Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

Government

Blaze Poll: Do Women Belong in Combat and Should They Be Required to Register for the Draft?

Jan. 27, 2013 9:00pm Mike Opelka

Editor’s Note: Women in combat will be explored in more detail on Tuesday’s Wilkow! which airs at 7 pm ET on TheBlaze TV.

Last week we learned that outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was lifting the U.S. military’s ban on women in combat. That news brought support from a host of newspapers. The possibility of women joining the combat ranks on the front lines also raised questions from some members of military, and media icons like George Will.

The issue of women in combat also brings another question into the conversation about women in the military. What about registering females for the draft? The current law of the land requires only males to register with the Selective Service System (SSS). This is supposed to happen within 30 days of young man turning 18.

If women belong in combat, should they also have to register for the draft?

Image sss.gov

The official language from the agency’s web page lays it out in some rather specific terms:

If you are a man ages 18 through 25 and living in the U.S., then you must register with Selective Service. It’s the law. According to law, a man must register with Selective Service within 30 days of his 18th birthday. Selective Service will accept late registrations but not after a man has reached age 26.

Image: sss.gov

The agency has also been trying to get the message out to 18 year old men for years. Witness this peppy PSA from 1985. It features a singing and break-dancing group encouraging a pal to get down to the post office and sign up.

22 years later, SSS enlisted a popular actor – R. Lee Ermey to recreate his “Sgt. Gunney” character for this public service announcement.

Ads like these and others combined with a non-stop campaign in high schools and post offices has generated a pool of more than 15 million men who have enlisted for Selective Service. Of course, there are some exceptions to the mandatory registration requirement. Men who are disabled, in hospitals, prisons, and a few other situations are exempt.

Yet, the question remains: Why are women given a blanket exclusion from Selective Service registration? The answer is addressed by the agency:

Selective Service law as it’s written now refers specifically to “male persons” in stating who must register and who would be drafted. For women to be required to register with Selective Service, Congress would have to amend the law.

While Congress has not seen fit to change the law, it has come under scrutiny by the courts. In 1981, the constitutionality of the gender bias was upheld by the Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg. The decision had its roots in the history of the draft’s purpose. The initial reason for drafting American males back in1 948 (when the draft was initiated) was to provide an ample supply of soldiers for combat situations. Since women were not allowed in combat roles, this precluded them from the draft.

The Supreme Court cited the combat exclusion rule in their 1981 decision:

And since women are excluded from combat service by statute or military policy, men and women are simply not similarly situated for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft, and Congress’ decision to authorize the registration of only men therefore does not violate the Due Process Clause.

The male-only requirement came up again in 1994, during the Clinton administration. Congress repealed the combat exclusion for women, and the President asked the Defense Department to consider changing the Selective Service registration requirements. And yet, nothing has changed in terms of the men-only requirement for Selective Service registration.

Not registering can have serious consequences. Again, we reference the information from the SSS website:

Registration is the law. A man who fails to register may, if prosecuted and convicted, face a fine of up to $250,000 and/or a prison term of up to five years.

In addition to the possible criminal charges and penalties, not registering can render you ineligible for:

federal student loans and grant programs
federal job training under the Workforce Investment Act
federal jobs or security clearance as a contractor
U.S. citizenship

If you are not certain that you registered, there is a place on the SSS’s website where you can check by entering your last name, social security number, and date of birth.

How do you feel about allowing women to fight on the front lines? Take our Blaze Poll on the subject of women in combat and the draft. You can also submit a question of your own on these topics.

Women In Combat / Draft?

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (359)

Metallicat
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:17am
American mothers are quick to throw in the towel during any war when they see their sons coming home in flagged draped coffins,they will be quicker to forfeit the match when they see their daughters coming home disfigured by war and they are left caring for the orphans.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ragnars Repos
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:29am
  Wow!…and not a question mark to be found. You are just begging for a bludgeoning about the head, neck, and shoulders.
  
  Report this comment
RaydocX
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:17am
All 18 year olds should then have to register.
If strength requisites are maintained few will pass to the teams.
Their presence will lead to issues of ‘fraternization’ and jealousy problems, but that shouldn’t prevent it.
Captured American female soldiers face treatment that would make weatherboarding seem a picnic.
And male troops I worry will more likely put themselves at risk to protect/ save wounded female comrades.

