would it be constitutional for women not included in an national draft–given the way politics have changed since the Vietnam war?
Well, considering that women have been allowed in combat roles in the Israeli military for decades now, and might even be required to serve a tour of duty in it when they turn 18 …
As far as I know, there has never been any barrier to the US government’s drafting women to serve in the armed forces if it were to deem it appropriate to do so.
Tracer, women in the Israeli army do not serve in combat roles. Yes, they are drafted, but most do mundane stuff like administrative work. Perhaps 5% of the female soldiers I saw in Israel carried weapons, whereas close to 100% of the men did (if you can call an 18-year-old boy with a baby face and a Galil a man).
Yeah, I say men have always been the ones dying for their countries and it’s about time things changed and to compensate for past injustice I say only women should fight wars in the next 100 years while men stay at home playing with their pizzles, and, furthermore, I believe there are a few countries out there that need straightening and we should promptly declare war on them and send them our finest women and teach them a lesson in “affirmative action”.
Can you send over some nice women to teach me a lesson? … smile … preferablly oral lessons … (and some spelling lessons - I am not going to fix those errors! They are a part of who I am.)
I don’t think women will be required to register.
It’s really funny though, I’m getting close to having to register with the government, so I’m going to put on my best gay face, flirt with the officer, and so forth.
But I never thought Canada or Sweeden were bad countries. 
I don’t know. Seems to me that in modern wars, you are a hell of a lot safer in the military than you are as a civilian. Look at the statistics in warring areas. I’d be curious to see te actual statistics on it, but it looks to me like you have 500 civilians slaughtered for every soldier killed in combat. Maybe drafting women and children into the military is a good idea just to keep them safe. I know if I was in a war zone, I’d like to have a big gun, a selection of inciniary devices, and several hundred armed companions around me.
I don’t see anyone being drafted in the future. Not from the US, at any rate.
But if there ever is another Vietnam-esque draft, I don’t think women will be drafted into combat positions, more’s the pity. For some reason, we still consider women to be mystically incapable of pulling the trigger on the Vulcan and cutting down forty-leven VCs.
Well, here in America we have grown comfortably used to the idea that war doesn’t come to us, we go to it. So as far as our citizenry goes, it usually doesn’t work that way.
Personally, I wouldn’t care to have a draft take women, although I can see no logical or Constitutional basis by which to exclude them. I highly doubt that, if a draft were instituted, women would be selected for it. My assessment of the public’s attitude is that the greater part of the populace would not favor including them. Besides, the social liberals who would be most likely to try and have the draft be gender-blind would probably be protesting its existance in the first place, rather than the manner in which it was employed.
Well there have always been the harry-legged chicks out there who have been wanting to have combat roles. But when you get down to it, most women aren’t like that. Women wouldnt want to fight and most guys wouldnt want their women in the military. Common sense tells you that in combat, men would likely perform better in general than women. The average women just does not physically have the capacity to be physically equal to the average male. Of course the U.S. government could mass produce bionic women or something…
So then, if it is true that women are not equal in battle or that the general public would not desire for them to go into combat, does that >gasp< mean that men and women are not equal? Not that one is better than the other, but just not equal? That means that women do not have equal rights to men and maybe even that men have the potential for sacrificing more than women do for their country in this case. And as I have seen in the high school newspaper thread, you Libertarians conclude that having less rights equals not having the right to free speech. So I guess if we take this to it’s logical limit, women should not have free speach either! Whoa, that was quite a stretch of psudoreasoning–but at any rate, it is interesting.
I am a firm believeer in equal rights for all…but with thre good (free speech, equal opportunity) comes the bad (drafting, and what not.)
If women (and all other minorities) truley believe that they deserve all the same rights (and they do) they must be willing to accept the consequences. Before anyone yells at me, I relaize that many women and minorities agree with me, but there are some that don’t.
I constantly see women who get bent out of shape when they are denied a job, blame it on being a woman, and then gets angry when her man doesn’t open the door for her, pull out the chair, etc…Isn’t this just perpetuating the myth that women are inferior to men? Again, I’m not saying all women are like this, but sonme are and it pisses me off!
So I do say that women should be drafted if one is needed, but they probably won’t because they’ll all start crying and suddenly get one BIG case of PMS all at once.
And what a fun filled time that was, wading through the misogyny of those last two posts! But I’ll actually agree with Bouv (partly.) If there is a war serious enough that draftees must be called up, why shouldn’t women have to register? I do not understand the mindset that says a young man can be sacrificed, but a young woman is too valuable. I am no more important to my parents than my little (just turned 18) brother is, and I am much more tempermentally suited to the armed forces than he is. Does being in the draft necessarily mean being in combat anyway?
And speaking of that:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=32520
Determinist said:
I know you’re just itching to provide a cite for this. I can see it in your eyes. So how about it? It doesn’t seem like common sense to me at all. There’s a lot more to combat than physical strength.
I understand why the whole idea of drafting women sounds fair. But it brings up some other questions that no one seems to have considered.
Do we draft women with small children at home? If so do we draft the mother if the father is already serving?
I hope that we never draft women into combat positions. However, women in support positions have always played a valuable part in wars and I am sure that would be the case in any future war.
as purely an aside, I’ve always found it interesting that on the form for registration for Selective Service, there’s the two boxes : Male Female .
So, the government has been prepared at lest on the surface, to do this. Or, more likely, whoever did the forms wasn’t thinking.
I don’t know. Can single fathers with small children be drafted? What if the mother has a “better” draft number than the father, could he be exempt then?
Why do you hope this?
I don’t think so. I believe that there is a classification for exemption (or was) based on whether going off to war would be a hardship on the family. But, of course, I could be wrong.
PowerpuffKue wrote:
Now why the hell didn’t I think of that as a way to get out of the Draft (if they institute a Draft)?
You can’t get out of being drafted into the army by being in college.
You can’t get out of being drafted into the army by being a conscientious objector.
But by golly, you can get out of being drafted into the army by being openly gay!
Iolanthe wrote:
Why, a young woman is useful as a baby factory. A young man is only a sperm donor, and we can get a few left-over young men to stud all the women if we need to.
<ducking and running>