Trying to remain calm. Obama wants women to register with selective service.

[Vida Winter]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08287/919582-470.stm?cmpid=elections.xml

 

I'm not familiar with this newspaper but I'd wager it's not right-wing.

 

With absolutely no disrepect to those who have daughters and women in your family serving in the armed services, I vehemently disagree with mandatory registration for women.

 

~Dana

[HollyinNNV]

Curious,

Why do you disagree with mandatory registration for women?

Holly

[Michelle T]

I'm not a fan of mandatory registration for anybody, but if males must register, I see no reason why females shouldn't also be registered.

 

No one is suggesting that males or females are going to be drafted (at least, not at the moment) or that females would be in combat positions if a draft DID come along.

MichelleT

[astrid]

I vehemently disagree with mandatory registration for women.

 

Why? (sincere question)

 

astrid

[Vida Winter]

Curious,

Why do you disagree with mandatory registration for women?

Holly

 

I know this may be cynical, but do women have to do everything?

[JFSinIL]

During WWII in Britain the woman HAD to help out, too - it was just expected, and one could be assigned to work in a factory/day-care/typing pool - where ever the need was.

 

I could see registering and if there was a draft the women drafted would be doing jobs that would free more men (our sons!) for actual fighting.

 

Of course, i do not want ANYONE signed up or drafted. but if it HAD to happen I think fair is fair.

[Only me]

I know that many men and women are serving in the armed forces and doing a great job the bottom line is that men and women are different. While I would worry tremendously if my ds was in the military I can't imagine my 5 foot 90 pounds when wet dd going in the military in 1 1/2 years. Even emotionally she is completely different from my son.

 

I may be old fashioned and this may be opening up a can of worms but I think God intended men and women to be strong in different areas.

[Zelda]

I know this may be cynical, but do women have to do everything?

 

Only if they want it done right.

 

I kid...I kid.

[JennifersLost]

I have to agree with people - I don't want ANYONE drafted, but if there is a draft, why are my sons more expendable than my daughters? I would want my kids assigned to positions they were competant to do....and if that meant that choices were made based on their body types, fine! I would expect that.

 

 

Of course, if my kids were drafted the army would have to take me first. I don't believe any children/young adults (18-25 yr olds) should have to fight before everyone in the generation that started the war (read: us) is dead.

 

JMHO.

[AuntieM]

and may you hear it with the same fair reading I'll give everyone else's response.

 

Someone has to keep the home fires burning! I believe that God designed women to be particularly good at this task. We are very, very strong in our own right, yet I believe a woman's brand of strength (generally speaking) to be more valuable here on the homefront. Of course there will be exceptions - there always are - but this is my general sentiment. It is based on my Bible-based beliefs about how God designed the roles of man and woman.

 

I wonder though... what if both mom & dad got drafted? Will there be an easy out for one of them, or will they have to scramble for child care arrangements?

[Crissy]

I know this may be cynical, but do women have to do everything?

 

 

In this case, we fought for the right to join the military. How can we now say that we only want to join for the parts we like?

[Mama Lynx]

Since I disagree with Selective Service across the board, I'm against this.

[Laura Corin]

During WWII in Britain the woman HAD to help out, too - it was just expected, and one could be assigned to work in a factory/day-care/typing pool - where ever the need was.

 

 

My mother turned down a place at Oxford to go and work in an aeroplane factory - it was her choice.

 

Laura

[kokotg]

I'm not sure why this column was written today. It's quoting an answer Obama gave in a Democratic primary debate well over a year ago. Here's the quote:

 

COOPER: Senator Obama, should women register for Selective Service?

 

OBAMA: You know, a while back we had a celebration in the Capitol for the Tuskegee Airmen, and it was extraordinarily powerful because it reminded us, there was a time when African-Americans weren't allowed to serve in combat.

 

And yet, when they did, not only did they perform brilliantly, but what also happened is they helped to change America, and they helped to underscore that we're equal.

 

And I think that if women are registered for service -- not necessarily in combat roles, and I don't agree with the draft -- I think it will help to send a message to my two daughters that they've got obligations to this great country as well as boys do.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

I checked the transcript and every other debate participant answered pretty much the same way.

 

Obama has always made a point of emphasizing finding ways to encourage young people to serve their country; I think this goes along with that.

[hornblower]

We don't have this in Canada at all but if men are required to register, women should be too.

 

Is that really controversial? Equal rights, equal opportunities, equal responsibilities.

 

- color me 'third wave feminist'

[Jenny in Florida]

I have to agree with people - I don't want ANYONE drafted, but if there is a draft, why are my sons more expendable than my daughters? I would want my kids assigned to positions they were competant to do....and if that meant that choices were made based on their body types, fine! I would expect that.

 

I agree completely. I don't want either of my children drafted, but I see no reason why one should be exempt because of her gender.