But women HAVE fought through time, and in the technological modern armed forces the strength difference may be less important, while the value added issues may be a real benefit.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 8:24am
  “All 18 year olds should then have to register.”
  
  Yes, because all people are the property of the state, comrade….
  
  Report this comment
Gunnett
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:15am
I’ve been to the field with women soldiers, depending where you are, and what you are doing, there are certain parts if the female body that just stink, you would be surprised how far smell travels. I would hate to be stuck in a tank with one after a couple weeks in the field without showers and etc. reminds you of a fish market….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
justtrythinking
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:08am
The draft is a separate issue from women in combat. Far more military personnel work in support functions than are actually serving on the front lines in combat and women can do those jobs equally well as men. I am entirely opposed to the draft, it is a form of slavery. Do you really want a military with people of low morale who have no desire to be there?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Metallicat
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:51am
Women make poor hunters because of PMS, their scent is easily picked up by animals. I dont see how they will make any better soldiers on the front lines for the same reasons. How long would women have held out at Saigon?or at the battle of the bulge before becoming irrational due to their biological differences? How many will become pregnant to get out of frontline duty and cause a logistical nightmare when our military is trying to supply troops to the frontlines just to keep up with casualties?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ragnars Repos
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:09am
  Oooooh, you’re gonna get it for asking questions like that. ;-)
  
  Report this comment
- Dismayed Veteran
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 10:12am
  Metallcat
  
  When you lie bleeding outside the triage tent, the first kind face will probably be a nurse. Women have been serving on the front lines in an asymetical (like that word) for a long time.
  
  Many of the nurses who were captured on Battan and Corrigidore were brutally treated by the Japanese. Many of my mother’s basic school group ended up in a Japanese POW camp or dead. My mom received a Bronze Star (V) and two Purple Hearts for her service in North Africa.
  
  I know that women should not be in the infantry, armor or artillery. But I see no reason they shouldn’t be pilots of gun, medivac, assault helicopters. For all I know, they probably are right now.
  
  Report this comment
kcsparky
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:50am
I am sure there are combat roles that women can fill without a problem. But I strongly believe that front line infantry duty is NOT one of them. Just the physical strength difference alone “will” get good men killed. It is not worth the risk to save a liberals ego.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jamespubliusmadison
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:44am
Last resort or not, once the law required a male to register for the draft it ceased being a volunteer army. If the cause is worthy, volunteers will come willingly. If not, the draft is the same as having a gun pointed at your back. If you want to risk your life to stop Iraq from invading Kuwait, thwart terrorism, or secure our nation’s borders (oh, wait that never happened) then by all means sign up. If you don’t feel any of these missions help save(d) American lives, how does the U.S. military benefit from forcing your compliance. The army doesn’t need cowards or dissenters, and just because the President and Congress decide to declare war, doesn’t mean their cause is in the best interest of the American people. We the people should be able to act on our own behalf when powers that be decide to act on our behalf…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ragnars Repos
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:13am
  “We the people should be able to act on our own behalf when powers that be decide to act on our behalf…”
  
  Music to my ears…err…you know what I mean. Well said, sir!
  
  Report this comment
NigelTufnel
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:43am
The standards WILL be lowered. I was infantry. I went through PLDC right along side women. Talk about a disaster. I finished my land-nav course in record time. I was taking a nap under a deuce when an afternoon thunderstorm blew up on Blue Mountain. I had to go out looking not just for the women soldiers but all the admin pukes too who didn’t know which way was East. I was astonished at how the Army would pass people on these basic skills just so they could make E-5. I went to college with Sarah Diehl(Kent State), the first woman Marine Corp chopper pilot. She obviously had the technical ability, but she was also a poster child for the Clinton admin. She didn’t even come close to posting the initial standards of the Corp. This is all a dog and pony show people. Obama and the librats are good at this. Whoopidi freakin’ do! It’s been going on for some time. “Don’t look at the economy….I made women equal!”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ragnars Repos
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:07am
  “Don’t look at the economy”
  
  Ah-ha! Someone here is awake, after all.
  
