she claimed equal rights would lead down the slippery slope towards equal mandatory stuff like the draft

All of the fear-mongering from Schlafly and others about what would happen if women were accorded equal rights: unixsex bathrooms, gay marriage, women in combat, happened anyway, without women having equal rights under the law. It has always been a bogus argument.

It seems that her argument has been totally destroyed. Women are subjected to the draft etc but not entitled to equal rights. Time to change that.

People put up with selective service registration at all because they do not expect a draft at all ever again.

If there were a draft it would be impossible to enforce.

And you didn't answer how it would be impossible to enforce. People can be found— SS numbers, IRS filings, credit cards, bank accounts—most people are, whether they like it or not, embedded in legal, financial, governmental systems.

Just because a few successfully evaded the draft, doesn't mean all, or even most did.

Our current volunteer military is an excellent force; better educated than the average population. Most folks dont know that. And signing up voluntarily is always better than being FORCED to sign up.
Compare to Russia, where most of their regular army have less than 3 yrs experience, are draftees, and are poorly trained. But there are a LOT of them, and thats they way those countries are staffed. Same with China, NK & others. Cannon fodder.

a possible need for the draft.

The only reason the draft existed in the first place is traditionally military pay was complete shit. When you raise the pay and benefits, any need for compulsory service vanishes.

With a new draft especially one that would include all young men AND women the ease at which politicians slide us into to yet the wars would be stymied with a draft. IMO draft resisters including every mother, father, brother, sister, grandmother, grandfathers, aunts and uncles would be in the streets protesting NOT WITH MY CHILD! NOT WITH MY LOVED ONE!

As it stand now with each suggestion that we might start yet another international "conflict" (code for shooting war) is mostly ignored by the general public. Most citizens see no need to worry because their loved ones WON'T be in any danger unless they volunteer.

If that were to change with the advent of a new draft every family would then have a vested interest in the potential of politicians pushing us toward yet another war.

Pay attention the Trump administration is hinting that we might need to "send troops" to Venezuela. Trump like all republican presidents wants to be a war president. When at war we will be told not to complain as it will damage the moral of the troops. Of course we will be reminded that the troops volunteered.

IMO it was the continue fear of those who might be drafted to fight in Vietnam that help end the war by protesting in the streets and burning their draft cards.

Signed USAF veteran medic 1965-1969. Third generation to serve during a war. Grandfather Army WW I , father USN WW II. and myself volunteer enlistee USAF 1965-1969

Any new military conflicts must be financed by a highly progressive tax. The rich will always be able to exempt their loved ones from war. They can't exempt their money, which they love more anyway. Hit them where it hurts the most.

stay out of jail entry into the military, and pathway to citizenship entry into the military.

We shouldn't depend on a security force that includes soldiers only in it to avoid jail time. They usually only get the offer because we are falling behind in registering legit citizens into the services.

And we shouldn't depend on illegal immigrants to fight our wars for us. We are currently trying to deport service members who signed up for that option. How American is THAT? You've fought our war for us, now get out.

Either we believe in it enough to fight, or we don't.

College students would be allowed to finish their current semester, then they can pick up where they left of when they return from service.

with a mandatory national service directly after high school. Military service would be one choice and there would others. I don't think college should be broken up under duress, so do the service before college. Plus, it gets older college students and maybe heads some people off at the pass by teaching them a trade in national service. That way you have fewer people in college who shouldn't be there or really don't want to be there.

were subject to the lottery, no matter what their student status.

After Vietnam finally ended, we pushed to end the draft because it made getting into pointless, unpopular wars far too easy. We'd never have lost 50,000 Americans in Vietnam if we hadn't had that draft.

...desperate to be rid of the draft. The anti-war movement was a pain in the ass that they didn't want and the quality of the draftees was always below average. Think about it, the college kids had deferments and the punks were told by a judge that they could enlist to avoid jail time. The Pentagon wanted to run their wars without the headlines and news coverage.

The PEOPLE were in the streets protesting conscription in the 60s/70s. THEY are who got the law changed.

wars not being in the news is a good thing.

despite widespread public opposition because the draft made it so easy for the generals and politicians to keep fighting.

It didn't end till 1975, after 50,000 Americans had been killed. It would never have gone on so long if we hadn't had the draft. That's why so many of us fought to end it.

It makes me sick to see people who weren't there rewriting history and trying to justify the draft.

The military is the smallest it has been since before WWII and gets all the volunteers they need. A fair draft means an enormous expansion of military spending.

