Compulsory female registration for the draft

[woolldog]

Ladies of DU, get ready to be forced to register for the draft. Are you all excited by this?

http://www.stripes.com/news/house-bill-requires-women-to-sign-up-for-draft-1.392180

WASHINGTON — Two House Republicans introduced a bill Thursday requiring eligible women in the United States to sign up for the military draft, just days after it was recommended by the Marine Corps and Army.

[mythology]

1. Good

If I had to, so should young women.

[In_The_Wind]

2. It's long overdue.

[woolldog]

4. It's only recently that ground combat units were open to women

and that integration is the impetus behind forcing women to register.

[In_The_Wind]

5. I'm too old to be drafted but I would have served if called.

[woolldog]

31. I don't doubt that you would have.

[pnwmom]

68. It's not overdue until we have the Equal Rights Amendment. When we spent

years trying to pass that, the response was that we couldn't have equal rights because that would mean we could be drafted (and there might be unisex bathrooms.)

First the ERA. Then the draft. Otherwise we'll lose any leverage.

[In_The_Wind]

71. I agree with you.

[aaaaaa5a]

3. Equal is equal

I don't have a problem with this. Women are a huge part of the Israeli's military. And they have one of the most effective fighting armies in the world.

[starroute]

56. Or was until the ultra-Orthodox started squeezing women out

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.648140

Female IDF Soldiers Barred From Mess Hall Due to Presence of ultra-Orthodox Troops

The army closed a mess hall to women and barred a female officer from entering when new recruits of the ultra-Orthodox Nahal battalion were having lunch, the Israel Defense Forces said.

The incident happened at the Tel Hashomer induction base Thursday. The IDF explained the move by saying the army had promised that there would be no women around ultra-Orthodox recruits during their induction. . . .

After the officer was barred from the mess hall, women soldiers who came to eat were sent to another mess hall usually reserved for officers, the reservist said.

About a year and a half ago a female combat soldier from the Border Police, who had finished her shift near Mevo Dotan in the northern West Bank, was denied entry to have dinner at a base where ultra-Orthodox soldiers were stationed.

[pnwmom]

69. But we're not. The SCOTUS has ruled we're not equal and the states failed to pass an ERA. n/t

[demmiblue]

6. ERA needs to come first (plus, the military needs to deal with rape/sexual assault harshly). n/t

[CrispyQ]

36. This. ^^^

And republican congressmen need to stay out of our uterus's.

[demmiblue]

37. I still chuckle at this:

Keep your Boehner out of my uterus!

?w=600

[CrispyQ]

38. LOL.

I hadn't seen that one before.

[mythology]

72. That's going to haunt my dreams

[Laffy Kat]

62. Good point. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

7. The draft is wrong. Expanding the draft is wronger.

[linuxman]

25. There is no draft

But if they brought it back, full inclusiveness would be more just, not less.

If it ever came to drafting Americans, expecting only one half of the population to sacrifice would be wrong.

[dixiegrrrrl]

40. Having to "register" for a non-draft makes no sense,

They can, and will, institute the draft at any time, thanks to the registrations.

for the record, I am against both, for anyone.
What if they gave a war, and no body came?

[linuxman]

47. You understand that there needs to be a registry in case we bring back the draft, right?

"They" being our elected government of the country in which we reside have the right to reinstate it. That's just a cold hard fact. If things were ever bad enough, it would be necessary.

I never cared for that saying. It's cute and all, but if "they" gave a war, "they" already have an army, and the war is coming whether you like it or not. If NK decides to invade SK, SK can't just say "no thanks, we decline to participate." That's some seriously naive and facile shit. It makes no sense whatsoever in reality.

For the record, I like our volunteer force. It ensures that we are relying on those motivated enough to sign up in the first place. I don't know how I'd feel about fighting alongside people who never wanted to be there in the first place.

[Warren Stupidity]

63. There is a draft - registration for military service is compulsory.

If you think conscription is a good thing I could understand why you would view making in more inclusive would be a better thing. Me, I think conscription is evil, expanding it is eviler.

[linuxman]

65. That is not a draft.

It's like calling voters registration an election. It simply isn't.

I don't view it as a "good" thing, but sometimes it is necessary. Nobody knows what the future holds.

Expanding it to include a wider group, thereby reducing an unfair burden on only half of society is just. I view sending only certain unfortunates into danger when everyone holds a stake to be unjust.

