Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Since we haven't had a draft in 40 years - doubt we'd start now. But, yes, theoretically, there is no reason why girls shouldn't sign up for selective service. Although perhaps the child-bearing aspect of sending young girls off to fight and then not having anyone home to continue the species - but then I read WAY to many dystopic/sci-fi books.


Don’t quite understand your thinking. It takes two to continue the species - female AND male.


One man can impregnate hundreds. One woman can only have a small number of children.

Women have to have some skin in the game. Why should women be allowed to vote on sending just the men to fight and die?

Men should have some skin in the game related to childbirth. Why should only women have to suffer through pregnancy and childbirth?

I can answer this very succinctly -- because Eve disobeyed God's order not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
That's why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Since we haven't had a draft in 40 years - doubt we'd start now. But, yes, theoretically, there is no reason why girls shouldn't sign up for selective service. Although perhaps the child-bearing aspect of sending young girls off to fight and then not having anyone home to continue the species - but then I read WAY to many dystopic/sci-fi books.


Don’t quite understand your thinking. It takes two to continue the species - female AND male.


One man can impregnate hundreds. One woman can only have a small number of children.

Women have to have some skin in the game. Why should women be allowed to vote on sending just the men to fight and die?

By that logic, why should men be able to make laws concerning abortion and women's reproductive issues?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hope so and its about time.

+1000

I mean, can anyone think of a reason why not??!?

Well, the last draft was for the Vietnam war, which clearly demonstrates that a future draft is a real possibility (albeit low in my opinion). The force that fought that war, jungle warfare, trenches, hand to hand combat, etc. was 100% male. If the new policy was in place at that time, then presumably 50% of the draftees through the lottery would be female. Now the fighting force would be 50/50 male/female combating 100% male enemy forces in close combat. Is this an improvement for our chances in war?

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who DO NOT believe that females should register.... Why not?
And, the argument that both a mother and father could be sent to war is not enough of an argument.
There are many spouses with children in the military now and the military finds a way to make it work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: There is no draft

semantics. Men must register for the selective service which would form draft rolls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Since we haven't had a draft in 40 years - doubt we'd start now. But, yes, theoretically, there is no reason why girls shouldn't sign up for selective service. Although perhaps the child-bearing aspect of sending young girls off to fight and then not having anyone home to continue the species - but then I read WAY to many dystopic/sci-fi books.


Don’t quite understand your thinking. It takes two to continue the species - female AND male.


One man can impregnate hundreds. One woman can only have a small number of children.

Women have to have some skin in the game. Why should women be allowed to vote on sending just the men to fight and die?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I doubt they would change the policy. We're a huge country and we have more than enough men on the draft rolls currently to field a very large force. They'd also have to think about what happens if they draft both the mom and dad to young children? Previously just the dad got drafted.


I think all it would take is a lawsuit from some young man to make this happen.
If all positions are open to females, why not have them register.
It’s only fair.
And we as a citizenry need to "have more skin in the game," so women should register and both men and women should be subject to the draft. It will be harder to go to war if everyone's children have to go. I'm sick and tired of all these "chicken hawks" who are so in favor of war but never had to serve.

Or know their ass will never be shot at because they are female. Yes yes lets go kill all those nasty ISIS people. You boy, over there. Stop what you are doing and go do my killing. Me? No I am a female...I might be raped! We all know being raped is worst vs anything that can happen in war.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I doubt they would change the policy. We're a huge country and we have more than enough men on the draft rolls currently to field a very large force. They'd also have to think about what happens if they draft both the mom and dad to young children? Previously just the dad got drafted.


I think all it would take is a lawsuit from some young man to make this happen.
If all positions are open to females, why not have them register.
It’s only fair.
And we as a citizenry need to "have more skin in the game," so women should register and both men and women should be subject to the draft. It will be harder to go to war if everyone's children have to go. I'm sick and tired of all these "chicken hawks" who are so in favor of war but never had to serve.

Anonymous wrote:Hope so and its about time.

(So maybe I'll revise my answer and say DD should have to register when women make a dollar on a man's dollar in the workforce...)

Plus 100 to this! I don't think our daughters should register and this is the main reason why. When males and females are truly treated equally then we can talk about registering females. Until then NO WAY

Anonymous wrote:
Chicken and egg. Registering in the selective service is one of the steps to being treating equally. You can't pick some parts of being "treated equally" and not the other.

Says you! Who died and left you bossy pants?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Woman of two daughters here and I say yes as well. i think that bootcamp and some military service will do our daughters a lot of good.

Does this good include hand to hand combat with ISIS or similar Neanderthal minded enemies in a urban or jungle setting? Crawling in the mud in fox holes alongside men with incoming mortar fire? With the new rules, combat is not an option but an obligation just like for the men, especially in the event of a draft. Careful what you wish for.

Any woman who can get through basis training can engage in combat. So to answer your question, yes!

And of course you are ok with the way the all young, militant, chauvinistic male enemy will treat the 50% young woman soldiers who may end up as POWs, like perhaps your daughter.

And the male POWs are not already raped and/or tortured? What about the female civilian populations in warzones?

You need to learn a few (unsavory) things about warfare.