[Tabrett]

I would for see a big baby boom if women were called in on a draft:lol:.

[KarenNC]

I wonder though... what if both mom & dad got drafted? Will there be an easy out for one of them, or will they have to scramble for child care arrangements?

 

Well, families where both parents are in the service or in the National Guard are having to do that now, as I understand it. A friend of mine works for DSS in our area and she has said they see a lot of situations where both parents are called up. Of course, all of these folks are there because they volunteered, not because of a draft, so should a draft arise it may be a different situation.

 

I have to agree with Crissy. With rights come responsibility, and, much as I hate the thought of it, if we are arguing for equal treatment in the good things (salary, benefits, employment, etc), we should not be surprised to be expected to participate equally in what some would call the less than desirable things (like registering for selective service).

[bettyandbob]

Honestly, I disagree with registration in general. However, if men must register I think women should too. They are not going to use people who are underweight or underheight. The military sizes there standard issue equipment to fit certain size ranges.

 

If there is a draft, and young men and women who fit military standards must fight, why couldn't we expect those who are too small or have a medical condition not to fulfill some needed support role here at home. I think that would be a good expectation for those who physically could not serve completely.

[Mama Lynx]

We don't have this in Canada at all but if men are required to register, women should be too.

 

Is that really controversial? Equal rights, equal opportunities, equal responsibilities.

 

- color me 'third wave feminist'

 

While I agree with the equality of the situation, it opens up a nightmare of logistics problems.

 

We'd need provisions for families, first of all, to ensure that BOTH parents are not REQUIRED to be deployed at the same time. It's one thing when both parents voluntarily join up, knowing and choosing the sacrifices and logistics issues for their families; quite another for involuntary participants. Such a scenario could potentially put a very destructive drain on families.

 

But then, like I said, I think we should do away with selective service.

[Danestress]

Registering for selective service is different from going to combat. Those are two different types of considerations and I will defer to our military commanders on whether women belong in combat positions.

 

But I do think that if we are going to require boys to register, we should require it of girlss too. And if we were to institute a draft, I see no reason not to draft girls into non-combat positions if boys are to make that sacrifice.

Edited October 14, 2008 by Danestress

[Sara R]

Kingsley Browne wrote a book about it. He summarizes his argument in a series of blog posts at this link.

 

In summary: women are different than men, physically and psychologically. Physical strength is still important in the military. Women react differently in combat situations. Men treat their female comrades differently than males. Women can get pregnant (accidentally or on purpose) to get out of difficult assignments, which is something men cannot do.

 

Also, I have additional problems with mothers in combat because of the effects to children at home. Fathers dying is tragic as well, but (good) mothers are central to the stability of a home and children.

[OnTheBrink]

and may you hear it with the same fair reading I'll give everyone else's response.

 

Someone has to keep the home fires burning! I believe that God designed women to be particularly good at this task. We are very, very strong in our own right, yet I believe a woman's brand of strength (generally speaking) to be more valuable here on the homefront. Of course there will be exceptions - there always are - but this is my general sentiment. It is based on my Bible-based beliefs about how God designed the roles of man and woman.

 

I wonder though... what if both mom & dad got drafted? Will there be an easy out for one of them, or will they have to scramble for child care arrangements?

 

My guess would be government-run boarding schools, or some sort of foster care for military families.

 

And, I agree with the rest of your post.

[Chris in VA]

I agree with Sara. Besides (and I'm asking this on a homeschooling board--), who would homeschool the kids left behind if both Mom and Dad were in the service? What about nursing babies?

I disagree with anyone being forced into military service.

[sleepy]

Kingsley Browne wrote a book about it. He summarizes his argument in a series of blog posts at this link.

 

In summary: women are different than men, physically and psychologically. Physical strength is still important in the military. Women react differently in combat situations. Men treat their female comrades differently than males. Women can get pregnant (accidentally or on purpose) to get out of difficult assignments, which is something men cannot do.

 

Also, I have additional problems with mothers in combat because of the effects to children at home. Fathers dying is tragic as well, but (good) mothers are central to the stability of a home and children.

 

:iagree: And I'd like to see selective service done away with.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I'm not sure why this column was written today. It's quoting an answer Obama gave in a Democratic primary debate well over a year ago. Here's the quote:

 

 

 

(emphasis mine)

 

I checked the transcript and every other debate participant answered pretty much the same way.

 

Obama has always made a point of emphasizing finding ways to encourage young people to serve their country; I think this goes along with that.

 

Yes. He DOES believe in national service. The idea that freedom, being a citizen, implies responsibility. This is his idea of responsibility. Two years of national service, IMO, is a very good idea. And I am confident that he does not believe in a draft, nor is he a hawkish warmonger. Service to country is high on my list of priorities for the future generation, too, and I like the ideas he has proposed.

