Sadly, the 5th Circuit upheld the constitutionality of an all male draft, it is now upon Congress to act (Poll: Should Congress end Selective Service or should they expand Selective Service to include women?)

  • Abolish Selective Service and permanently ban the draft and conscription.
  • Expand Selective Service to include women.

0 voters

I purposely did not include the status quo in the poll, as I believe all male registration and an all male draft to be legally, Constitutionally and morally repugnant in an era in which society has declared women to be absolutely equal to men in all respects. The status quo cannot stand, Congress MUST make a choice and they MUST make it NOW.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in a per curiam decision, overturned the decision of the District Court and dismissed National Coalition for Men vs. Selective Service on the grounds that an existing Supreme Court precedent foreclosed consideration of the case. Plaintiffs may appeal to the Supreme Court, but with the current make up of the Supreme Court, it is unlikely they will get a favorable outcome.

Therefore, Congress MUST act.

I favor the abolition of Selective Service altogether and a permanent ban on a draft or conscription.

But if Congress chooses to retain Selective Service, then women must be registered on an equal basis with men and made liable for the draft on an equal basis with men.

The status quo is legally, Constitutionally and morally repugnant as it treats men and women unequally, when the military itself has fully opened itself to female participation.

I would further note that a recent Congressional Commission report states that women should be registered for Selective Service.

If this country drafts women into combat positions in a future war, they will be opening another front inside the country.

I really doubt that we will have another situation where we are going to have to draft anyone. But if it does happen, then would be the time for Congress to act. Right now I believe it is a waste of time.
The House might pass a bill that McConnell would probably sit on.

Equal rights, equal fights.

2 Likes

I support including women in the draft; however, as far as I know there are some jobs in which women are still precluded. Some of those make up the bulk of the combat forces. The percentage of women actually drafted in the event of a draft, should be the same as the percentage of jobs open to them after you subtract the billets that are unavailable from the total number of billets.

We’ve had an all male draft throughout our history.
If it is unconstitutional now, why hasn’t it always been?

3 Likes

I’m really torn on this and agree with everything Safiel says in his OP.

If we draft women to fight in a war, in reality, that draft would end up being to fight their husbands, brothers and fathers.

Liberty is what I support. Liberty demands equality and defense. All persons benefiting from it are responsible for its defense. I don’t believe some people should be drafted in its defense, all should be. That does not mean that all would need to be indoctrinated into the armed service, but all should be required to do what the nation demands. Might be the need for oil would increase, and labor would be needed to produce it. If liberty is threatened (which is what it would take to actually draft anyone), then I believe in all hands on deck.

Believe whatever you want but if you start drafting women for combat positions, you just lost the war and started a civil war instead.

2 Likes

Easy solution. End selective service and ban congress from ever reintroducing conscription through constitutional amendment.

Either that or make women eligible for conscription. It has to be one or the other.

No matter what is constitutional or not constitutional, drafting women into combat would end the war they were drafted for and start a civil war instead.

Every draft issuance in American history was challenged at the courts, the most significant being the draft order of 1917 during World War I.

In each case, the courts sided with the federal government’s arguments that the draft was legal.

It’s been a contentious issue our entire existence as a country. Irishmen burned Manhattan over the draft in 1863 in the Civil War.

Females are (in general) NOT equal to males physically. They simply are not. (Exceptions notwithstanding.)

I didn’t vote. Status quo is the way to go.

1 Like

That is true. But as citizens of a republic they have the same obligations as men in regards to forced servitude, which is what conscription is.

If you’re going to force people to war, it has to be done equitably without regards to wealth, gender, or religious positions.

That’s why it should simply be done away with and never revisited again. Because it has never been enforced equally here or anywhere else in the world. Either everyone goes or no one goes.

did you not read my initial post? I said they should be drafted (into the military) by the same proportion as they have billets minus the number of billets reserved for men, which I believe includes most of the combat MOS’s if not all. Women would not be drafted into combat positions.

Sorry, was discussing the OP premise, didn’t mean to say you wanted to draft women into combat positions personally.

I don’t support anyone being conscripted. Male or female.

Levee en masse is immoral and an affront to individual liberty. Always has been, always will be.

failure to support the defense of liberty in a time of war when liberty is threatened, should be considered treason.

I think that expands the question. As far as I am concerned, conscription is about the military.

I wouldn’t have a problem requiring female service in other capacities (such as medical, legal, administrative, manufacturing, to name just a few.)

But when it comes to the military, I would submit that most any guy in a battlefield situation would want to know that the person next to him would be strong enough to carry him out of danger should the situation arise. (And that’s just one example of why.)