Selective service only requires males to

[Jumping John]

register. Seems so discriminatory.

Any valid explanation for this?

[enlightenment]

1. Yep.

It's a hold over from a period when women were not allowed in combat positions - the days when idiots like Gingrich could openly argue that it would be dangerous to the male troops to have a menstruating woman in a foxhole. It has remained because it would be political suicide for a politician to suggest it should change, since the registration has one purpose; to supply names for a potential military draft.

[frazzled]

3. Well, the way to change it, then,

Is for young women at age 18 to voluntarily fill out Selective Service forms, in solidarity with their male peers and as a statement about their own equality and power. (An example of "change from outside Washington." The politicians will follow if lots of young women show a willingness to register.)

[Jumping John]

14. I called my congressional Rep and was told it is illegal for a female to voluntarily register with

selective service.

[JimDandy]

64. That's why actions like that are called

"civil disobedience". Voluntarily committing an illegal act in order to change the status quo has often been the path to changing our democracy for the better.

[The empressof all]

52. Actually a better way is to pass the ERA

Hard to believe that it never passed.

[Victor_c3]

33. I don't think it is just about menstruating women in a foxhole

The physical size and strength differences are the reason the women aren't permitted in combat positions. When your basic load is roughly 80-100 pounds of equipment (body armor with plates, helmet, camel back, rifle, 210 rounds of ammunition, 4 grenades, etc) I don't think there are a lot of women who can complete a 16 mile foot march in 4 hours (the army standard for an infantryman) while carrying that. Not mention if your job is to be an M249, M240B, or M203 gunner then you have even more weight to carry. I don't think there are too many women who can keep up physically with a man.

That being said, if a woman can pass the same physical fitness test that a man can, then I don't see any reason why a woman couldn't be a capable grunt.

I'm probably going to get flamed for this....

[Risen Demon]

45. Sir, I applaud you

And agree with exactly everything you say.

Basic physical standards for female soldiers to be in the military are lower than the males.

E.G., For a female age 17-21 to score a 100 on the push up event of the APFT, she only needs to perform 3 more pushups than the minimum requirement for a male of the same age(42).

But combat positions require the same demands regardless of gender.

[riderinthestorm]

49. With the WOT, the nature of combat in Afghanistan and Iraq - its fact women are on the front lines

in essentially combat positions every single day.

Its crazy to believe they are somehow in rear guard positions anymore. They passed that line long ago....

[Victor_c3]

61. true that

Most women might not be able to physically keep up with men in the "combat" positions, but women do fill a lot of combat support and combat service support positions. Although a woman wouldn't be in charge of a "line platoon" or combat platoon, there were female platoon leaders in charge of the support platoon in the battalion I was attached to when I was in Iraq. The support platoon had to conduct daily convoys to and from the closest major base and, as a result, was attacked numerous times. So, in those positions, you do have combat proven leaders who are women. I don't argue with you on that at all.

In some posts below that many people said that they wouldn't want their daughters to deploy to war/combat. Well, I wouldn't want my son (if I had one) to deploy to war either. I don't think that we as a society need to constantly coddle and protect "our" women like we do. As a society we don't do women any favors by doing so. In fact, we just discount half of our future leaders and best and brightest by doing do. When as parents we prepare and teach our daughters the same way and the same things that we teach our sons, I'm sure that the women our daughters grow up to be will be just as capable and tough mentally and emotionally as the men.

I have two daughters (aged 2 and 4) and I doing my best to raise them to be as tough as any man.

[riderinthestorm]

66. You rock! I'm old enough to be your mother so I get to give you a motherly hug!

Welcome home. I also have two daughters (much older!) and I know of what you speak - my girls are/were farm kids and they aren't raised to be hot house flowers. They're as strong as any of my guys who work here and they do as much of the work as any of them. My oldest girl had her masters degree in archaeology by the time she was 21 - smart, tough and driven to succeed in a tough outdoors field.

Nobody wants their kids to go to war. If I had my way there'd be no Selective Service. Our military now is an extension of the MIC and profits the rich guys and no one else.