  “Pay no attention to that shrinking dollar in your pocket. Look at THIS!…and THIS…
  
  HEY! Over here! …THIS!”
  
  We should be watching any number of banker/pol crooks being led to their jail cells. Instead, we get “the fiscal cliff”/a “battle” over meaningless “tax cuts”, “gun control”, “women in combat”, and on, and on.
  
  Americans are completely disoriented right now. Obama floats bombing drones over foreign countries, killing who knows how many children, then he gets on TV and sheds a “tear” for locally murdered kids, AFTER his “Fast and Furious” adventure, THEN calls for gun control, THEN goes golfing, AFTER his Hollywood elitist parties are over, and BETWEEN signing too numerous executive orders–cuz congress is so tiresome, Republicans loathsome, and there is no time, and on, and on, and on…
  
  “These are not the banker/pol crooks you are looking for.”
  
  I mean, who the heck needs conspiracy theories? They’re out to get ya, folks. It’s plain.
  
  If more people were like me, the fight would have been over a while ago, and we would be presently marveling at how quickly the economy roared back to life.
  
  As it is, all we have are useless Conservatives and useful idiots. If I believed in a god, I’d be praying hard, hard, hard, right now.
  
  Report this comment
Ragnars Repos
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:36am
Women on the front lines is a bad idea, BTW.

Call me sexist, but I believe any country that puts women, and therefore its children, in harms way is a country that won’t last long.

If it were up to me, it would not be tolerated. There are differences between a man and a woman no matter how much some people want us to be the same.

As a rule, women are not fit for battle.

There are many men who can’t fight. I would wager that there are many, many times that number of women who could be considered suicides by walking onto a battlefield.

This is a monumental mistake.

On the commie hand, if I were searching for ways to further demoralize Americans (the collectivist’s chief goal at the moment), I would definitely be at least threatening to put women in combat–psychologically immasculate the males and frighten the females; disorient all–a direct hit to the family.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Robert999
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:19am
This is barbaric. Every civilized society has the motto “Women and children first” because they are the weakest members of society and the civilization’s future. If we do this, we will be going the way of Red China, the Soviet Union and other less civilized societies. We must follow the traditions of our Western Christian Civilization and protect the weaker sex from the hardships of combat. Plus, 99 percent of women are not physically qualified for combat.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Metallicat
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:51am
  Liked
  
  Report this comment
USA-Ron
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:08am
I agree Dr, Fez and Wolf

let’s Draft the Women.

I was drafted the last year of Draft in Sept, 1969

if women want in, just Draft them.

OK, No they are NOT able as a Man

NOT in Combat, OK ?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
taintso
Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:07am
All of our recent wars have been for political/power or profit. Mandatory service for all children of Congress, Executive office, Judicial, and military commanders. No special service, front line service. Death penalty for any service person acting on the citizens of this country. Volunteers to fill remaining billets. And the the trading of illegals for hostages.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Verceofreason
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:59pm
What a stupid article.
If men don’t register for the draft – why should women?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
thekuligs
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:55pm
I have been on the Blaze a long time, but I have never been more ashamed of this group than I am today. So wanting equal RIGHTS means I should be shipped off to war instead of raising my children? I am a hypocrit because I don’t think so? You must not understand what RIGHTS are. We all have the right to free speech, the right to bear arms, the right against unreasonable search and so on. I do not and SHOULD NOT have to give up my GOD GIVEN rights because I was not born a man. What most of you are talking about are not RIGHTS. EQUAL RIGHTS does not mean EQUAL FACTS OF NATURE. Because one fringe group is determined to do something does not mean we should inflict it on everyone. Or all you all thinking like liberals now?

And by the way, for those of you who think this means we should make all women register for the draft for this or ANY reson; all I can do is laugh at you. There is an easy way to get out of going to war, and that is to get pregnant–and that would cause a whole lot more problems than slove them.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- mewnani
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:19am
  You’ve got the wrong idea. Equal rights in this instance means fighting alongside men in combat instead of either staying home or serving in non-combat oriented positions, not the right of free speech, etc. I’m against letting women do this because it causes a lot of unforeseen problems. I’m against a draft too, if you’re wondering.
  