 

This notion would never pass congress, though. There are precious few congress members who watch a child fulfill specific national service such as the military, the Peace Corps, the US urban equivalent to the Peace Corp (??), etc.

[Jennifer3141]

I don't want anyone forced into military service but if the government intends to take my son from me, I see no reason why they shouldn't also steal my DD.

 

That being said, if we're still fighting this idiotic war in 15 years, I'll be living in Canada with both my kids anyway.

 

Jen

[Cricket]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08287/919582-470.stm?cmpid=elections.xml

 

I'm not familiar with this newspaper but I'd wager it's not right-wing.

 

With absolutely no disrepect to those who have daughters and women in your family serving in the armed services, I vehemently disagree with mandatory registration for women.

 

~Dana

 

Wow, I hadn't heard this. :iagree: with you, Dana!

[phathui5]

Wow. This is the first time I've thought about maybe voting for McCain.

 

I'm completely against women being drafted. No way should children be in a situation where both parents have been drafted for military duty and they're put in foster care or boarding school. There are enough men in the country that calling women up is not necessary.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

I wonder though... what if both mom & dad got drafted? Will there be an easy out for one of them, or will they have to scramble for child care arrangements?

 

Well, back in the day of the draft, there were exceptions for hardship. This would, I imagine, qualify as hardship. And it should, IMO. Right now with a volunteer military and dual military parents, this is the "career" path *chosen* by the two parents, knowing the consequences. I think that's a hard, hard thing, but in a free society with a volunteer force, parents do choose this path and children do get left behind.

 

Certainly not MY choice. I can't even imagine such a thing. But I've lived around this reality all my adult life. People arrange for their children to be cared for, and that's just the way it is. Sad, though.

[Vida Winter]

Already, many (I am not saying all) women:

 

Go to high school -- check

Go to college - check

Have a career - check

Stop the career, start a family - check

Go back to work and still continue most of the housework & family duties - check

Suffer the guilt and consequences of balancing family/work

to say nothing of homeschooling - check

 

Since we've done so well, let's register for military service, too.

 

:banghead:

 

It's just another thorn in my rear, you know?

 

And if you are very concerned about equal pay for men and women, I'd advise you to look into what women are earning while working on Obama's campaign vs McCain's campaign.

 

Off to go soak my head.

[Spy Car]

I know this may be cynical, but do women have to do everything?

 

They certainly don't need to serve as Vice-President :D :lol:

[5kidsforME]

They certainly don't need to serve as Vice-President :D :lol:

 

Unless it was Hillary right?

[CLHCO]

Kingsley Browne wrote a book about it. He summarizes his argument in a series of blog posts at this link.

 

In summary: women are different than men, physically and psychologically. Physical strength is still important in the military. Women react differently in combat situations. Men treat their female comrades differently than males. Women can get pregnant (accidentally or on purpose) to get out of difficult assignments, which is something men cannot do.

 

Also, I have additional problems with mothers in combat because of the effects to children at home. Fathers dying is tragic as well, but (good) mothers are central to the stability of a home and children.

 

Thank you. It's very nice to jump to the idea that women should be equal in all things but when we start to get into very dangerous territory, sometimes we have to step back and look at reality instead of pushing to make the world what we want, pretending women will suddenly genetically evolve to the challenge.

 

The book "Why Gender Matters" has a lot to say about the male and female brain, including how they respond in fear, how they respond to pain, etc. This is an educational book about school environments, BTW, not one about the military, but it is stuffed with solid research people really don't want to hear.

 

Personally, I'm fine with women in some roles in the military, I do not believe they should be in most combat situations for her mental and physical health - they do handle things differently than men; I do not believe they should be stuffed next to men in critical situations to change the entire environment - men behave different when women are present, like it or not.

 

I don't understand why equal in value must be equal in ability in all areas, at least in the most dire of circumstances. If women tend to be better with hand-eye coordination so they make better knitters, who cares. But when lives are at stake, I find I'd rather get honest instead of cling to what I wish things looked like.

[clarkacademy]

and may you hear it with the same fair reading I'll give everyone else's response.

 

Someone has to keep the home fires burning! I believe that God designed women to be particularly good at this task. We are very, very strong in our own right, yet I believe a woman's brand of strength (generally speaking) to be more valuable here on the homefront. Of course there will be exceptions - there always are - but this is my general sentiment. It is based on my Bible-based beliefs about how God designed the roles of man and woman.

 

 

:iagree: VERY MUCH

[Mama Lynx]

Yes. He DOES believe in national service. The idea that freedom, being a citizen, implies responsibility. This is his idea of responsibility. Two years of national service, IMO, is a very good idea. And I am confident that he does not believe in a draft, nor is he a hawkish warmonger. Service to country is high on my list of priorities for the future generation, too, and I like the ideas he has proposed.