But if there's going to be an SS, I'd want my girls to have the same opportunities to gain the skills, training and PAY as any other guy.

[Victor_c3]

69. thank you

I can't take full credit for my attitude though. My wife is what I calll a hardcore feminist and she really opened my eyes to the glaring differences between how women and men are treated in our society.

[pinboy3niner]

75. The local Army NG Transportation Co. here recently returned from Afghanistan

The men and women of the unit spent a year doing a very hazardous job--transporting fuel. They "manned" both the fuel trucks, and the gun trucks securing their convoys. The company is commanded by a female 1st Lt.

They lost one KIA in the Rhino bus attack in Kabul shortly after they arrived, and two soldiers were awarded Purple Hearts during their tour. At a recent ceremony re-naming the local Armory in memory of the soldier who was KIA, The CO had a difficult time talking about losing a troop, especially with the family there--but she soldiered through it.

The commander is impressive, and the unit has a stellar reputation. My impression from being with them at some of their official events, including their sendoff and the Armory re-naming ceremony, is that the women in the unit have the same status and respect as the men. And many of the troops had previous deployments, some of them in other jobs--as indicated by the CIBs worn by many of the male soldiers. (This deployment was the sixth for one NCO.)

Women doing these kinds of hazardous jobs is a relatively new development, but at least now they are being recognized with the award of the new Combat Action Badge. They deserve it.

[frazzled]

2. I agree; it should be changed

Given the number of women who are in our current volunteer military, we should change the outdated Selective Service rules.

[southernyankeebelle]

4. That is fine if you want your daughter in a combat zone. However I wouldn't want my daughter in a

combat zone. Women who go into the military are VOLUNTEERS they want to be there. Seeing the rate of rapes in the military and really nothing being done I don't think I'd want my daughter in the middle of that. I wouldn't mind her doing a 2 yr community type service here in the states but not in the military. Not everyone is made to be in the military.

[MineralMan]

9. I doubt very much that parents want their sons in a war zone, either.

Uff da!

[southernyankeebelle]

24. I agree. Maybe we should stop politicians sending our troops off to wars like Iraq and VN.

Many damn good soldiers died and I have a hard time with that. I support the troops 100% and their families who never get the recognition they deserve. Don't get me wrong I don't want to see anyone's sons or daughters in a war. Until I see people like Romney sending his boys off then we will see what happens. I have gotten old now and I realize that war only help corporations and the rich and the working people provide the bodies and the government provides the body bags. Over 60 yrs of military service in my family and seeing how their wounds effected them long after they retired shows me war is hell and our soldiers who come home now with honor but wounded sometimes never get over it.

[yardwork]

16. There's nothing voluntary about registering for the Selective Service. It is the law for males.

Since all U.S. males are required to register for the Selective Service by law when they are eighteen, all female citizens should have to register, too. Right now we don't have a Selective Service. But U.S. law still requires men to register for it.

[southernyankeebelle]

23. I don't care if it is the law. My son did that when he finished school. I very well know what is

required to register. I just don't want my daughter doing it period. I don't have a problem with her doing some type of service as long as it has nothing to do with carrying a rifle in a combat zone. Sorry. My dad and father-in-law and my husband all served in the military and retired from same. Not one of them wanted their daughters to been in the military. I know at one time I wanted to and my dad said hell no. Until the military takes serious the rape situation that is going on I would never ever want my daughter serving in the military.

[yardwork]

32. Registering for the Selective Service does not carry a requirement of serving in combat.

[southernyankeebelle]

39. I know that. My son registerd in 1990.

[NYC Liberal]

18. And you think people want their sons in a combat zone??

[southernyankeebelle]

21. no, I sure don't

[riderinthestorm]

44. Men are getting raped too. So why should women be the only ones "protected"?

Sorry but its an antiquated notion that women can't perform combat roles. In fact, most of the women serving now are well within "combat" zones since so much of the areas like Afghanistan and Iraq are almost entirely subject to battles breaking out virtually anywhere.

FYI, I have two daughters and while I am 110% against them serving as rich men's pawns in our corporate military, if in fact it became mandatory for them to sign up for the selective service then I see no reason why they should not. The law is completely discriminatory.

