Should women be required to register for military draft?

1. 69

   puddingicecreamposted 12 years ago

   All US male citizens are required to register for the military draft when they turn 18. Your thoughts?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Valemanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I had no idea that men in the US have to register for military draft.  Does this mean that every male has served in the military, or just that they are available for call-up?  I know in the UK all men were once required to serve a period of National Service, but I think it was some time in the '50s that it ended.  I personally don't think either gender should have to register for the military, if they have no calling in this direction.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         we're available to be called up by our tyrannical government who claims ownership of our lives.
         
         If it happens to me, I'm high-tailing to Canada. I'm not going to die for this false god known as the US.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            dutchman1951posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I did get called up, and by grace came home, but I will say I would not accept the call again.

            replyreport
         2. 59

            Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah, the future of the military is psyops and thats why the reptilian, er I mean human, scumbags who rule the planet want women in the military. And this is because women are natural masters of psyops. So dont fall for it ladies. Us men in civilian life REALLY dont object to being constantly mindf***ed by you, we really dont.
            
            But we will not be voluntarily mind f***ed by any authority system. And this question was posted specifically for that purpose. For mind f***ing. Nice try.

            replyreport
      2. 0

         Motown2Chitownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         It just means that they are available for call up, Valeman. 

         replyreport
   2. 60

      dutchman1951posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      yes

      replyreport
   3. 60

      Dave Mathewsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Why not! They seek to be seen as equal to men so why not have them register. It is their country too so they should be willing to protect what is theirs just as they would if they were a mother protecting her child.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      Stevennix2001posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      If you want true equality, then yes.

      replyreport
   5. 62

      qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Only those who qualify to join AARP should be eligible for the draft...of course this would have to be a law agreed to by all nations.
      
      AARP members both male and females are closer to natural death, and if they are KIA it'd just be a little sooner than expected.
       
      In males, their testosterone levels would have diminished to the point of them becoming wussys." The thought of hand to hand combat would scare the living shyte outa them!
      
      The senior ladies would be trained by LIFE to take care of their decrepit husbands so they could provide solace to male draftees who are suffering nervous breakdowns, strokes and ventricular tachacardia.
      
      They would be indispensible because the troops would be collapsing all about like the "Twin Towers" on 9/11!
      
      One such "draft" would put an end to conventional war worldwide!
      
      All the survivors would return home where they sit and plan that the next world war would end with a "tap" of a button on a computer keyboard.
      
      ...or have we already reached that stage of human "progress??"
      
      Qwark

      replyreport
   6. 61

      uncorrectedvisionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps women should not be allowed to vote unless they do.  It is a clear violation of federal law to separate women and men in this way and if the draft was started up again I would expect a lawsuit.
      
      Imagine if women were not permitted to join the FBI, CIA because those can be dangerous professions. In times of war the rapid development and deployment of combat troops is an absolute necessity but so is following them with pilots, truck drivers and medical crews.
      
      Women in a war for national survival have just as great a stake as men and so they should be registered with selective service.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         recommend1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Why 'selective service' - shouldn't they ALL be put into the front line with the least intelligent soldiers who are already used as cannon fodder,  'selecting' their positions just means that they would all be officers or secretaries safely back at base - and so by default they would become management in the same way as offices are full of totally incompetent female managers - to the detriment of intelligent women everywhere ?

         replyreport
         1. 61

            uncorrectedvisionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            The "selective service system" is the name given the system where by men register and are classified for potential service in case of a draft.  It is not a means whereby individual get to choose what job they want in the military.  You would be surprised how many choose combat designations.  I have known some remarkable young college graduates, one with a degree in nuclear engineering- no less, who have gone into the Navy with combat unit designations rather than choosing nice sedate office jobs.
            
            I also know one young man who enlisted, is a lance corporal in the Marines Corps and is assigned to office work and hates it.  He wants a combat unit.  Check Prince Harry, he has sought out combat arms as a military profession.

            replyreport
      2. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Are you a mad man?!
         