[Warren Stupidity]

76. My state has the death penalty but we haven't executed anybody in nearly 80 years.

In your view that would make my state a state without the death penalty. I disagree. Conscription levels could go from 0 today to 1,000,000 tomorrow. The registration system is very much "the draft".

[linuxman]

94. That's a poor analogy.

Your state still has a death penalty, but they aren't using it. If you told me your state had fishing licenses but no bodies of water, that would be more analogous. A registration isn't a draft, it is simply a requirement for an effective one. This seems like a semantics game though. I think I'll just have to agree to disagree.

[lostnfound]

81. Agreed nt

[Bettie]

8. I'm too old

but I would have registered had it been necessary when I was younger.

Makes sense.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

93. Same here.

It's totally weird to think I am too old for that. I'm almost 37. I think it is fair, but I hope they have thought about what to do in the situation in which these people already have kids. If there was ever an need for a draft again, it would be terrible to make a bunch of kids orphans.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

96. I think they probably wouldn't draft a pregnant woman.

I think drafting women would probably result in a baby boom. It is pretty easy for most women in that age range to get pregnant.

[Hortensis]

9. America should have a standing draft of ALL citizens

between the ages of about 24 to 48 (leave the kids home to finish school and continue their adult brain development and take the parents). More than anything else, the real specter of being dragged away from one's life, family, job, mortgage payment, etc., to enrich others should spike the War Industry's cannons.

[SusanCalvin]

17. That is a good point.

Or tie the franchise to (paid) service of some sort, not necessarily military, like _Starship Troopers_. Doubt *that* would ever happen.

ETA: In case the _Starship Troopers_ reference is unclear, the book envisioned service of some sort to earn the franchise, not necessarily or even probably military. That's a common misconception that I don't want to take a chance of perpetuating.

Sigh... I just said the same thing twice, didn't I.....

Try again: Although the main character was Mobile Infantry, the service requirement, stated clearly right there in the book, is not necessarily or even probably military.

There. I hope....!

[Hortensis]

19. Required non-military service to one's country is

another issue that should be discussed. At this point I'd just like to require people to serve by voting.

But with the potential for a wide variety of really massive disasters directly and indirectly from climate change, perhaps we could some day need to be able to call up 10,000 people to help rebuild this area and newly develop that, if really basic things, like fresh water and food supply were threatened, plus stopping megafires, spread of disease, etc.

[Fumesucker]

34. By 24 kids are starting to think a little too independently to make good troops

Part of that whole "adult brain development" thing.

Speaking as someone who was a draftee as a late teen I would have been much more difficult to indoctrinate by 24.

[SusanCalvin]

39. I see your point,

But I view it as an argument *against* people in the military whose brains aren't fully developed...!

[Fumesucker]

43. It's better to fix the problems before they happen

Combat arms is amazingly stressful physically, younger is better for the physical part with the ability to heal quickly from exertion. Instant unthinking obedience, much as I personally loathe it, is necessary for certain sorts of military operations. They tell you as little as they have to for you to be able to handle your particular portion of any plan and you are a meat machine that does that portion to the best of your ability.

What I'm saying is the problem isn't so much young troops but screwed up leadership priorities and goals. Fix the actual problem and the symptoms will mostly fix themselves.

[SusanCalvin]

44. Again I agree.

And I agree with your list of required qualities for a "meat machine," and with the hope that we use such as little as possible.

ETA: But I do believe thinking adults could be good foot soldiers if they agreed with the cause in advance and, importantly, then agreed with the necessity of blind obedience with no hesitation or argument in some circumstances.

Heinlein wrote a book about that, too, actually. (Well, another book - so at least two, maybe more.) It didn't get very good reviews, IIRC, but I liked it.

[Fumesucker]

50. Sorry, I'm jumping back and forth from here to somewhere else and I'm losing track...

I forget who I'm arguing with and who I'm agreeing with...

[SusanCalvin]

51. Oh, I wasn't being snarky -

I was just agreeing twice.

[Hortensis]

41. Exactly. And how if we waited until, say 28,

until you'd left adolescence behind (presumably) and had embarked on your adult life? Kids are too clueless and malleable to make good citizen soldiers.

[Fumesucker]

48. I'd actually be in favor of universal service if I could figure out a way to be fair about it

I'm not that smart though.

