Women in combat makes selective service illegal.

lotstodo

aka "The Jackal"
Way back when during Jimmy Carter's administration, the Selective Service was sued by a group of men under the pretense that it violated the fifth amendment by not drafting men and women equally. In the majority opinion which upheld the registration of men only, Justice Renquist wrote that "the fact that Congress and the Executive have decided that women should not serve in combat fully justifies Congress in not authorizing their registration." In the dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thurgood Marshall argued for the registration of women or ending the draft completely, he wrote that the current system of registering men only "places its imprimatur on one of the most potent remaining public expressions of 'ancient canards about the proper role of women.' "

Current Constitutional Scholars believe that by allowing women in combat but not registering them for Selective Service, the Pentagon has just made a huge legal mistake that Congress is not going to want to fix.
 
I'm firmly believe we could solve a lot of the country's ills if women would simply go back to being women.

So, on his way out the door, he wanted to do something he'd be remembered for and put out there that women could go into combat. Now look what a mess he made. :rant
 
deewee said:
Madea said:
I'm firmly believe we could solve a lot of the country's ills if women would simply go back to being women.
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!! :love

:dunno I am not sure what Madea means by that statement or what you are thanking her for.
 
I'm all for women going back to being women if men will just go back to being real men.

Good point, LTD. Also - where are these wimmins gonna pee? And what about their...uh...that time of the month?
 
mei lan said:
I'm all for women going back to being women if men will just go back to being real men.

Good point, LTD. Also - where are these wimmins gonna pee? And what about their...uh...that time of the month?
I assume that MRE's will now come with a feminine napkin, and they can pee on a tree and shake it just like the boys. :Ninja
 
Re: Re: Women in combat makes selective service illegal.

Madea said:
I'm firmly believe we could solve a lot of the country's ills if women would simply go back to being women.
Exactly! Some things don't need an explanation.
 
If the women could FULLY do the job as well as their male counterparts, then fine. But, even women in the military are saying NO, they can't! Sorry, I'm not willing to have my son's life on the line and the person who is supposed to be their for him can't fully do her job. Just sayin.
 
Madea said:
If the women could FULLY do the job as well as their male counterparts, then fine. But, even women in the military are saying NO, they can't! Sorry, I'm not willing to have my son's life on the line and the person who is supposed to be their for him can't fully do her job. Just sayin.

I can fully understand that sentiment, but not the statement of woman going back to being woman, when did you (general you) stop being a woman?
 
Re: Re: Women in combat makes selective service illegal.

Blazing Saddles said:
Madea said:
I'm firmly believe we could solve a lot of the country's ills if women would simply go back to being women.
Exactly! Some things don't need an explanation.

:huh
 
ShoeDiva said:
Madea said:
If the women could FULLY do the job as well as their male counterparts, then fine. But, even women in the military are saying NO, they can't! Sorry, I'm not willing to have my son's life on the line and the person who is supposed to be their for him can't fully do her job. Just sayin.

I can fully understand that sentiment, but not the statement of woman going back to being woman, when did you (general you) stop being a woman?

I'd say 70s/80s. Women got the idea they had to act like men to survive in a "man's world". We were "sucked" into believing the lie and the cost has been great. I don't have to do "men's work" to survive. I have great contributions I can make as a woman.
 
Madea said:
ShoeDiva said:
Madea said:
If the women could FULLY do the job as well as their male counterparts, then fine. But, even women in the military are saying NO, they can't! Sorry, I'm not willing to have my son's life on the line and the person who is supposed to be their for him can't fully do her job. Just sayin.

I can fully understand that sentiment, but not the statement of woman going back to being woman, when did you (general you) stop being a woman?

I'd say 70s/80s. Women got the idea they had to act like men to survive in a "man's world". We were "sucked" into believing the lie and the cost has been great. I don't have to do "men's work" to survive. I have great contributions I can make as a woman.

I do not think there is much of an age difference between us, yet I do not see it as you do. I wonder why? I have never thought I had to act like a man to make it. I have always thought of them as my equal. (In general, but I do still agree with your combat zone sentiment. I would not be close to equal in that aspect!)
 
I do believe men and women are equal and should each be handled with love and respect. But, I believe we have roles. I don't need to go into combat to feel validated. I don't even have to have a career to feel validated. I can be complete as a wife and mother. Somewhere along the way, some women forgot that.
 
Madea said:
I do believe men and women are equal and should each be handled with love and respect. But, I believe we have roles. I don't need to go into combat to feel validated. I don't even have to have a career to feel validated. I can be complete as a wife and mother. Somewhere along the way, some women forgot that.

I do agree with you. It would be a sad day to send anyone like me to combat! I have not personally spoke with any Army girlfriends I have yet about this combat issue. I will though. I never really thought about it because I know that many have been deployed and I actually thought were "technically" in combat.
 
Having spent 25 years in the Army and deployed to war several times, I feel I can speak with authority on women's roles in the military. I don't believe women should be allowed to serve in combat arms military occupational specialties i.e. Infantry.

Women do not have the upper body strength men do. The body armor we wore while I was in both Iraq and Afghanistan weighs more than 50lbs. Now add to that a ruck sack the Infantrymen wear on their back containing food, water, as well as a lot of ammunition and you are carrying another 65 lbs easy. That's 115 lbs of weight on your upper body.

There's also the hygiene issue. During training exercises where we would stay two weeks or more in the field living in tents and sleeping on the ground; regulations required us to send the women nightly to showering points because they were more subject to infections and illness.

I agree with the statement made Panetta only approved women serving in combat roles to make a name for himself on his way out as SecDef. Though he said women would have to meet the same physical standards as men to be in these combat roles, I see the standards being lowered to make it easier for them to gain entry.

I'm not saying in the least that no women could make it by meeting the same standards established for men; I'm saying way to many would fail in their attempts and politicians (mostly from the left) would force the military to lower the standards to gain votes from women.

There has been instances where women have proven themselves under combat. SGT Leigh Ann Hester of the 617th Military Police Company, a National Guard unit out of Richmond, Ky., received the Silver Star, along with two other members of her unit, for their actions during an enemy ambush on their convoy in Iraq.

SPC Monica Brown, a medic in the Army received the Silver Star for valor in Afghanistan. A vehicle in her convoy was hit with an IED and five soldiers in it were wounded, two of them seriously. She moved to the vehicle under intense small arms fire and moved the two seriously wounded soldiers away from the burning vehicle. She went for one and then returned for the other.

Though I gave two examples of heroism in combat by two women soldiers, they were a rarity, an exception to the rule. I served with lots of women in Desert Storm, Iraq, and Afghanistan and I can tell you the vast majority of them would have never made it as an Infantryman.

Now look at the odds of a male soldier making it through the selection course for Special Forces. Less than 10% of those who go through the selection process make it to be accepted in the Special Forces Qualification Course. The selection process alone is very physically demanding. The Q course is even tougher. If women were required to meet the same physical standards as men to just be accepted into the Q Course, it would be extremely rare for one to succeed and this would look like a failure and unacceptable to those politicians from the left.

In summary, not only was it a mistake for Panetta to open this door for women, but it will eventually lead to the lowering of standards to allow women in.
 
I say give the women the option to try out just like the men. Same standards, no special breaks and no extra stuff either. If they can pass the same testing and training as the men then they should be allowed.
 
Back
Top