Should Women Have to Sign up for the Draft?
I recently stumbled across this article, Making Women Sign Up for the Draft Would be the Height of Stupidity: http://townhall.com/columnists/johnha...
Here are a few quotes:
"Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie all blundered right into her trap and agreed that we should take the radical step of forcing young women to sign up for a potential draft."
"... while we should certainly appreciate women who serve our country, it doesn’t change the fact that the more women you put into combat, the worse our military will perform."
"Have we gotten so mired in this faux feminism,” “You go, girl” culture that we can’t even admit that men are generally much better suited to kill other men than women?"
"However, if we ever stoop to drafting women and forcing them to fight our battles, it would be one of the most foolish and shameful moments in our nation’s history."
- - - - -
My opinion:
Frankly, I thought this article was condescending. I don't understand why it is radical to ask women to take the same risks as men.
This article is saying "It is okay to ask (or force) men to kill other men and potentially sacrifice their own lives but it is not okay to ask the same of women".
If a woman isn't physically equipped to fill a role, don't put her in that role... but the same can be said for men. The military wouldn't make a person that is 5'2 and 120 pounds a SEAL regardless of gender.
The fact that women are typically smaller and lighter than men doesn't automatically preclude them from in some way serving their country. Draft women for other roles or at least evaluate women to see if they are equipped to serve in combat positions.
I believe in equality. Not superiority. That means I want to be treated just as my male counterpart is. Not better. Not worse.
- - - - - -
I would love to know what other Gulchers think of this issue and the article.
Here are a few quotes:
"Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie all blundered right into her trap and agreed that we should take the radical step of forcing young women to sign up for a potential draft."
"... while we should certainly appreciate women who serve our country, it doesn’t change the fact that the more women you put into combat, the worse our military will perform."
"Have we gotten so mired in this faux feminism,” “You go, girl” culture that we can’t even admit that men are generally much better suited to kill other men than women?"
"However, if we ever stoop to drafting women and forcing them to fight our battles, it would be one of the most foolish and shameful moments in our nation’s history."
- - - - -
My opinion:
Frankly, I thought this article was condescending. I don't understand why it is radical to ask women to take the same risks as men.
This article is saying "It is okay to ask (or force) men to kill other men and potentially sacrifice their own lives but it is not okay to ask the same of women".
If a woman isn't physically equipped to fill a role, don't put her in that role... but the same can be said for men. The military wouldn't make a person that is 5'2 and 120 pounds a SEAL regardless of gender.
The fact that women are typically smaller and lighter than men doesn't automatically preclude them from in some way serving their country. Draft women for other roles or at least evaluate women to see if they are equipped to serve in combat positions.
I believe in equality. Not superiority. That means I want to be treated just as my male counterpart is. Not better. Not worse.
- - - - - -
I would love to know what other Gulchers think of this issue and the article.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
That being said, we are living in a period where such differences are not valued, and recognizing such a difference is currently viewed as sexism. So based on the times that we live in, I think that if "equality" is demanded, it should be given. For example, I think women should have to sign up for the selective service. Since gay marriage is now legal, I think polygamous marriage should also be legal. We have all these affirmative action laws in place, lets equally apply them to the NBA and the NFL. Thoughts?
I think it takes a skill set more commonly found in men to wage war. The idea of equality (for draft purposes) is based on the notion that either sex is equally capable - mentally, physically, and emotionally - to handle war. I don't believe that to be the case. With the Israelis, as every one of their citizens who turns 18 has to serve time in the military, but you don't see many women who choose to stay there, and they aren't typically part of the reserves.
Jan
Jan
Of course I side with no draft at all but if there is to be one equality demands all genders be drafted. And since we are told that jobs must somehow be distributed in a way which reflect the demographics then they must be drafted slightly more than men since women account for slightly more than half of our population (last I knew). That way we wouldn't show any sexism, right?
Oh and that last line was 49% pure sarcasm. ;)
that everyone must spend part of their life working
for the state, or pay a lifetime tax. . I think that is the
way to do it. . I chose the air force and got a good
deal;;; others might choose to work in a library or a
veterans' convalescent home. . it would work, and
women would have the full range of alternatives,
according to their abilities and aspirations. . and
a short, light navy SEAL might be a wonderful
team member for many missions -- think Israeli
women's fighting forces. . they are amazing!!! -- j
.
As long as the American people are able to exercise their 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, they will remain a "free" people...excepting, of course, the possibility of anarchy.
If our government were so sure of it's control over us...they wouldn't constantly be trying to "take" our guns. Trust me...they still fear us (though, they may not realize just how much).
Whoopie doo you godda gun. So what? Did you use it? No. Did you do anything? I don't know. If you did it wasn't enough. since the bill was containing the newest add on restrictions and changes was passed 85% in Congress .....
Our side lost... while the public did nothing, didn't have to bury their heads in the sand. Their heads have been buried for over a decade.
i served and am a vietnam vet... my father served and he is a viet nam vet and a korean vet... my grandfather served in ww2..... my family served all the way back to the revolutionary war.... and i must say we served PROUDLY!!! you folks with the slavery and indentured servant crap..... well you just plain and simply make me ill sorry but it is true....
Jan
The military would take a person 5'2" and 120 pounds and make that person into a tunnel rat, and in Vietnam, that is exactly what happened.
But "Abaco" got it right, nobody should. Or, nobody must.
Regarding women serving in the military: it reminds me of a sci-fi book I read where some humans crash land on an alien planet and have to fight their way through jungle and hostiles to a spaceport for extraction. The hostiles are lizard-types but with gender-reversal - it's the "females" who do all the fighting. And because of the superior firepower of the human marines, they decimate the population of females and push the entire species to the brink of extinction.
The point I was making is that the conventional standards for 'fit to serve in combat' are no longer applicable. You can have people in their 60's+ flying drones (thus removing the age limitation); you can have women in combat (thus removing the gender limitation). Having someone 'willing to fight' is now the major criterion. While we still need physical people on the ground, more than just women have been excluded from combat - and this is no longer the case.
Thank you for the site!
Jan
life.
individual rights, whether for men, women, or both.
Also, women, not being as physically strong as men, would not do as well in combat. And if you
have more women going in to be put into other
capacities, thus freeing up more men for com-
bat, the men will naturally resent it, as putting
less value on their lives than on the lives of
women.
Those who refuse to wield the sword can still die upon one (or something like that).
Load more comments...