Not necessarily military but say six months or a year doing something that needs to be done while getting a stipend/educational benefits/what have you... If you lean military, you go military, if not there's a lot of other things that need doing and I'm a firm believer in hands on experience, we all learn more from what we do wrong than what we do right.

As far as having a self protection force for your country, train any citizen who wants it as an assassin, no national leader with a functioning brain will want to screw with a nation of trained assassins.

[w0nderer]

35. you do realize it's not just citizens that can get drafted right? n/t

[Hortensis]

42. In my world they would be. :) Non-citizens could volunteer.

If fighting for one's country were rare and almost always only when needed, it would be considered an honor. And IMO that's how it should be.

One problem with this rosy picture of much less war is that many on the far right -- and some anti-democracy types on the far left determined to drag people kicking and screaming if necessary into their version of a better world -- would be that some people would always be easy to convince war was necessary.

Look at all the people who are distressed that we didn't invade Iran -- nationalist conservatives who seriously believe negotiating is a form of surrender. Many of those people would sacrifice and sign up in their forties to "save" America from the "Others."

It'd be up to the great liberal-to-moderate-conservative spectrum to stop them -- and in the past civilization has failed a bunch of times when the illiberal far left and reactionary right join together.

[w0nderer]

83. whilst in the real world

greencard (permanent residents and other immigrants) can be drafted

at the same time they can be 'more legally so' be called up in their country of origin (where they actually get to vote too unlike the US)

personally i'm for 'readiness to defend country' == 'right to vote'

or rather the opposite

'you can't be trusted to vote therefore we can't trust you to fight for the country'
if i can't be trusted to vote, how in all hells can i be trusted with a gun next to top secret things?

draft has never really stopped wars, because there is always a few ways
'pay' or 'pressure' to get a slot as a R.E.M.F. or as a 'protected employment class' or similar

as for the armchair hawks, i usually shut them up by handing over $5 for buss fee to and a coffee whilst they wait to sign up at the nearest recruitment center...amazing how fast the words 'oh at this stage in my career' can be said

[Hortensis]

95. LOL, yes, and my notion that they should be drafted

while our children grow up enough to start a career, and even get a chance to reach their age, usually is quietly received. It's a new idea, and right-wing radio hasn't fed provided them a ready answer.

[MuseRider]

10. Give us the ERA then yes!

I am far too old now but that has been my position since I was eligible and people would ask that question....wasn't it Phyllis Schafly that said that the draft was one reason not to endorse the ERA?

I am all for the ERA first then draft yes. Qualify that with this, I do not think anyone should have to register for the draft but if men do and women finally have equality by law then they should as well.

[Thor_MN]

28. >THE< ERA is dead. A new one could be brought up, of course.

And I would be for an amendment that guaranteed rights for all people.

But saying "the ERA first" is nonsensical, as the deadline for its ratification expired 33 years ago.

[SusanCalvin]

53. OK. *An* ERA. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Well, if war comes and they start drafting, migration to Canada will be by both sexes this time.

[kydo]

12. About fucking time!

Now if we could only get the same pay as a guy that would be awesome. And this damn pink tax, that shit should so be over. But come to think about it other then the products for my period, I always bought the male version. I like blue razors, and they are cheaper.

[jonno99]

30. Um...both an e-1, e-2, e-10, etc. (enlisted) male & female are paid exactly the same.

And regarding your "pink" tax - like anything else, you get what you pay for. If blue razors work, why would you ever buy pink?

Or perhaps you're arguing for LESS product choices?

[n2doc]

13. Doesn't matter

We will never have a draft again in this country, unless things really hit the fan. Much easier to limit other opportunities so that the poor are funneled into volunteering.

[A Little Weird]

14. Here's my response in earlier thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141334958#post5

[SusanCalvin]

15. I'm not excited by any draft,

although I don't like the way the all-volunteer force has made the military, to a large extent, a last-resort jobs program. I miss the days when the establishment felt some obligation to participate and a (male) non-veteran politician was an anomaly.

Still, fair is fair.

On the other hand, we don't have the ERA yet.

So, I dunno.

[wheniwasincongress]

16. "Fair is fair" and "equal" comments

Let's about drafting women when the ERA gets passed, when the military shows more concern and force where sexual assault is concerned... "equal" my ass

[SusanCalvin]

18. You're right.

I officially change my "I dunno" to your position.