[southernyankeebelle]

54. Good you send your 2 daughters and I will keep my only daughter at home. This is a volunteer

military. Until I see politicans sending their loving children (18 or older) into combat zones then maybe I would say fine. I saw what happened in VN. Many guys got screwed unlike the Bush boys, Romney, Cheney and many more who were able to get out of it. My kids are just as important as their kids. I figured its time for the politicans to send their own. I think the men and women who serve today should get free college education if they want it or even a trade school. Let's put our taxpayer money to good use. These soldiers deserve so much especially when they come back wounded like my dad did. It effected him til the day he died. Also my father-in-law was wounded during battle. I am very old fashioned sorry but it is just me. My dad said no to me. Now I would say no to my daughter. Especially with rapes going on and they are not really addressing it. Your right men can get raped also but he can't come home with a baby.

[riderinthestorm]

57. I already stipulated I DON'T want my daughters joining. But SS is discriminatory

If they're going to require males, it needs to be equal and allow females as well. Women are already in combat because of the nature of our WOT, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Otherwise they're in just as much jeopardy without as many skills, training and PAY as the other guys.

[southernyankeebelle]

73. I can't fight with you on that. But she volunteered to go in. That is the difference. That is all

am saying. But I want these young people being taken care of when they come home. We should offer them Vocational jobs training or 4 yr college for free. That is the least we can do for them. I love our troops. Of all people who should have a leg up is the soldiers.

[riderinthestorm]

76. Who volunteered to go in? Not my daughters, nor obviously did yours. What are you talking about?

Your position is sexist that women shouldn't have to sign up for Selective service. I don't want ANY of them having to do this. But if its going to be a reality, make it equal so that both men and women get the same skills, training and PAY.

Women are already in combat in modern warfare. They simply aren't getting the skills, training and pay however that men are getting. If you truly are advocating for people being "taken care of", then ALL of them should receive equal benefits - in service and out.

[southernyankeebelle]

83. Women and Men VOLUNTEER to be in the military. That is up to the individual. PERIOD. I believe

men and women in the military DESERVE EQUAL PAY. I never said any thing other wise. I just said I don't want my daughter in the military, nothing more or less. You read what you want into the comment. I know what I said. I RESPECT SOLDIERS I married a veteran and I followed him all over the world for 21 yrs. Don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say. It doesn't make me a sexist because I don't want my daughter in the service. PERIOD.

[riderinthestorm]

85. This is about being forced to register for the Selective Service. Potential draft bait

and how its only applied to males, not females.

Selective Service. Mandatory registration of men.

You don't believe women should be forced to register. That's sexist.

[southernyankeebelle]

86. Women have total rights. No I don't believe women should be forced to register. Nor do I think boy

should be. Life isn't fair is it? I love children however I don't want the pain that goes with the birth. I wish men can have that experience. But they can't. Like I said life isn't fair.

[riderinthestorm]

90. Your post #23 seems to be saying you were okay with your son registering but not your daughter

" I just don't want my daughter doing it period."

So I guess I'm confused (and so are many other DUers obviously).

You say women have "total rights" but you've stated elsewhere that you don't think women should be in the military. Upthread you also don't believe women should be in combat even if they do volunteer for the military (if they're excluded from some military roles, they don't have "total rights" whatever that means). In post #23 you seem to be saying you don't want your daughter to be forced to sign up for the Selective Service but your son did....

Just trying to clarify if I've misunderstood you.

I don't want the Selective Service registration for anyone. But if it IS going to exist, it must be applied equally to men and women. I think that's a clear statement.

[southernyankeebelle]

94. I don't want my daughter going into the military, period. There are other ways she should able to

serve the country. Like serving in nursing homes, hospitals and help in local government offices doing work for the community they live in. I don't have a problem with MY daughter doing that. It isn't sexist. If you feel that is sexist well then that is your right. I am not here to change anyone's mind. I just feel I don't want my daughter in the military period.

[Zalatix]

62. Not that we would ever ask you to show the same concern for men as you do for women...

but how about opposing selective service for anyone, period?