  Report this comment
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:23am
  “So wanting equal RIGHTS means I should be shipped off to war instead of raising my children? ”
  
  So you are arguing that child raising does not also include the Father being there to help raise HIS children? (You do know it takes both a man and a woman to create a child, don’t you?)
  Equal rights must by logic also include equal responsibilities. Or do you disagree with that. Show your work…
  
  Report this comment
- thekuligs
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:31am
  mewnani– nothing about this involves any rights whatsoever. What you are talking about is equal OPPORTUNITY; and that is not the same thing.
  
  skunkbear–my husband is in the military and is away often. He is the provider and the protector, but he does not fill the same role in the childrens life that the mother, the nurturer does. Again this is the difference in nature and it is OBVIOUS that a father interacts with his children different than the mother does.
  
  Report this comment
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:33am
  “There is an easy way to get out of going to war, and that is to get pregnant–and that would cause a whole lot more problems than slove them.”
  
  So what if they get themselves pregnant?! Expecting womyn to stay home and nurture their own children is archaic. Park the damn things into a Gubment program so that the amerikan womyn can reach her full potential by out manning the men as pawns to the banksters…
  
  Report this comment
- mewnani
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:37am
  Wait were you talking about how the admittance of women in the front lines of battle is good or bad? If you were saying that it was bad I apologize, I often read things the wrong way. If you said it was a good thing though, I hope you should reconsider; this can and will cause more pain and suffering than the people who’s wonderful idea this was can imagine.
  
  Report this comment
- thekuligs
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:46am
  mewnani–personally I think it is a terrible idea; just because they caved under poltical pressure does not mean we should make EVERYONE do it because it goes against nature. (And for that matter rational thought!)
  
  I was pointing out that the guys on here think that wanting equal rights for women means they should be signing up for the draft. It’s been a while since I read the Bill of Rights; but I don’t recall it mentioning I had the right to serve on the front lines.
  
  Report this comment
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:51am
  “skunkbear–my husband is in the military and is away often.”
  
  So why are you not the one being away often while your husband is the one home raising your children? No one is talking about your rights to freedom of religion, speech etc. The discussion is whether women are capable of defending those rights equal to men. And if not why not. Is it because men and women are actually different? Oh Heaven forbid! Yet you shrilling women insist it must not be so.
  
  And just for the record, the reason your husband is not being there for you and your children is because he was/is a putz to believe in the garbage of “serving his country”.
  
  Report this comment
- thekuligs
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:59am
  skunkbear–trolls are so good at being intentionally obtuse and name calling.
  
  As stated, I was drawing attention to the tone of the comment section from many of the people I usually agree with; and not the likes of you. You can not reason with the unreasonable.
  
  Report this comment
- mewnani
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:00am
  Ah, ok. I think they bring up the draft because currently a man is required to sign up for it once he hits 18. Since they consider that unfair (which it is) and since the women who thought this was a good idea were only thinking of their own pride they want women to have to join the draft too to get back at them for being so stupid.
  
  Report this comment
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:04am
  THEULIGS:
  
  “I was pointing out that the guys on here think that wanting equal rights for women means they should be signing up for the draft. It’s been a while since I read the Bill of Rights; but I don’t recall it mentioning I had the right to serve on the front lines.”
  
  I just read the Bill of Rights and nowhere does it mention that I as a man have the responsibility to serve on the front lines while at the same time womyn, who have the same rights as me – a man – do not also have the responsibility to serve on those same front lines (as designated by the banksters).
  
  Report this comment
- thekuligs
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:13am
  skunkbear–I do not disagree with you there. I think the best soldier is someone who wants to be a soldier and that in the modern age warm bodies are probably not the way to go. Serving the country is not a right, it is an oppertunity; one which men and women both have. That does not mean they should serve the same roles.
  
  Report this comment
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:14am
  THEKULIGS said
  
  “skunkbear–trolls are so good at being intentionally obtuse and name calling.
  
  What, exactly, was the name I called you?
  
  “You can not reason with the unreasonable.”
  
  Please enlighten me with what, specifically, I mentioned that is “unreasonable”…
  
  Report this comment
- thekuligs
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:23am
  I believe you called my husband a putz and implied he wasn’t there for his family because he was often off serving his country.
  