ETA: Absolutely right about the sexual assault issue. My excuse for not immediately thinking of it, though I am, of course, aware of it, is that I had no issues nor heard of any when I was in the military. No idea if that was because of fewer women at the time, less reporting, my particular circumstances, or what. The extent of it now, and the handling of it, is appalling.

[treestar]

21. that's a good point, but since this is mere registration

it is a good one to concede and then have the argument that since women can be drafted, the military should make more effort.

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. Be careful what you wish for.

The ERA would have guaranteed...

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

The amendment would invalidate a great many laws, including the affordable care act and draft registration for men.

[TeddyR]

87. Fine

Then no women in combat units until the ERA is passed.

[Skittles]

99. yup

men, acting like EVERYTHING is equal except the draft

[treestar]

20. Works for me

It should be equal. Though I would wonder at the value of the registration system. But if there was going to be a draft, women could be in it - not like there aren't female volunteers anyway.

I don't want to see a draft happen, but that includes men too. Plenty of men don't want to serve in the military either and that is their right.

[smirkymonkey]

22. Do we have a draft?

[SusanCalvin]

24. We have registration. Male only, at age 18. nt

[smirkymonkey]

52. Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the info.

[lumberjack_jeff]

59. Gender neutral screen names... why bother?

Every man between 18 and 55 knows this from personal experience.

[Spider Jerusalem]

23. There hasn't been a draft since 1973 (n/t)

[lumberjack_jeff]

46. Everyone who defies the registration law is prevented from student aid.

It's one of the main reasons that men are underrepresented in college. "You want to go to school? First you have to volunteer to die."

[Spider Jerusalem]

55. No, it isn't

your MRA schtick is tiresome. Selective Service registration? 89% of those required: https://www.sss.gov/

In some states, it's closer to 100%. The difference in male and female college attendance is down to other factors which have nothing to do with registration for Selective Service (and you know what? Men were over-represented in colleges and universities since there've been colleges and universities, up untul very very recently, so you can spare me the tedious and stupid "war on men" nonsense you like to peddle).

[lumberjack_jeff]

57. So 90% of men are eligible to apply for student aid compared with 100% of women?

This explains much of the differential attendance rates.

Perhaps "math studies" should be a thing.

[Spider Jerusalem]

60. No, it doesn't

if you look at states with 99% Selective Service compliance (Georgia and South Carolina, for instance)? The gender gap in college/university enrollment is still 60/40 with more women enrolled then men. Maybe you should learn how to use statistics properly?

[Starry Messenger]

58. +1

[uppityperson]

64. In many states they also are prevented from obtaining a drivers license

[jeff47]

54. Every 18-year-old male has to register anyway.

If you don't, there's a host of government services that are taken away.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. Good

women want equality, this is part of it.

[peace13]

27. I watched my son sign up.

Men and women can both do the job. It's time for registration for all. Maybe I'll have more company on the peace line. Who knows?

[Mike Nelson]

29. There should be no gender...

...disqualification for a draft, if we need one.

[Boomer]

32. It's only fair

If you don't want your daughter to be drafted for a war, why would you want your son to go too?

If it's just and necessary, then we all need to support it and be willing to die for it.

[lostnfound]

82. It can never be fair. For one thing, women don't have the same childbearing years...

Men have almost twice as long to settle down and start a family.
Risk of pregnancy and the consequences thereof is different.
Anyone who thinks males and females are the same is ignoring science. Risk-taking behaviors, and mirror-neuron systems, for example. Reaction time is another. Physical differences.

I don't want my son to go; I don't believe in the draft. But I definitely don't believe women should be drafted for combat roles. If they are outliers who want to pursue that, fine.

[TeddyR]

88. Fine with me

Women can't get drafted, and women can't serve in combat units. If you agree to exclude women from combat units (including my daughter) without complaints about discrimination, then I'll agree that only men are eligible for the draft (including my sons).

[lostnfound]

90. I actually never had a problem with excluding women from combat

But I'm of a certain age, and my bf still opens doors for me and carries heavy stuff. Chivalry wasn't such a bad tradition.

In the other hand, if 20% of women are physically as ready as 60% of men to be as fit for combat, I don't know why the country would benefit by excluding those that are both fit and motivated to do so.

[Travis_0004]

106. Most people in the military don't serve in combat roles

They are plenty of things in the military women can do without being in combat.

[gollygee]

33. I think it's a great idea just as soon as the ERA passes

But I don't think it's OK to say that no, we aren't equal, but it's ok to draft us. You want to draft us, pass the ERA and make this part of that.

[lumberjack_jeff]

49. Aside from draft registration, can you give me some examples of laws which would change due to ERA?

" Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

This argument is one of completely transparent privilege.

The equal rights amendment isn't law because feminist groups realized that they could - and did - do better than "equality under the law".

[pnwmom]

73. What planet have you been living on? Feminist groups strongly supported the ERA

but it didn't pass because 3/4 of the states didn't ratify it. A minority of conservative states, not feminists, blocked the ERA.

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. Simple tracking of the language proposed proves my point.

In 1920; "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction."
In 1970; "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."
In 2016: "Women shall have equal rights in the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction."

It's not subtle. 100 years ago, the goal was equality. Today it's not. The male-only draft is prohibited by the 1970 language - the Equal Rights Amendment, but the language proposed last year does not.

[davidn3600]

79. Exactly....Feminists today do not want that original Alice Paul language

Last edited Sat Feb 6, 2016, 06:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Which basically kills it just like the Hayden proposal did in the 1950s...
"The provisions of this article shall not be construed to impair any rights, benefits, or exemptions now or hereafter conferred by law upon persons of the female sex."

They don't want an ERA amendment unless it specifically mentions only women getting equality.

It's the classic "Animal Farm" ploy...."Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others."

[pnwmom]

80. That was a bill proposed by a couple of people. Hillary supported the 1970 version

and still does.

The Feminist Majority, which has endorsed Hillary, supports the original language.

http://feministmajority.org/equal-rights-amendment/

And so does VoteERA.org

http://www.voteera.org

[davidn3600]

67. Do feminists even truly want an ERA anymore?

Has Hillary even talked about it on the campaign trail?

Why push for an ERA when you can instead selectively push for laws in only the places where you want equality?

[Major Nikon]

84. Not just selective equality

One has to wonder what would happen with the OHW and gender biased portions of the ACA if the ERA passed.

[TeddyR]

89. I'm fine

With conditioning draft eligibility on passage of the ERA, so long as I don't hear complaints about women being excluded from combat units. Otherwise register for the (potential) draft, just like my two sons.

[MH1]

61. I'm too old and already served 8 years. But it's only fair.

Of course, I would like to see universal national service. (Not necessarily military service, however. If everyone had to serve in some capacity, in relative peacetime it would probably be sufficient to incentivize military service over other options, to get sufficient people to choose that.)

[davidn3600]

66. Either make women register or take away the penalities for men

Right now, it is legally required for men to register for the Selective Service. If they do not, they lose benefits. They cannot apply for student loans or government grants. They cannot have a government job. Some states even restrict the ability to get a driver's license.

If women want all combat jobs to be open to them throughout the military, there is no reason why women shouldnt be included in the registration.

[pnwmom]

70. Pass the Equal Rights Amendment first. Otherwise they'll be drafting women

and they'll STILL be claiming we don't need an ERA, and it can't be passed because it might cause unisex bathrooms.

[davidn3600]

85. WW3 is really the only reason there would ever be a full-blown draft

Something really, really bad would have to happen. Russia would have to invade NATO or something of that nature. You are not going to ever see a draft to invade Iran or Syria. Another Vietnam is not going to happen where we draft people to fight a war no one understands.

And if there is a WW3, do women really want to just sit and hope the men protect them? That didn't work out real well for German and Russia women in WW2. The rape was epidemic as armies took over towns. That's why many Kurdish women are taking up arms against ISIS. They aren't just going to sit and wait to be taken over.

[erpowers]

97. End the Penalities for Men

I think it would be better to end the penalities for men. Men should not be punished for not signing up for selective service, especially since no one has been drafted since the 70s. We have an all volunteer military. What is the point of forcing men to sign up with selective service.

I assume there would have been less support, or more vocal opposition to women being allowed into combat jobs if more generals had called for this before women were allowed into combat jobs.

[Octafish]

75. Better Idea: End the Wars

Stop the wars and we don't need to draft anyone. The "Volunteer" force would appreciate it, too.

[sorefeet]

104. Thanks Octafish, everyone else thinks

we only have one option WAR. You just don't hear the word PEACE much any more. I got a blank wall on the outside of my house facing the road. This spring I am going to paint a 15 foot peace sign on it. I might put "war no more forever" in it some where. It's a guarantee that if a Republican gets the presidency we will be in another war within the first year.