         Don't take away the right to vote because someone doesn't want to be shipped to a desert and shot by some guy defending his land!!!
         
         Demand an end to the draft!!!!!

         replyreport
         1. 61

            uncorrectedvisionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Perhaps voluntary military service should be a requirement for citizenship.  If one is not willing to sacrifice for one's country than perhaps they don't deserve citizenship.

            replyreport
   7. 59

      mathsciguyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      If you want what I think, then the answer is no, obviously, because nobody should be required by their government to support war efforts against their will, risk their lives for a cause they don't believe in, etc.
      However, I think it would earn the women's equality movement much respect among men who might otherwise disagree.  There seems to be an awful lot of outcry for entitlement in the US from various groups who have, absolutely, been disadvantaged and wronged and discriminated against.  But, what's good for the gander is good for the goose, right?  You can't ask for all the benefits and at the same time reject all the disadvantages.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      No, I don't think women should have to register (when/if the draft is reinstated).   Just because some women want to/and are capable of serving in that capacity doesn't, IMO, mean that all women should be required to do so.

      replyreport
   9. 71

      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      They don't register for the draft. They register for civil service. There isn't a draft anymore. As a civil service member, it is part of being American. You should be willing to protect your life, your community and/or nation, if desperately needed or warranted.
      
      The draft is void of individual rights. Hence, one reason it doesn't exist.
      
      As for women's rights? Yes, they too should be signed on for civil service. Equality rules should apply.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         uncorrectedvisionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         They register with the Selective Service Administration not civil service.

         replyreport
2. 74

   Reality Bytesposted 12 years ago

   Only if they truly want equality.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Shadesbreathposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Technically, for there to be true equality, women should have to.
      
      And they should also not be able to drop off an infant at a fire station with impunity until men can walk away from an infant with impunity as well.
      
      There are a lot of little places where "equality" starts to fail because, despite what some people will have you think, men and women are not EXACTLY the same.
      
      That said, I personally think mandating that women sign up for the draft would be ridiculous, tragic and disastrous. I can't think of anything that would infuriate me more as a father and husband and, for the first time ever, I think I would find myself in a screaming mob outside a capitol building somewhere... or worse.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Chaotic Chicaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Shadesbreath, you took the words right out of my mouth.
         
         I served but because I wanted to.  I am torn over the draft issue because we {as females} do want equality but use our ability to carry children as extenuating circumstances to get out of duties that are unfavorable for mothers.  There really is nothing equal about that as a man cannot say "I want out because I'm going to be a father".
         
         As for the rest of your statement, I further agree.  I am pro-choice though I could never go through with that option myself but it bothers me that a woman can terminate a pregnancy without the father's knowledge or permission.  I cannot come around to thinking that that is really okay.  If he wants the baby, shouldn't he have that choice?  I don't know, maybe I am wrong but the feminist movement has only gone so far.
         
         If we are talking true equality, then yes, women should have to sign up for the draft as men.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            No. The draft is evil and unconstitutional (isn't "fighting against your will" involuntary servitude"?).
            
            The correct answer is:
            
            "If we want equality, no one should have to register for a draft. The military should be purely voluntary."

            replyreport
   2. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      If women want true equality then they need to grow testicles and men need to grow ovaries.
      
      Let's face it - we're different. Women are more precious to humanity than men are. I can't bear children, nor can i feed them with... y'know... my chest.
      
      Here's a fun mental exercise -- if you had to pick 50 people (either man or woman) and you wanted to have the most children (labor) after 5 generations, how many men and women would you pick?
      
      If you picked more men than women, you're an idiot.
      
      Face it, we're different.
      
      Men are worth much less than women are, but are more athletic.  To back this up, look at world records for just about any athletic event.
      
      I mean no disrespect to women (or men, for that matter), it's just true.
      ***
      
      That being said - the draft should be abolished immediately - it's tyranny. No one should be required to enter.

      replyreport
      1. 74

         Reality Bytesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I do agree with you Evan, my response was to the OP's question.
         
