NDAA would require women to register for the draft

[Theodolia]

Source: http://thehill.com/policy/defense/27796 ... -for-draft

Women would have to register for the draft under an amendment added to an annual defense bill Wednesday.

“If we want equality in this country, if we want women to be treated precisely like men are treated and that they should not be discriminated against, then we should support a universal conscription,” Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) said.

The House Armed Services Committee voted 32-30 to include the amendment in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

Congress has been debating what to do about the draft since Defense Secretary Ash Carter opened up all combat jobs to women late last year.

In 1981, the Supreme Court ruled that women did not have to register for the draft because combat jobs were closed to them.

With that reason now moot, some lawmakers have argued women should now register. Others want women to remain exempt, while still others say this is the opportune time to abolish the draft altogether.

As originally drafted, the NDAA would have asked the Pentagon to conduct a study on the matter and would not have taken a position.

TL;DR: So if passed, this would require women to register with Selective Service the same as men when they become adults, which is largely a symbolic change since the draft hasn't been active in decades.


What do you think, should the draft also apply to women? Should we even have a draft (even an inactive one) in the first place?


I think that since women can now serve in "combat roles" it seems that including women is the appropriate thing to do, although I can't say I imagine this actually becoming an issue anytime in the near future because there isn't going to be a draft any time soon.

[Ifreann]

Or, you know, nobody registers and nobody gets drafted. That'd be good too.

[Galloism]

I see no problem with this.

[Ashmoria]

as long as they don't have to take the cost of it out of the foodstamp budget, I don't have a problem with it.

[The Forsworn Knights]

I would prefer no draft seeing as even in the largest war in history only had one attack on our soil, and that was an island nowhere near the mainland.

But I still prefer this to the previous drafting regulation.

[Neutraligon]

Good, but what happens to the women who are adults but below the high cutoff age for being drafted? Are they not required to register (grandfathered in), or are all women between certain ages required to register.

[Galloism]

Good, but what happens to the women who are adults but below the high cutoff age for being drafted?

They would probably need to register within a certain timeframe - that's how we do it with immigrants who move in during that period.

[Neutraligon]

Good, but what happens to the women who are adults but below the high cutoff age for being drafted?

They would probably need to register within a certain timeframe - that's how we do it with immigrants who move in during that period.

That makes sense.

[Frenline Delpha]

This is the equality Feminists seem to be banging on about. Now to wait and see CM's response.

Anyways, I would prefer no draft, but if males have to sign up, why don't females?

[Ostroeuropa]

Good, but what happens to the women who are adults but below the high cutoff age for being drafted?

They would probably need to register within a certain timeframe - that's how we do it with immigrants who move in during that period.

This strikes me as a disaster waiting to happen. It would be simpler to just grandfather them in rather than have a substantial portion of the country suddenly expected to do something like this before any of the appropriate education and information apparatus was in place.

With immigrants its different. There is a system in place to tell them all the stuff they need to know.

[Galloism]

They would probably need to register within a certain timeframe - that's how we do it with immigrants who move in during that period.

This strikes me as a disaster waiting to happen. It would be simpler to just grandfather them in rather than have a substantial portion of the country suddenly expected to do something like this before any of the appropriate education and information apparatus was in place.

With immigrants its different. There is a system in place to tell them all the stuff they need to know.

Well, that was speculation on my part. It just seemed probable.

Incidentally, I was looking around for other articles on this, and I apologize for fox news, but they had a bit I thought was humorous:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04 ... draft.html

In a twist that presages how contentious further debate may be, the author of the amendment voted against his own measure. It passed the committee by a vote of 32-30.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a former Marine who served three combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't support drafting women into combat and he's opposed to opening infantry and special operations positions to women. He said he offered the measure to trigger a discussion about how the Pentagon's decision in December to rescind gender restrictions on military service failed to consider whether the exclusion on drafting women also should be lifted.

Dude totally raised the measure being sarcastic, and it passed.

[Neutraligon]

They would probably need to register within a certain timeframe - that's how we do it with immigrants who move in during that period.

This strikes me as a disaster waiting to happen. It would be simpler to just grandfather them in rather than have a substantial portion of the country suddenly expected to do something like this before any of the appropriate education and information apparatus was in place.

With immigrants its different. There is a system in place to tell them all the stuff they need to know.

I would expect that they would send out a message as far as possible telling women between the ages that they need to sign up, giving them leeway to do so. For instance say women are given 3 years (just an example) to sign up, and anyone who would age out within those three years need not do so. Meanwhile all citizens who age in during those 3 years would be required to sign up.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04 ... draft.html

In a twist that presages how contentious further debate may be, the author of the amendment voted against his own measure. It passed the committee by a vote of 32-30.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a former Marine who served three combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't support drafting women into combat and he's opposed to opening infantry and special operations positions to women. He said he offered the measure to trigger a discussion about how the Pentagon's decision in December to rescind gender restrictions on military service failed to consider whether the exclusion on drafting women also should be lifted.

Dude totally raised the measure being sarcastic, and it passed.

Well, he certainly got the discussion moving...

[Ostroeuropa]

This strikes me as a disaster waiting to happen. It would be simpler to just grandfather them in rather than have a substantial portion of the country suddenly expected to do something like this before any of the appropriate education and information apparatus was in place.

With immigrants its different. There is a system in place to tell them all the stuff they need to know.

Well, that was speculation on my part. It just seemed probable.

Incidentally, I was looking around for other articles on this, and I apologize for fox news, but they had a bit I thought was humorous:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04 ... draft.html

In a twist that presages how contentious further debate may be, the author of the amendment voted against his own measure. It passed the committee by a vote of 32-30.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a former Marine who served three combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't support drafting women into combat and he's opposed to opening infantry and special operations positions to women. He said he offered the measure to trigger a discussion about how the Pentagon's decision in December to rescind gender restrictions on military service failed to consider whether the exclusion on drafting women also should be lifted.

Dude totally raised the measure being sarcastic, and it passed.

That's pretty great.

This strikes me as a disaster waiting to happen. It would be simpler to just grandfather them in rather than have a substantial portion of the country suddenly expected to do something like this before any of the appropriate education and information apparatus was in place.

With immigrants its different. There is a system in place to tell them all the stuff they need to know.

I would expect that they would send out a message as far as possible telling women between the ages that they need to sign up, giving them leeway to do so. For instance say women are given 3 years (just an example) to sign up, and anyone who would age out within those three years need not do so. Meanwhile all citizens who age in during those 3 years would be required to sign up.

This would be better imo.

[Galloism]

Well, that was speculation on my part. It just seemed probable.

Incidentally, I was looking around for other articles on this, and I apologize for fox news, but they had a bit I thought was humorous:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04 ... draft.html



Dude totally raised the measure being sarcastic, and it passed.

That's pretty great.

I found it immensely humorous.

[Neutraligon]

That's pretty great.

I found it immensely humorous.

Never ask people to do something you don't want them to do, they might just do it.

[Ostroeuropa]

That's pretty great.

I found it immensely humorous.

It'll get funnier if people start congratulating him on proposing it.

[Ifreann]

This strikes me as a disaster waiting to happen. It would be simpler to just grandfather them in rather than have a substantial portion of the country suddenly expected to do something like this before any of the appropriate education and information apparatus was in place.

With immigrants its different. There is a system in place to tell them all the stuff they need to know.

Well, that was speculation on my part. It just seemed probable.

Incidentally, I was looking around for other articles on this, and I apologize for fox news, but they had a bit I thought was humorous:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04 ... draft.html

In a twist that presages how contentious further debate may be, the author of the amendment voted against his own measure. It passed the committee by a vote of 32-30.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a former Marine who served three combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't support drafting women into combat and he's opposed to opening infantry and special operations positions to women. He said he offered the measure to trigger a discussion about how the Pentagon's decision in December to rescind gender restrictions on military service failed to consider whether the exclusion on drafting women also should be lifted.

Dude totally raised the measure being sarcastic, and it passed.

Clearly he should have included sarcasm tags.

[Galloism]

I found it immensely humorous.

It'll get funnier if people start congratulating him on proposing it.

I'm tempted to call his office and thank him for his progressive thinking, pretending I don't know he was being sarcastic.

[Neutraligon]

It'll get funnier if people start congratulating him on proposing it.

I'm tempted to call his office and thank him for his progressive thinking, pretending I don't know he was being sarcastic.

So if this is included as a part of th bill think Republicans will balk?

[Ifreann]

It'll get funnier if people start congratulating him on proposing it.

I'm tempted to call his office and thank him for his progressive thinking, pretending I don't know he was being sarcastic.

Tell him you've been a lifelong Democrat voter, but you're going to vote Republican now.

[Galloism]

I'm tempted to call his office and thank him for his progressive thinking, pretending I don't know he was being sarcastic.

So if this is included as a part of th bill think Republicans will balk?

Not sure. Six republicans on the committee voted in favor of the measure.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm tempted to call his office and thank him for his progressive thinking, pretending I don't know he was being sarcastic.

So if this is included as a part of th bill think Republicans will balk?

Pro-traditionalism VS Pro-military factions.
FIGHT!

[Neutraligon]

So if this is included as a part of th bill think Republicans will balk?

Pro-traditionalism VS Pro-military factions.
FIGHT!

Don't forget that different factions of feminists will be fighting as well. What interesting allies are made in this fight. Pro-traditionalists, and people like Lacy and Anita on one side, and Pro-equality and military(military may be divided) on the other.

[Galloism]

Pro-traditionalism VS Pro-military factions.
FIGHT!

Don't forget that different factions of feminists will be fighting as well. What interesting allies are made in this fight. Pro-traditionalists, and people like Lacy and Anita on one side, and Pro-equality and military(military may be divided) on the other.

Politics does sometimes lead to strange bedfellows.

[Kannap]

Or, you know, nobody registers and nobody gets drafted. That'd be good too.

It's about high time we abolish the selective service.