[southernyankeebelle]

72. I don't believe anyone should be forced to sign up nor forced to serve. Believe me I didn't want

my son to sign the selective service card. Because not long after he got a call from recruiters. My son didn't want to go into the service. Besides that my own husband was a recruiter so we already new sell. We both grew up in the military housing environment. My husband served 21 yrs and I worked civil service. I'd been around enough recruiters while my husband was doing that duty. It isn't pretty what they have to do to get a person in. My husband never lied to a kid and made sure that kid made up his/her mind what job they wanted to do and not what the recruiter is trying to put you in. I don't want anyone son or daughter forced into something they do not want to do.

[Jennicut]

88. Rape is disgusting, hurtful and emotionally devastating for both males and females.

In some ways, it is even worse for men because of how they are viewed in society. They are expected to be strong and be able to fight off attacks. Males that are raped get less support from their families and friends as well. Lots of studies about it. Male rape is very under reported for a reason.
I do not support selective service or a draft for both men and women.

[Zalatix]

58. So you would rather just force MEN to go die in combat? Really? Now that is downright sexist.

I, for one, would choose a different solution: NO ONE should be forced to go to war.

None of the above. You could have answered that way... one has to wonder why you didn't.

[southernyankeebelle]

71. Well I believe in being honest. I think there are many people who would feel that way. Who are you

to tell me how to answer? Look at some of my other responses. I don't want ANYONE to go to war. I believe in a just war. Like WWII. Not like VN or Iraq. We lost to many good men and women in those wars. Bush should be in jail for allowing over 4,000 soldiers to die in Iraq knowing there were no WMD, period. But that is another story. I don't want anyone to go to war. I have a son and I love him very much. My son's and daughter's life are just as important as politicans family members. Please don't get mad because I am telling what I feel. I don't expect anyoneelse to feel what I feel. I respect the way others feel. I can't change your mind and you can't change mine.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

6. It should be removed completely. nt

[Comrade_McKenzie]

5. It's discriminatory. What do you expect, though?

It's a list on which they force you to add your name that may one day be used to force you to fight and die in some country you can't pronounce for some reason you probably don't give a damn about.

There's nothing fair about it.

[Nye Bevan]

7. Chivalry? To protect our womenfolk? (nt)

[Lucy Goosey]

8. Wait, what?

(I'm not American.)

Is this the draft? Do all American men have to essentially pre-register just in case something happens that causes the draft to be re-instated RIGHT AWAY?

There are so many things I didn't know about the US. Here in Canada, we can't even call up our reserve forces if there is no formal declaration of war - which means no reservists have even been called up since Korea, even though we had a significant presence in Afghanistan, let alone civilians being drafted.

[MadrasT]

11. Yes.

Do all American men have to essentially pre-register just in case something happens that causes the draft to be re-instated RIGHT AWAY?

[Lucy Goosey]

12. That seems like an invasion of privacy or something.

But what do I know? I'm just a brainwashed socialist peacenik health-care-loving Canadian, after all.

[Victor_c3]

68. Yup. There is a reason nobody hates Canadians!

Damn those peace loving socialized medicine having progressive minded people to our north!

Don't forget that you guys also have the metric system! I hate how it just makes sense that everything is in lumps of 10.

(I hope you can pick up my jelousy and attempt at humor here)

[MadrasT]

10. A "valid" explanation? No.

It's leftover anti-female sexism and it's wrong. (I say "anti-female" because it is from a time when women were thought to be "less than" and incapable of military service.) I know some men think it is anti-male, but I see it as quite the opposite.

I'd prefer no one would have to register, but if we're going to have it, women should have to register, too.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Yes, only males are subject to being drafted under US law

It has been challenged in the courts and found not to be discriminatory, though it could be ripe for another go at it.

[yardwork]

15. I agree. All citizens should have to register if males have to do so.

[pnwmom]

29. Not until the ERA is passed. n/t

[yardwork]

31. That's a fair deal. I agree.

[Zalatix]

59. NO citizens should have to register.

[slackmaster]

65. I'm a native-born male US citizen, and I never had to register for the draft

I was born in 1958.

