SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The U.S. Senate has passed a provision that would require women to register for the draft, but don't expect any changes soon:
On Tuesday, the Senate passed a defense authorization bill that would require young women to register for the draft — the latest development in a long-running debate over whether women should sign up for the Selective Service. The provision would apply to women turning 18 in 2018 or later and would impose the same requirements and rules that currently apply to men.
The policy is still far from being law. The House, after considering a similar provision earlier this spring, ultimately passed an authorization bill that omitted it; the two branches of Congress now must resolve the differences between their bills. And the bill faces a veto threat from President Obama over other elements of the legislation, such as the prohibition on closing down the Guantanamo Bay military prison. But the bill's passage brings women a step closer to Selective Service registration — a historic change that has bipartisan support in Congress but is firmly opposed by some conservative lawmakers.
For decades, the U.S. policy of having a draft for men, and not women, was approved as constitutional by the Supreme Court. But as NPR's David Welna reported last year, the court's reasoning relied on the fact that women were barred from combat roles. Now that women are eligible for combat duty, "Congress seems to have lost its court-endorsed rationale for limiting Selective Service registration to males only," David wrote.
Previously: Women Warriors Coming Soon to US Forces
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by cubancigar11 on Thursday June 16 2016, @01:03PM
Nothing can be farther from the truth! God, feminist propaganda has really been successful in the west.
It was NCFM (national coalition for men) which sued selective-serivce [ncfm.org] for not requiring women.
Most feminists don't want [sheknows.com] draft for women. The cunning ones have instead opted to say draft itself is bad [slate.com] instead of answering in yes or no.
Now, conservatives don't want women to be in war because for them, it is all about 'honor' and shit like that. I personally want women at the front until history forgets it wasn't the case ever. Call me a misogynist if you will :D
(Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Thursday June 16 2016, @01:41PM
LOL, I actually read the AC's comment as sarcastic. I know in general feminism calls for equality and I'm on board with that, but I think we all know what "feminism" calls for and what a lot of "feminist" call for (obviously not all feminist) are two different things. I honestly don't want to see anyone at war, men or women, and am glad Canada doesn't have a draft.
I highly respect our military personal, but I think it has to be voluntary. Taking some kid that's not prepared to kill people and doesn't want to fight, putting them in the middle of combat and forcing them to go against everything they were ever taught (killing is wrong) is a pretty sure fire way screw them up for life and/or get them killed. That said, I doubt the draft will ever be brought back in the states, more than anything it's a last resort contingency plan for the special case that every thing does go to shit. If the states ever does bring back the draft, I'll join the military willingly because that's a sure sign we're in extremely dire straits.
If I thought we were in a world war II type situation and I was required to lay down my life to protect my family and friends I'd sign up in a heartbeat. Maybe I'm an idealist, but I think a lot of people feel that way. I also don't think you need to force women to serve, I believe in the past women would have if they weren't being held back, for their own good, from even trying. Whether "feminist" will admit it or not, it was for their own good. It wasn't because of misogyny, it was because we love our women and want them safe. We love our men too, but someone has to do the dirty work and that's what men are, use to be, brought up to understand and even take pride in. It's our job to give our lives (both metaphorically and literally) to protect our families.
"Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Thursday June 16 2016, @04:52PM
>more than anything it's a last resort contingency plan for the special case that every thing does go to shit
Well, so long as by "everything" you mean "the elite's plans for empire building". A draft has never been necessary for a defensive war, there's ever been a shortage of volunteers when imminent threats are at hand. Where you need a draft is when you want to throw away people's lives killing folks halfway around the world that never did anything against your nation, for fear of what they might do in the years to come if you let them live their own lives as they see fit.
(Score: 2) by RedGreen on Thursday June 16 2016, @07:49PM
"and am glad Canada doesn't have a draft."
No we have conscription to force you to join used both in WW1 and 2 when mainly the French in Canada would not join in to defend their European brothers we were fighting and dying for.
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 2) by khchung on Friday June 17 2016, @03:35AM
I highly respect our military personal, but I think it has to be voluntary.
Some would argue, and I agree, that if military were drafted from the general population, then *everyone* in the country would think long and hard before starting any war cuz they or their sons may have to fight it personally and possibly die in it.
(Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Friday June 17 2016, @09:41AM
It's a good thought in theory, but you know the ones that actually make the decision to go to war or istigate it would have exceptions for themselves and their families and friends.
"Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2016, @03:50PM
> It was NCFM (national coalition for men) which sued selective-serivce for not requiring women.
And NOW (the largest feminist group in the country) plus 12 other feminist organizations filed briefs in support of the NCFM (which, at the time was actually named the National Coalition of Free Men):
http://www.nytimes.com/1981/03/22/us/women-join-battle-on-all-male-draft.html [nytimes.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2016, @04:04PM
Then apparently the National Coalition for Women has a time machine.
The lawsuit was filed against the U.S. Selective Service System in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on April 4, 2013
What's more of issue is the stance of feminist now.
Misrepresenting the positions of NOW over 30 years after the fact is disingenuous.
They were completely silent when 2013 lawsuit took place.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday June 16 2016, @05:18PM
For over thirty years the largest feminist organization on the planet has supported a female draft
Sorry anti-feminists, you are simply wrong on this one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2016, @05:29PM
Again with the misrepresentation.
Was NOW also a complainant for NCFM lawsuit? Did they offer ANY support in favor?
Might as well be discussing Republicans as the only party against racism since it was the party of Lincoln.
(Score: 1, Troll) by DeathMonkey on Thursday June 16 2016, @05:33PM
Was NOW also a complainant for NCFM lawsuit? Did they offer ANY support in favor?
Yes they did. Did you even look at the GP's reference?
From the 1981 NYT article:The case against the all-male military draft was brought by men on the ground that being singled out for compulsory service violated their rights to equal protection. But a number of women's groups have filed briefs with the Supreme Court arguing that the all-male draft also violates the constitutional rights of women.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday June 16 2016, @05:36PM
On the other hand, as Eleanor Smeal, the president of the National Organization for Women, observed the other day, when she lobbies state legislatures in behalf of the equal rights amendment, male legislators frequently say to her, ''When you women fight in a war, then we'll talk about equal rights.'' 'Argument of Entitlement'
That ''argument of entitlement,'' as Mrs. Smeal calls it, was one of the factors that persuaded her that exclusion from the draft hurt the interests of women.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 16 2016, @08:17PM
> Most feminists don't want draft for women. The cunning ones have instead opted to say draft itself is bad
You can't just win with some people, eh?
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday June 17 2016, @06:17AM
I don't really care about draft, and I don't think it should be enacted. Especially in a country like USA which doesn't have any major disputes with its neighbors. Israel? May be... but USA? No.