\
IIRC Israeli female conscription is for non-combat roles only, but that may change (see link below).
Whether women are suitible for combat is moot IMHO. There are plenty of support roles (logistics, maintenance, medical, etc). My mother served during WWII (WX observer stateside) and she was petite and they had to fudge her eyesight and blood pressure (too low). If she could do it, 90% of the women out there are physically capable.
even if the purpose of the draft is for combat roles, if those roles go up so do support roles.
Brian
Men need to register in order to get Financial Aid while women get it without registering. That’s imposing obligations on male students that female students don’t have.
But they throw like GIRLS!!!
This is also true of the draft-age male population, at least until the Army gets hold of them and puts them through Basic Training. And, although it is certainly true that the average woman is less physically strong than the average man and is probably therefore less fit for physically challenging combat positions, I doubt that any average person, man or woman, is mentally suited for combat.
U.S. society at large is not about to consent to the draft of its young women. However, I suspect that most of the debate about drafting women is designed to call the draft itself into question.
I think if it ever got to the point that we needed to force women into the military or even combat roles, society’s view would change.
There are two things going on here: biology, which isn’t going to change and our views of biology, which can.
A lot of public opposition to drafting women is about our views not biology, like the views expressed back when the services were first integrated. That group is naturally inferior, they won’t fit in, etc etc etc.
I agree society would have a hard time dealing with sending there daughters/wives, ect. into combat. I’ve talked about this with my friends before and most of there boyfriends/husbands said over there dead body would they allow there wives to go into combat. But I personally believe if we are ever to open a draft again it should be co-ed. I think men are far more discriminated against in todays modern society then they should be. I say let woman fight the wars and the men go to the wedding and baby showers.
Don’t assume the rights of civilians as granted by the USC applies in toto to the military. Examples:
- Barring women from combat roles and serving in subs
- Barring homosexuals who were asked and told
- Their own court system without juried trials
- Plus a whole host of other issues.
The claim is that the military has special circumstances which require special exceptions to the constitution. The SCOTUS has consistently backed that up. This is one area where you won’t find any so-called judicial activism (at least, not with these justices nor with any that Bush would appoint, if re-elected). As seen with Rehnquist’s decision above, their attitude is: “If congress ain’t going to pass a law to force the military into doing something it don’t want to do, then neither are we.”
Peace.
Well, yes, we are, from an evolutionary viewpoint.
Once we’ve contributed our sperm, we’re really not relevant any more. (Except for a minor effect of providing for and caring for the expectant mother. But that can be done equally well by her family/clan/tribe.)
As a further question, what is the military’s position on pregnancy during service? If a female truck-driver in the Army gets shipped to Iraq, then gets pregnant, is she shipped home to a non-combat-zone position? Discharged? What is the military’s position on female birth control?
I’ve always advocated having everyone, regardless of sex, sexual orientation, or even disability (there’s plenty of non-combat support roles) be eligible to serve in the military. But having more women in combat in this latest war makes me realize that pregnant women do pose a problem. Perhaps mandatory depo-provera shots for all servicewomen for the duration of a tour? A violation of their personal rights, perhaps, but not much more than the other mandatory vaccinations soldiers get.
Can you imagine how many millions of mothers and wives throughout world history have expressed the exact same sentiment? My own mother said the same thing. However, it turns out that all those soldiers get sent into combat, anyway, regardless of what the loved ones back home have to say about it.
One result of drafting women would almost surely be an explosion in the numbers of pregnancies (women trying to get out of being drafted).
It may be said, but some how I feel that the American male “Superman” stereotype would probably prevent it from happening. You’ve also got to assume most of these woman that would be drafted wouldn’t want to be going. Then its the question of honor. I think you’d find a good number of husbands/bf’s atleast in jail if you where actually able to implement it. Like I say I’m all for it, I just don’t see it happening. Atleast not in this war. Maybe if it was a war that generally was more supported it might be different.
The 14 amendment isn’t usually enforced when laws only discriminate against males. This maybe because pour culture says that males cannot be victims or should be ignored and laughed it when it occurs and that females cannot be perpetrators and therefore should rarely be held accountable for their actions. For example females are protected from genital mutilation but circumcising baby boys is perfectly legal. We also have the violence Against Women Act which clearly excludes men from being afforded the same protections under the law, and in many cases can actually trample on a mans rights. Selective Service is just another one of those laws that is ignored because it only affects males negatively.
http://www.sss.gov/fsbenefits.htm
Members of congress declare war and people vote for members of congress. Logically all voters and all people who are eligible to hold a seat in congress, men and women, should have to register for selective service because they are taking part in a choice which affects the possible declaration of war, which can lead to a draft. Voting or running for congress without having to also register for the draft means taking part in a decision making process that can only risk the lives of others. This should have been taken into consideration with the implementation of the 19th amendment. If it is illegal to discriminate against voters based on sex, then it should also be illegal to discriminate against who should be required to defend that vote based on sex.
Given that this thread is almost 10 years old, and that the post that revived it is more suitable for Great Debates, I’m closing it.
BigMobe, if you wish to engage in debate on this subject you may open a new thread in Great Debates.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator