gear. Physically weaker men are the losers here because they will have no way to stay off of the front lines.
Its all dependent on your MOS, NEC etc. And, there are plenty of women serving in combat positions already.
Read here on Chief Kent. She was CTI, a liinguist for the Navy.. Many more like her out there. And if the front line gets overtaken, the rest of the military will be combat veterans real quick. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/u...itary-spy.html
And even though I have 2 daughters, I say heck yes, they need to register too.
Of course they should be drafted. Troops get hungry on the front lines. What better than a well made sammich when there's a brief cease-fire.
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.