 

This notion would never pass congress, though. There are precious few congress members who watch a child fulfill specific national service such as the military, the Peace Corps, the US urban equivalent to the Peace Corp (??), etc.

 

I didn't read the article, just went off the OP's post.

 

I am, in general, against Selective Service. But I could get on board with two years of some kind of national service.

[hornblower]

While I agree with the equality of the situation, it opens up a nightmare of logistics problems.

 

We'd need provisions for families, first of all, to ensure that BOTH parents are not REQUIRED to be deployed at the same time.

 

Yeah, but that doesn't sound too difficult to me. Is there an exemption now for men who are single fathers? That must happen surely.

 

But anyway. This selective service thing is just, so, um, weird. And this is coming from that weird place up north with healthcare & other socialist leanings :001_smile:

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Wow. This is the first time I've thought about maybe voting for McCain.

 

I'm completely against women being drafted. No way should children be in a situation where both parents have been drafted for military duty and they're put in foster care or boarding school. There are enough men in the country that calling women up is not necessary.

 

Were fathers who were single parents drafted in the wars that have come before? There have ALWAYS been exceptions to draft. Always. This is not a call to draft nursing mothers, or mothers who provide full-time care. Or single dads who are the sole parents of children. Single mothers (or single fathers for that matter) are NOT allowed to join the military.

 

This is a slippery-slope argument that I do not see has been borne out in fact or implication in history.

 

Israel seems to manage having women do national service without relegating their dear children to boarding schools or ripping nursing infants from their mothers' breasts. This thread is getting very emotional over a theoretical model of service to country for ALL. The details can be imagined as horrific, if one thinks Sen. Obama is a devil come to steal away your children into a fate worse than death (and perhaps death, if there's a shooting war) or can be imagined as noble and honorable if you feel Sen. Obama is an honorable man who is thoughtful and a lover of a strong and stable family as the basic unit of this nation.

 

:Insert patient but slightly exasperated call to reason here:

[Mama Lynx]

Thank you. It's very nice to jump to the idea that women should be equal in all things but when we start to get into very dangerous territory, sometimes we have to step back and look at reality instead of pushing to make the world what we want, pretending women will suddenly genetically evolve to the challenge.

 

The book "Why Gender Matters" has a lot to say about the male and female brain, including how they respond in fear, how they respond to pain, etc. This is an educational book about school environments, BTW, not one about the military, but it is stuffed with solid research people really don't want to hear.

 

Personally, I'm fine with women in some roles in the military, I do not believe they should be in most combat situations for her mental and physical health - they do handle things differently than men; I do not believe they should be stuffed next to men in critical situations to change the entire environment - men behave different when women are present, like it or not.

 

I don't understand why equal in value must be equal in ability in all areas, at least in the most dire of circumstances. If women tend to be better with hand-eye coordination so they make better knitters, who cares. But when lives are at stake, I find I'd rather get honest instead of cling to what I wish things looked like.

 

VERY nice post!

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Unless it was Hillary right?

 

I think you are reading this wrong. Spy Car has no issue with women in national service.

[Danestress]

It's about women in service. Registering for the selective service does not change in any way women's eligibility for combat roles.

[teamturner]

I may be old fashioned and this may be opening up a can of worms but I think God intended men and women to be strong in different areas.

 

:iagree: I couldn't agree with you more!!! :D

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Yeah, but that doesn't sound too difficult to me. Is there an exemption now for men who are single fathers? That must happen surely.

 

But anyway. This selective service thing is just, so, um, weird. And this is coming from that weird place up north with healthcare & other socialist leanings :001_smile:

 

Service to country is socialistic because... ??

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

And if you are very concerned about equal pay for men and women, I'd advise you to look into what women are earning while working on Obama's campaign vs McCain's campaign.

 

Off to go soak my head.

 

Sen. Obama is paying men more than women to work on his campaign? Really? You're joking, right?

[mommytobees]

I wouldn't worry about it, not until military service is mandatory for men.

 

Kris

[phathui5]

Service to country is socialistic because... ??

 

Because it's the whole idea of the group coming before the individual, the collectivist mindset, which is the root of socialism.

[Plucky]

I think registering for SS for either sex should be done away with, why can't Obama lean that way?

[Vida Winter]

Sen. Obama is paying men more than women to work on his campaign? Really? You're joking, right?

 

No joke. I don't have a link right now and I need to leave for a while.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I think registering for SS for either sex should be done away with, why can't Obama lean that way?

 

What's the plan in a national emergency?

 

(I'm not being snarky, btw. I'm just wondering how you'd propose handling it. I think being immersed in the military culture for so long has kinda dulled my thinking to the notion that selective service should be done away with.)

[Plucky]

Well, if it's not being used and is supposedly not going to be used for a draft into military service what is the point? You think the government isn't aware of every single one of us?