On what basis could supporters of opening military combat specialties to women oppose this?
They can’t, and as a matter of fact, they won’t want to.
This is exactly what the “supporters” of such nonsense want - the further blurring of the roles God gave men and women. This is another of those smallish moves that will further degrade and coursen our society, as both men and women become hard, both physically and mentally. As women give up Gods greatest gift, their femininity, in order to work out, get tatted-up, smoke, drink, curse, have meaningless sex and basically be men, our society will suffer with lower and lower birthrates, less marriage and bad relations between men and women.
The fact that supporters of this think that somehow being able to go into combat is a step towards equality blows my mind…
I don’t know, but it’s enough that I may someday have to send off my son, but if I have any daughters? Heck no.
Why would they oppose it? The whole idea behind opening combat roles to women is to treat the sexes equally with regard to military roles. Opening the Selective Service System to the same would be an extension of that. And as for opening combat to women, we’re one of many countries have been doing for years with no loss of femininity or any of the other concerns I’ve seen voiced. Canada for example has opened all jobs to women (other than subs) since '89.
Sounds good to me.
Why should women be exempt?
They want to be equal in all things, don’t they?? We better be very careful who we vote for, we are falling fast!! God help us !!! God Bless, Memaw
Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces 1992 -
"After extensive research, Canada has found little evidence to support the integration of women into ground units. Of 103 Canadian women who volunteered to joint infantry units, only one graduated the initial training course. The Canadian experience corroborates the testimony of LTC Gregor, who said the odds of selecting a woman matching the physical size and strength of the average male are more than 130-to-1.
Today, women represent only 2% of Canadian combat forces.
And the physical differences are only one part of the equation. High skilled, hard charging combat units with good morale have a camaraderie that can easily be broken down by the presence of a female in their ranks. Male weakness or protective instinct? I don’t know, but it exists…
Many Navy ships which deploy with only sailors on board, return with babies on board.
There is nothing from a moral point of view that tells us that women should be exempted from any draft. They probably should not be in combat, but should they not have to serve in any capacity? They are just as capable of serving as men.
They don’t want anyone to know that!
You miss one important thing - the military culture.
The end game is war fighting. It is a male dominated, testosterone charged culture, as it has to be to do it’s job. Male draftees for the most part can handle and adapt to that environment, but I believe there would be many females that could not adapt.
Unless of course, we take the testosterone away to accommodate women in big numbers, but then, what kind of military do we have?
I think women should have had to register for the draft, regardless of whether women should be in combat roles. Surely there are tons of noncombat positions needed in wartime. Women could easily fill those roles, with no loss of femininity, etc. Wasn’t the UK Queen an ambulance driver during WWII? She seems pretty lady-like to me.
We have had women in the military for many decades. Including women in the draft would not alter anything.
I’m a woman from a military family. I’m saying that not to say other people don’t have credibility, but to preempt anyone saying I don’t. It’s so ironic that people think equality means making women conform to men. I don’t have as much a problem with non-combat roles, but color me skeptical that this isn’t where this is headed.
I forget, are people exempt if they have children?
It really was just a matter of time before this happened. Of course, there currently is no draft, and Congress would have to pass legislation to require women to register.
Unless physical requirements are changed, many women wouldn’t be able to qualify for certain roles anyway. It’s going to be an interesting debate, for sure.
I’ve always believed that women should have to register for the draft. If we resorted to a draft again, it would be because our nation is in great turmoil and facing immediate danger. In that situation, we need everyone pitching in. This shouldn’t even be contingent on combat roles! We have the right to vote and all of the Constitutional protections of our fellow male citizens. It’s a responsibility.
Besides, it strikes me as very pro family to have more options to choose from. Why send a husband and father into war over a single woman with no kids? Who is that good for? More people available means fewer children will have a father/parent ripped from them.
I don’t like the idea of drafting anyone.
Yes less women volunteer for it, and of those that volunteer comparatively few make it. But that shouldn’t prevent those women that want to serve, and who do, and will, serve well from doing so.