[Octafish]

105. You are most welcome, sorefeet! The nurse at my doctor's office was in the US Army...

...in 2000 and saw what was ahead. She said everyone in her unit knew that a Bush-II presidency meant war. She didn't know what was coming down the pike would be so horrible, but everyone eligible to retire did so.

I'm a Kennedy Democrat because JFK stood up to the warmongers who demanded he nuke, bomb, invade, kill innocent Americans and blame Castro, etc., and said, "No."

In 1961, CIA director Allen Dulles and JCS chairman Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer told JFK the best time to attack USSR was "Fall 1963," based on our strategic advantage. The timing makes an "interesting coincidence," seeing how so much was done to blame communist Marxist Leninist traitor (and US intelligence agent) Lee Harvey Oswald and the Cubans and the Soviets after Nov. 22, 1963.

Did the U.S. Military Plan a Nuclear First Strike for 1963?

Recently declassified information shows that the military presented President Kennedy with a plan for a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union in the early 1960s.

James K. Galbraith and Heather A. Purcell
The American Prospect | September 21, 1994

During the early 1960s the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) introduced the world to the possibility of instant total war. Thirty years later, no nation has yet fired any nuclear missile at a real target. Orthodox history holds that a succession of defensive nuclear doctrines and strategies -- from "massive retaliation" to "mutual assured destruction" -- worked, almost seamlessly, to deter Soviet aggression against the United States and to prevent the use of nuclear weapons.

The possibility of U.S. aggression in nuclear conflict is seldom considered. And why should it be? Virtually nothing in the public record suggests that high U.S. authorities ever contemplated a first strike against the Soviet Union, except in response to a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, or that they doubted the deterrent power of Soviet nuclear forces. The main documented exception was the Air Force Chief of Staff in the early 1960s, Curtis LeMay, a seemingly idiosyncratic case.

But beginning in 1957 the U.S. military did prepare plans for a preemptive nuclear strike against the U.S.S.R., based on our growing lead in land-based missiles. And top military and intelligence leaders presented an assessment of those plans to President John F. Kennedy in July of 1961. At that time, some high Air Force and CIA leaders apparently believed that a window of outright ballistic missile superiority, perhaps sufficient for a successful first strike, would be open in late 1963.

The document reproduced opposite is published here for the first time. It describes a meeting of the National Security Council on July 20, 1961. At that meeting, the document shows, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the director of the CIA, and others presented plans for a surprise attack. They answered some questions from Kennedy about timing and effects, and promised further information. The meeting recessed under a presidential injunction of secrecy that has not been broken until now.

CONTINUED...

http://prospect.org/article/did-us-military-plan-nuclear-first-strike-1963

Mack White is no slouch, either. Wonder what he'd think of the memorandum of Col. Howard Burris?

A peace sign would be a perfect message for people to see.

[HereSince1628]

77. My guess is that this is 'reverse discrimination' nonsense

America isn't ready or willing for conscription to to either military or civilian service.

[catnhatnh]

78. The old draft machine was a hell of a ride

and a known side effect was death. The lack of an ERA kinda looks like a mickey mouse excuse why you shouldn't have to take your chances...

[yuiyoshida]

86. OH GREAT ...I GET to go serve in a NEW WAR!

yeah, that sounds grand.

[woolldog]

100. Whoa

You can join my army anytime.

[Kath1]

102. I'm way too old.

If I was younger I'd be saying HELL NO, I WON'T GO.

[NickB79]

91. Yes, women should have to register when they turn 18, same as men do

And I have a 5-yr old daughter.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

92. slow down the wars - bring back the draft - ain't no senator's son

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ain%27t+no+senator%27s+son&&view=detail&mid=BE9C1EC0A37D6DB29055BE9C1EC0A37D6DB29055&FORM=VRDGAR

[Oneironaut]

98. No draft for men or women. The draft is government-approved slavery.

[tazkcmo]

101. Yes!!!

Right after passage of the ERA. After that, I want to watch Chelsea register.

[heaven05]

103. well

American soldiers who happen to be female have died IN COMBAT in Iraq and are still dying in Afghanistan. Wouldn't surprise me at all. American woman have a genuine claim to equality in this one. Sad but true to me. Not saying other examples of the need for true gender equality are not their either. For those who.....and I also feel the draft would straighten out wayward and undisciplined youth. I see nothing wrong with it. ALL vets in these highly charged political times, from 2001--2003 to the present have my highest respect.