Men who were born between March 29, 1957 and December 31, 1959 slipped through the cracks between President Ford's executive order eliminating the Vietnam era draft lottery in 1975, and another EO signed by President Carter in 1980 that established a registration requirement for men born on or after January 1, 1960.

[HopeHoops]

17. Yeah. Women are inferior and don't belong in combat situations.

almost

That's still the thinking too many people have. Personally, I think women are not only as capable, but more level headed in general.

[4th law of robotics]

25. I would guess most *people* aren't capable of it

mentally.

Not for any length of time.

Physically men are stronger obviously (the military has lower physical standards for females than for male recruits). Mentally, I don't think there's any difference.

And there's no evidence an 18 year old girl is more or less level headed than an 18 year old boy.

[HopeHoops]

30. My three daughters are 17, 19, and 21 and all 2nd degree black belts. Read on...

The eldest spent last semester in Budapest (sister campus). She and a friend got hit on by two guys and at one point one of them asked her if she was nervous. That's when she realized that she'd struck a defensive fighting stance. That still cracks me up just thinking about it. My wife's under 5' and all of 95 lbs wet, but she's a 3rd degree and can kick the shit out of damn near anyone who doesn't outrank her by at least a full level.

Mentally, war fucks everyone up. Period. I recently read that a war-seasoned veteran commits suicide every 18 minutes now. Sorry, I forget the source, but it was almost certainly a link from DU. As for physical strength, both genders have the same requirements to pass the PT. If you make it through that, you're strong enough. Oh, and at 18, I pretty much guarantee the odds of being level headed are WAY in favor of females. I was an 18 year old boy once, so I've got some experience in that department.

[4th law of robotics]

34. Personal anecdotes don't mean much

I've known 18 year old boys who are complete idiots. And 18 year old girls. And 18 year old boys who I'd trust with a weapon. And 18 year old girls.

Oh, and at 18, I pretty much guarantee the odds of being level headed are WAY in favor of females

Unless you've been both an 18 year old boy and an 18 year old girl at some point you really can't personally comment on that. All you could say is that you as an 18 year old boy fit some description.


Additionally fighting someone in a bar is not the same as being subject to constant noise and violence (seemingly random and impersonal) in a battlefield. I'm sure there were many barroom toughs who broke under the pressure in the trenches back in the day. And many meek people who didn't.

And according to the US army the standards are different for men and women:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blfitmale17to21.htm
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/army/l/blfitfem17to21.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Physical_Fitness_Test

[HopeHoops]

36. She was on the street. And, as an 18 year old boy, I knew plenty of women that age.

With a few notable exceptions (who I will decline to mention for their privacy), it was pretty much universally in favor of females when it came to level heads. Okay, well, there were those cyclical times where I can't claim that, but it's also normal.

As for the standards, I thought they had changed that! Weird. I'll have to ask my eldest's boyfriend about that (when he wakes up - he's on night shift at his job). His army gear is all over the house and covered in cat hair.

[former-republican]

40. If his MOS starts with 11

Please ask him what he thinks about introducing women in direct combat roles.


I'm pretty sure what he's going to say.

[HopeHoops]

41. Sorry, "MOS"?

[pinboy3niner]

42. MOS = Military Occupational Specialty

For example, iln the Army, MOS 11B is an Infantryman.

[former-republican]

43. sorry

Military Occupational Specialties

[HopeHoops]

84. Thank you.

[NYC Liberal]

19. There's really no valid explanation, no.

[pnwmom]

28. Yes, there is.

The ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) failed to pass.

[NYC Liberal]

78. OK yes but there's still no valid reason to exclude women, ERA or not.

They could include women without the ERA, but they choose not to...for no valid reason.

[pnwmom]

79. Oh really? You don't think women would STRONGLY object to being included in the draft

without having the protections of the ERA?

[NYC Liberal]

82. STRONGLY object or not, there is no valid reason.

Either we equally require everyone to register, or we scrap the whole thing.

[HappyMe]

92. I agree.

Not passing era is no excuse for not registering.