         If men are required to register, then equality would make it mandatory for everyone.  Otherwise the Supreme Court would be hearing discrimination suits if the draft was ever re-instituted.   
         
         Not every human is battle ready men or women. Logistics are just as important if not more so then "boots on the ground".
         
         Sry I had to resort to recent catch phrases.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            indeed, ***IF*** men have to, then so would women - if they want "equality".
            
            But once again science has yet to get us to real equality.

            replyreport
      2. 59

         Chaotic Chicaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I only have one issue with your statement and that is where you say that men are worth much less.  It is a documented fact in this country that men and women in equal job positions do not get paid equally with men making significantly more than women. 
         
         While I like your response with equality meaning no one should have to be required to serve, this was created not as involuntary servitude in mind but duty to loyalty to country.  The gov't looks at it as 'you live in this country, you enjoy it's freedoms, you can do your part and fight for it in times of war.'   It's a common sense line of thinking if not outdated.  Then again, loyalty itself is relatively outdated these days anyway.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry, I was talking about "the survival of mankind"-esque. Women have babies, and they only have one a year.
            
            Women make less money, but that's mostly because they tend to be the sex that has babies and then demands to take care of them
            
            (yes yes yes, get angry at me... I know it's not PC.)
            
            My dad never took maternity leave, nor has any man I know of. But I know plenty of women who have chosen to leave work after 10+ years of working in order to have children and take care of them. In fact, I know numerous substitute teachers who got hired full time because a woman went on maternity leave (getting paid the whole time), just to later announce that they weren't coming back.
            
            Sorry, but I was not born with two X chromosomes. I can't have children.
            
            (Yes yes yes, I'm evil for pointing out facts)

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Chaotic Chicaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I'm not going to get angry over your opion.  I can see how you developed it.
               
               Speaking from experience, many women only choose to leave the workforce to care for their children for one of two reasons.  One, they believe that it is important for a child to be raised by their parents, not a stranger.  Two, and this one tends to be more applicable, the cost of child care has risen so much as to make working pointless.  Based partly in fact to the unequal pay system, the majority of the time the cost of child care plus traveling expenses takes away at minimum 75% of her paycheck.  At that point why bother working?  It doesn't make financial sense. 
               
               And no, you are not evil. 

               replyreport
3. 67

   awareposted 12 years ago

   if men have to then women should to . but as it is now neither are required .
   ray

   replyreport
4. 61

   TMMasonposted 12 years ago

   Wow.. are we all actually in agreement here... damn!
   
   I say yes to, if that want true equality, which doesn't exist, but... yes.

   replyreport
5. 84

   psycheskinnerposted 12 years ago

   The first step would be allowing women in combat roles, as many other countries have or are in the process of. I personally think it should be all in or all out.  And I doubt we will see the draft enacted again any time soon.

   replyreport
6. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   I'm seeing posts on here that range from "no, women need to be protected", and "if women want equality"
   
   SUCH CONFUSED RESPONSES!!!
   
   The government does NOT - i repeat, DOES NOT - own our lives. The draft is involuntary servitude and is thus UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
   
   NO ONE should have to register for the draft!!!
   
   NO ONE!!
   
   In fact, if a draft is implemented, it merely reflects the fact that the war is an UNJUST WAR. If we need to FORCE people to fight, then clearly we aren't under attack.
   
   The fact that a draft exists for ANYONE to partake in is monstrous and shows us nothing more than the degree to which we've forgotten our own freedoms.
   