  Example of name calling? CHECK
  Example of being unreasonable? CHECK
  
  Report this comment
- skunkbear
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 8:47am
  THEKULIGS:
  
  “I believe you called my husband a putz and implied he wasn’t there for his family because he was often off serving his country.
  
  Example of name calling? CHECK
  Example of being unreasonable? CHECK”
  
  The point is that your husband is indeed not there but you think the reason he is not there is because he is “serving his country”. He is not. He is serving the banksters who actually control the country and start these insane wars in order to gain control and force peoples into debts that are not real.
  
  Your husband thinks he is serving his “country” but he is not, ergo he is a putz, a dupe, a fool. And I should know because I was once just such a putz. Accurately describing someone is not name calling. Pointing out their foolishness is not unreasonable.
  
  Report this comment
Valkaneer
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:53pm
I served in the Army, and I’ll say letting women in the military is the worst thing probably that has happend to it so far. All the standards are lowered not just for women. Your doing a 5 mile run and the women can’t keep up, guess what we all slow down. When I was in women had to do what 18 sit ups to pass, I had to do 56 i think it was. Women had to do something like 25 push ups I had to do 42. Run times were not even close.

Tell me what is a woman going to do in a Fox Hole for 3 day when it’s her time of the month? There are regulations to make sure women have a shower available every so many days. Any woman caught by the enemy would be raped over and over. I want to see how many women can do a 20 mile walk with a 60 lbs rug sack?

When I was at Fort Irwin I was OP4 (enemy in military war games) scouting on top of a hill maning a SAW. Head quarters wanted eyes on a postion 1 mile away. My buddy with the raido and I ran down a 500 ft tall hill and full out sprinted accross the desert by enemy Humers, we even out ran the OC (war game judge). We were fianlly killed due to minor issue, of where the miles gear was placed. Still I had a rug sac and a 23 lbs fully automatic rifel and my buddy had his rifel, and commo raidio on his back on a full tilt sprint for over a 1/2 mile, and we killed a humer with 6 guys in it on the way. How many woman can do that?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Robert999
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:22am
  A military with women in combat is a weak military and a losing military.
  
  Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:41pm
The logical thing to do if you are going to make a change like this is to create an all female infantry. That way you can take all these questions out if it, instead of all the alinsky games. YOU PROVE SOMETHING WORKS, OR YOU DON”T — You do this for the sake of everyone. Libs are idiots.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- iampraying4u
  Posted on January 29, 2013 at 2:10pm
  obummer doesnt want us to win
  
  Report this comment
Soul Leister
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:40pm
talk talk talk… if you women “actually” want equal work–equal pay, then you “will be required” to do the same damn thing the men have to do (otherwise you are “proving” you are not equal after all). So, that means register for the draft like the men do and you women marines have to start running three miles for you physical fitness tests JUST LIKE THE MEN (otherwise shut up and ask for a pay cut… because you are not doing what the men have to do… you keep proving you are not equals but you lips are still moving (so you must be lying)).

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Mike76
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:32pm
LOL at you guys who are saying yes, women should be allowed in combat, but no, they shouldn’t have to register for the draft! Some animals really ARE more equal than others, I guess? Yes, if they meet the same standards and are capable – let ‘em fight. Yes, make ‘em sign up for selective service – you want equality, then accept the responsibilities that go along with it. And when housing mixed genders together at the FOB creates trouble within the ranks, leads to babies on the battlefield, or a woman is captured in combat and raped or disfigured, this will all come to a halt as abruptly as it started. Ain’t social engineering grand!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Ghandi was a Republican
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:48pm
  Ya know– We will not have true equality until ugly men can enter the Ms Beauty pageant. All this ‘equality’ crapp is a joke. This particular bit is about getting women killed, raped, beheaded and killing America’s will to defend itself!
  It is the job of all men to protect women wherever they may be. It is genetically encoded. It cannot be politically correct-orized. Men will be confronted with this conflict in the heat of battle,. Liberal Girly men do not have this encoding and cannot understand it.
  
  Report this comment
Cosmos102
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:28pm
No matter how strong a woman is, she will never be as strong as most men because men are built differently and have more muscles. Therefore women would not only be a hindrance to men on the front line, but actually be putting their lives in danger.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Butters66
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:28pm
I think the average age of a solider in Vietnam was like 19 or 20. In WWII it was like 26. I think all of old men over 30 will be able to pick up the slack considering how little actual manufacturing jobs actually exist in the US today.