[pnwmom]

101. Yes, there is a valid reason. Either women are considered a special class,

deprived of full responsibilities and protections, or they are not.

If they are deprived of equal rights, they shouldn't be part of any draft.

[lumberjack_jeff]

96. This is an interesting contention.

What kinds of protections would you anticipate receiving from the ERA?

Specifically, what laws (in addition to the end of the male only draft registration) would be rendered unconstitutional?

I think women would strongly object to being included in the draft, or having those other laws invalidated. I think that many if not most americans of both genders like the ability to discriminate by gender.

I think the ERA is great but be aware of what that means; no more male only draft, no more VAWA, no more WIC program, no more Women's educational equity program, no more SBA help for women owned businesses.

[DevonRex]

20. I served. I think all women should have to register. Nt

[pnwmom]

27. I think the Equal Rights Amendment should be passed first. n/t

[DevonRex]

38. Sounds like a really GRAND idea for a deal

to me, doesn't it to you? We women are certainly willing to do our fair share for the country, if the country does what's fair for us!

Good slogan? Damn! I wish I had seen this sooner.

[pnwmom]

47. Their whole excuse for not passing it in the first place was the draft --

and gay marriage.

It's time to pass it.

[riderinthestorm]

50. Agreed. This is a valid point nt

[pnwmom]

26. Yes. The Equal Rights Amendment didn't pass. And until it does,

I don't think women should be subject to the draft.

[4th law of robotics]

35. Er. . . what rights are women

specifically denied that would have been protected under the ERA?

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification

[pnwmom]

48. The SCOTUS is still pointing to the lack of an ERA in their decisions.

I will fight any call to draft women unless an ERA is in place.

http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/faq.htm

SNIP

The ERA would require courts to go beyond the current application of the 14th Amendment by adding sex to the list of suspect classifications protected by the highest level of strict judicial review.

In September 2010, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia stated his belief that the Constitution does not protect against sex discrimination. This remark has provoked widespread public reaction, citing his position as clear evidence of the need for an Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution.

SNIP

Without the ERA in the Constitution, the statutes and case law that have produced major advances in women’s rights since the middle of the last century are vulnerable to being ignored, weakened, or reversed. By a simple majority, Congress can amend or repeal anti-discrimination laws, the Administration can negligently enforce such laws, and the Supreme Court can use the intermediate standard of review to permit certain regressive forms of sex discrimination.

[4th law of robotics]

89. So the only thing you could find

was a blog for this bill that said women might lose rights they currently have without it.

Meaning they currently are not being denied those rights.

So what rights are women lacking compared to men?

[lumberjack_jeff]

97. "The constitution does not protect against sex discrimination"

It doesn't.

If it did, we wouldn't have government programs designed and intended to benefit women exclusively.

[HappyMe]

93. One step in the equal rights fight

should be registering for the draft for women.

Or, suspend ALL registering until era passes.

[yellowcanine]

37. Yes. It is a relic of the male only military.

But there is a medical draft standby plan which does include women unless directed by Congress to exempt women. It would be administered by the same Selective Service System as would handle a military draft.

[slackmaster]

46. Women still don't have the same rights as men at the federal level, so they don't have the same...

...responsibilities either.

[pnwmom]

53. Exactly. Until the ERA is passed,

it is perfectly justified not to draft women.

[slackmaster]

60. Did you know that the Republican Party platform supported the ERA from 1940 until 1976?

They lost it when they sold out to fanatical religious conservatives after Roe v. Wade.

[pnwmom]

70. No, I didn't. That's interesting, thanks! n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

98. Can you give some examples of RIGHTS that are unequal at the federal level. n/t

[slackmaster]

100. There is no federal law prohibiting discrimination against women in employment

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; but not based on gender or sexual orientation.

Unless your state law prohibits it (as mine does,) it's perfectly legal for an employer to have a policy under which a woman is paid 70% of what a man is paid for a given position.

That was the case in South Carolina where my ex-wife lived when we met, and I haven't heard that it has changed.

Here's another: There is no federal law prohibiting discrimination against homosexuals in housing, or employment, or anything.