   END THE DRAFT.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      Jed Fisherposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You are correct, Evan. War itself is a form of human sacrafice, a society's leaders deciding who they will throw to wolves to protect themselves. War as a form of settling international disputes became very unpopular when atomic bombs were introdued, because atomic bombs can kill the leaders too. All of a suden, it was time to sign surrender papers and forget the war.
      Modern war has become more a willingness to sacrifice money by one side verses the willingness to sacrifice life on the other.
      As for draft registraton, it's wrong for anyone and should be done away with completely. Make women register? No way, forget it.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I highly encourage you become familiar with Ron Paul if you enjoyed my response!

         replyreport
7. 59

   HoSaM2010posted 12 years ago

   nic  word  (psychekinner)

   replyreport
8. 81

   Wayne Brownposted 12 years ago

   The proposal has merit and you make a good case. The registration for the draft was kept in place in the unlikely situation that we would be forced into a war in which we did not have enough combat troops to sufficiently man the field.  That was a skepticism of those who did not believe a voluntary military would work for America and it was indeed a good backup plan.  At the time, women were not allowed in combat roles and and still are quite restricted from most of them thus I can easily understand how the requirement to register them was overlooked.  In terms of answering the call of our country, it certainly would be good that all young able-bodied people were known to their government when emergencies arise so they may answer the call.  WB

   replyreport
9. 60

   recommend1posted 12 years ago

   The basic idea that your country cannot get enough people to fight for it, without resorting to forcing them to do it, says it all.  If you (en masse) are not ready to fight and die for the system you live in it says everything about the system - nothing about conscription.
   
   If women are treated differently to men in these cases then this basic test of all the feminist equality hot-air proves it to be false.
   
   If countries with huge military cannot get enough people to voluntarily fight for it, then its military should be made smaller to accomodate the wishes of the people.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The fact that we would need to force people to fight wars proves that the wars are unjust.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         TMMasonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I don't know if that is actually the case. It doesn't neccessarilly follow that one, means the other.
         
         Sometimes manning up for war doesn't come to many easilly.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I think there's some truth to Evan's statement but obviously not so black&white. I gave this matter some thought and I surely wouldve aggressively resisted the Vietnam War had I been from my father's generation. No way would I have fought against Ho Chi Minh. But had I been from my grandfather's generation, faced with Hitler and Pearl Harbor and France and Britain pulverized not to mention living the American Dream in the scope of a nazi submarine, I probably wouldve signed up.
            
            But even in a case like that, I would hope the military would have the good sense to put at some sort of intelligence/counterintelligence post. Giving me a rifle wouldnt help us.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Just a reminder on WWII - we got into that war by pissing off Japan with blockades.

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Jonathan Jancoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  And if we hadnt done that, Hitler wouldve taken over all of Europe. We continuously provoked Japan to justify going to war with Germany. FDR had to suck up to so many Nazi traitors in this country leading up to that war it's amazing we didnt end up on the other side.

                  replyreport
         2. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            WWII - we pissed the Japanese off by embargoes, trade tariffs, and outright blockades. They bombed us, we instituted a draft.  (I'm not saying that the Japanese were angels in that war, just saying that we were the aggressor in our relationship at the time).
            
            Every "military conflict" involving a draft since (WWII was the last declared war) - we're in some guy's backyard telling him he's evil and murdering his children.
            
            Yeah, the draft necessarily means that the public doesn't want to volunteer to fight. This necessarily means that the war is unjust.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               TMMasonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               "Yeah, the draft necessarily means that the public doesn't want to volunteer to fight. This necessarily means that the war is unjust."
               
               I don';t se it as that Evan. Going to war scares most people. And sometimes you ju7st need more soldiers than you can get to enlist through volountary routes. I just do not see the one neccessarilly leading to the other conclusion.
               
               But I agree with you WWII Japanese facts. We did embargo the shit out of them and pushed them to have to invade chilna to gain resources etc. But the other I cannot agree the logical conclusion to draw from one, is the other. But China and Japan were warring long before America came on the scene in Asia, also. So the Japanese felt no hesitation in going back there to take what they wanted. And all that doesn't negate the fact that they sneak attacked us... which upset alot of people.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  People will fight if they see value in it.
                  