We got robots now, yo.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jays
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:14pm
Women, we are creating a violent world……………..military service will help you to prepare for it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PoohbearA2
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:28pm
  No offense but women are all to well acquainted with violence. You men have no idea what percentage of women are victims on any given day. Still way under-reported. Since most of that violence is at the hands of men, I have a hard time believing that men are hardwired to protect women. They are hardwired to protect their chances of producing offspring. Women need to be sheltered while they produce children, but I think that’s as far as biology goes. My guy, thankfully, environmentally trained to care for me. Big THANK YOU to my in-laws, you did great!!!!
  
  Report this comment
red_white_blue2
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:11pm
It is not a matter of whether women can fight and retrieve other soldiers from the field of battle. The question isn’t whether they should have to register for the draft. The question is that if you have more women in battle, will it change jeopardize other soldiers by introducing a psychological challenge that will make people hesitate, there would be a rise in casualties, missions could be compromised, battles lost, wars outcomes jeopardized. Men are hard wired to protect a woman, and these situations would occur. The American public is not ready for the reality that captured women are being raped and brutalized daily. It is something also morally that should never take place. We need to insure the current law of excluding women stands.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PoohbearA2
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:21pm
  Rape stats outside of war are shocking. Not anything new to women. Men POW’s are raped too BTW.
  
  Report this comment
PoohbearA2
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:09pm
Very easy. Determine the qualification to do a job. Those who pass, pass. Those who don’t, don’t. Most women(99.9%) are completely incapable (even with intensive physical training) to perform in ground combat roles. Ladies get over it, Women and Men are NOT the same. We make great pilots though!

Yes, everybody should have to register. Plenty of jobs that women can excel at during wartime. As far as pregnancy goes… hey guys, get over it. Men and women are NOT the same.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Butters66
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:06pm
So as long as standards are never lowered and a woman meets them, then it sounds like she has the right to serve in combat.

If a woman was good enough at basketball to play in the NBA, don’t you think she would be?

This sounds like a non issue, unless the rules get played with. Unfortunately, I do not put that past our progressive neighbors. So we must fight and maintain those, just like with Firefighters.

Also, most of the military is not front line combat roles. Getting drafted just means they must serve. The US has the smartest, greatest women on the planet. (Look at the Olympics for instance.) I want them helping us winning any war that would require a real draft.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- mewnani
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:10pm
  Er….. who will be doing all the jobs left open by soldiers and those called to serve when war hits? If all the women are out serving the country who will be left to do those jobs? Little kids?
  
  Report this comment
- Butters66
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:21pm
  @mewNani –
  
  Less men would be drafted as well as we take an overall higher end percentage of the population suited for the military. Also, there are good reasons for exception from the draft such as being important to war effort at home. This was the case for men in the last draft as well.
  
  I think you might be a bit too focused on the 1940s version of the draft and not what happened in the 1960s and 70s.
  
  Report this comment
- mewnani
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:24am
  My apologies; in spite of my youthful age I am a few generations older than most. Still I can already see a lot of problems with a female draft and with female soldiers fighting alongside male soldiers. Can you imagine if a female soldier is captured? Can you imagine what they would do to her? Can you imagine what kind of stress it would put on her body? Can you imagine all the hardships resulting from that one particular issue women are most famous for? There’s just too many downsides.
  
  Report this comment
Small World
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 10:57pm
Women are idiots…next they will want a d!!k.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- mewnani
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:08pm
  I’m a woman and I take offense to you calling all the sane women stupid. :|
  
  Not all of us wanted to be on the front lines of war you know. :|
  
  Report this comment
- Exeter5
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:27pm
  Not all of you wanted to be on the front lines of war but most wanted equal rights. Fair is fair. You have the right to join the military or stay away from it. Make your choice. And may your God help you.
  
  Report this comment
- mewnani
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:29am
  I’m not part of that “Most” demographic you speak of. Heck I don’t really think a lot of the women where I live support this. *sigh*
  
  I just hope they reconsider… adding women to the military poses so many problems….
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.