[raw raina]

51. It's a backdoor draft and disgusting. NO ONE should have to sign up to get education money!

[Selatius]

55. There has been no draft since 1973. Selective Service does not equal a backdoor draft.

A backdoor draft would be issuing a stop-loss order to units to keep them from being rotated back to the States or out of the theater of operations, just like what happened in Iraq. I had one friend in the Marines who was stop-lossed and ended up serving a tour of duty lasting 22 months in the early years of the Iraq War. He was never the same when he came back home.

As far as Selective Service goes, I think it should apply to women as well. I'm a firm believer in equal rights for all, including women. It's why I favor the Equal Rights Amendment as well. If the ERA passes into law, it should include a provision amending the Selective Service to mandate that women must register.

[Zalatix]

63. Selective Service = Sword of Damocles. And it should be abolished, not expanded to women.

[slackmaster]

67. Conscription would still be possible through the existing militia statutes

Both at state and federal level.

[Alduin]

56. We should take this further...

and disable selective service. How is it fair for someone's kid, or you, or your nephew, or your son, or your grandson, to go off and fight, or possibly die, in a war that he didn't start and didn't want to be a part of?

We should get rid of selective service. There's no need for it.

[progressoid]

91. Plus, the military isn't interested in a draft.

I've talked to a couple mid-level military people that have said that the draft would probably hurt them in today's service. It would be expensive and time consuming to fill our high-tech, highly specialized military. This ain't our Dad's army anymore.

[Honeycombe8]

74. Yes, there is. nt

[Swede Atlanta]

77. This needs to change.....

We can discuss the wisdom of placing women in active combat roles...i.e. placing them in foxholes with men....but.......

There is no reason women should not be considered part of the selective service program even if their roles would be non-combat related.

The time has come for us to fully accept and treat women as equals....that suggests both benefits (e.g. equal pay) with responsibilities such as selective service.

[ReasonableToo]

80. In a perfect world (country), six months of training/service after high school.

If our Department of Defense were only used for defense, it would be good for all citizens to go through a modified basic training (not the kind where a person is mentally "broken" so that they an be "built up" to take orders blindly). This would essentially be ACTUAL SERVICE rather than selective service for not only the country but also the citizen. (all citizens)

However, since our country is run by plutocrats who use our men and women as unknowing mercenaries (the ones who know it are more likely to commit suicide) and our military is rife with Christian fundamentalist and rape enablers, the selective service should be abolished.

Because of our history, military service should be volunteer only.

Perhaps a comprehensive fact-finding and house-cleaning where accused war criminals are actually adjudicated and we put laws in place that prevent the propaganda in the media and full transparency in political/military dealings, I might go back to the "ideal world" opinion. Until then, we are not worthy of any of the lives lost on our behalf.

Oh, and pass ERA too!

[davidn3600]

81. The Selective Service is stupid anyway

If the United States is ever truly under attack, where our civilization is threatened. There would not need to be a draft. The military would be flooded with volunteeers, both male and female. Even after 9/11, there was a dramatic increase of people wanting to join the military.

So why do we need it? In case our politicians in their great wisdom start a war that is unpopular against a country that has never done anything to us, and we have to force people to go fight and die for a cause they don't care about.

[HereSince1628]

95. In WWII American territory WAS attacked...they still needed a draft and weirdly

I found out recently while doing geneology for the SO, that during WWII American men in their 50's had to register for it. I'd have never known that but one of the on-line services had a copy of his WWII registration card!

[wtmusic]

87. Two years of mandatory service in the Peace Corps, for everyone

and in a generation selective service would be largely unnecessary.

[lumberjack_jeff]

99. Americans love their sexism.

The arguments against this have a chicken / egg quality to them.

"I don't support the ERA because I don't want my daughter to have to register for the draft"
"I support draft registration for my son, but not my daughter because the ERA hasn't passed"

Both are inseparable from a fundamental belief in gender inequality, which most american men and women, share.

It is discriminatory, and the answer to your question is; because most americans like the ability to discriminate.

[bemildred]

102. One word: ERA. nt