                  If they don't see value in the fight, then the fight clearly isn't worth it to them.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Chaotic Chicaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Fifty plus years ago, I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly on that comment but we are living in a time where people are more selfish than ever.  As the generations have come along, there has been a thinning out of solid patriotism.  Many people in my generation have steered clear of politics altogether and I see younger generations devoting their lives to finding the easiest route to money possible.  Nobody wants to do the grunt work anymore; there is a sense of entitlement that permeates today's instant gratification society that is not only appauling but it leaves no room for a belief in anything bigger than themselves.  It has a lot less to do with "seeing value" though for some that does apply. 
                     
                     So many of the able bodied have been coddled since birth and do not understand the value in a hard day's labor.  I've heard many a young adult boasting that they will never push a broom.  They fail to understand that pretty much everyone starts at the bottom of the ladder, or at least the lower rungs.  When parents and teachers have babied them, doing everything for them thinking that they were acting in their best interest, what develops is a grown adult who has not learned responsibility and that kind of person would look at what happened and get mad but let somebody else do the dirty work.

                     replyreport
10. 60

    Moderndayslaveposted 12 years ago

    Let the people that start these wars go fight.We can put them in a desert and arm them to the teeth and tell them Go At It.Cheney is a good shot,he hit someone while hunting already.
    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/06/22 … viv-style/

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Word to that!

       replyreport
11. 77

    Rob Wintersposted 12 years ago

    If it's the case for 1 it should be the case for all.
    What's good for the goose is good for the gander!
    With exceptions allowable for pregnant & nursing mothers.

    replyreport
    1. 65

       kmackey32posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       And blondes????

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Nope. No exceptions. A pregnant woman and a nursing mother must also die in a desert fighting people who are defending their homeland.
       
       It's nonsense to even think that ANYONE must join the draft.
       
       It's tyranny. End it for everyone.

       replyreport
       1. 65

          kmackey32posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          

          replyreport
       2. 65

          kmackey32posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Ok what if I am blind....

          replyreport
12. 69

    Beth100posted 12 years ago

    Draft?!?  Well, I'm glad I live in Canada where this does not exist.  As for equality, the answer is simple:  enlistment is voluntary, not mandatory for both genders.  That would allow freedom of choice and equality to all.

    replyreport
13. 76

    wheelinalloverposted 12 years ago

    How about mandatory military service for both sexes. In some countries that either exists or has in the past. In those places women may not fight in an actual war but I know they are put "in harms way".
    
    America is about freedom of choice. During the Vietnam "conflict" pre-draftees had several choices. They could go to college, go to war, or leave the country. Once you number was called though your choices went out the window real fast.
    
    My personal opinion is that if this country started putting women in the draft the world as we know it as Americans would end. There would be fighting neighbor against neighbor with everyone against the government.   
    
    I served in the United States military by choice twice while the draft was in place. First during the Vietnam "conflict" and again in peace time. When my time in the military ended I still had to sign up for the draft. It didn't matter that I was on inactive reserve for seven years after my time in the military. As a sole surviving son chances are that I would have been among the last drafted, but could have been recalled if the need arose anyway and would have served voluntarily.
    
    I don't remember the word draft having anything to do with World War 2. They had Americans lining up to defend freedom and no need for a draft. People even lied about their birth date, mental status, and infirmities just so they could fight for freedom.
    
    I honestly don't know if this would happen with the current government unless someone was attacking us as a nation on our soil. I would like to believe our citizens would step up if this was the case.

    replyreport
14. 58

    reviewpalposted 12 years ago

    yes they should if the country they live in wants true equality then it is the only way, it is no coincedence that each country that has impowered women, especially in the work place, has seen an improvement in thier respective economys, reason being is the jobs are given less to stature and are geared towards finding the best PERSON for the job, over time women become employed in the job that best suits her skill not her sex, other countries are yet to wake up to this reality, but make no mistake, the statistics do not lie, the equality of genders benefits us all

    replyreport