All during the 60s & 70s all we saw were "end the draft" protests. Now everyone wants to bring it back?
I dont agree with using the military to put pressure on the rich, politicians or whoever. We have it for one purpose; to be able to fight as best as possible.
As for VZ, only thing thats really needed there is one guy who is a great distance shot. That guy could come from Columbia or any of the other neighboring countries.

I'm also a USAF vet, 10 yrs. Dad retired; served in Korea (volunteer). Both Grandads WW1(1 volunteer 1 draft); 1 Spanish American war. 2 great greats in the Civil War ("draft", meaning they were basically told "lets go&quot .

I don't think we should, but if need be, the ALL children pf any elected official MUST be included along with everyone else.

No deferments, no exceptions for anyone not completely disabled.

The draft enabled the Vietnam War to continue for years after the supply of warm bodies would have dried up under an all-volunteer system as the war became seen as unwinnable.

Same with WWI and the Civil War.

"38.8% (6,332,000) of U.S. servicemen and all servicewomen were volunteers
61.2% (11,535,000) were draftees"

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-us-military-numbers

The Civil War

"The act gave the Union a boost in soldiers, but still, there were not enough volunteers. They needed more troops. The Enrollment Act of 1863, sometimes called the Civil War Military Draft Act, was the answer to that problem."

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/american-civil-war/drafts-american-civil-war.html

WWI

"The reason for the Selective Service Act, though, was that American men had not volunteered en masse or certainly not in the numbers needed to raise, train, and deploy an army quickly after the United States declared war on Germany on April 6, 1917. What is true is that the vast majority of men complied and registered for the draft and then served, if drafted—not quick to volunteer, but not unwilling to serve. In the end, over 70% of American Army troops were conscripts, "

https://blogs.loc.gov/headlinesandheroes/2018/06/wwi-draft/

our wars since Vietnam have always been over very quickly after the goal was reached.

for more than a decade if it weren't for a draft.

50,000 Americans wouldn't have died if it weren't for a draft.

It was a pointless war, and it went on and on and on BECAUSE we had a draft, and a steady supply of new young troops to be killed in a war the people never supported.

Mass protest would sway them BEFORE IT EVEN GOT STARTED.

"With a new draft especially one that would include all young men AND women the ease at which politicians slide us into to yet the wars would be stymied with a draft. IMO draft resisters including every mother, father, brother, sister, grandmother, grandfathers, aunts and uncles would be in the streets protesting NOT WITH MY CHILD! NOT WITH MY LOVED ONE!"

and tens of thousands of post-draft deaths before the war effort finally collapsed.

The idea that people would mobilize for massive protests before a war had even started AND that the government would quickly respond is a fantasy that ignores human nature. We knew that back in the 70's and 80's and that's why we pushed to END the draft. Nothing has changed since then, except some people don't remember or are too young to have lived through it.

regardless of socio-economic status you are to serve in the event of a draft.

time and time again, it's the lower middle class and the poor that serve in dis-proportionate amounts as compared to the rich.

Women have only 20 years or so of likely healthy, adult fertility. Men have 35 or more.

Women also are much more likely to get raped or assaulted in the service; that needs to be fixed.

Frankly, women tend to get “drafted” into twenty years of servitude with raising kids, although many men put their heart and soul into parenting too.

I don't see how women can argue that they should be excluded, and why men should be forced to go when we shouldn't.

Of course, I also think the draft is highly immoral - it's slavery by a government to force people who don't want to fight to fight.

... it is very unlikely we will have a draft again given the brass (to my understanding) wouldn't want it.

...at least for any m or f student who receives federal financial aid?

Just like women can still be taxed even though there is no Equal Rights Amendment.

And yet women are not equal under the Constitution.

You missed my point, but not the opportunity to mansplain the article to me.

Women can be drafted. And they will have to draft women if the US needs to reinstate the draft, per this ruling.

I didn't say women are being drafted. I said women can be drafted. What part of the word "can" do you not understand? You really shouldn't be telling others to "learn how to think."

I was commenting on the unfairness of the present situation. Try to keep up.

18 years of age with very few exceptions.
That's not to say it has to be for the military rather they could do a number of things like civil service for things like meals on wheels or helping to repair roads but after they serve they get free government funded college.

If such things are deemed necessary by society, then pay people enough to get sufficient volunteers. Use of governmental force to compel someone to do something they wouldn't otherwise should only be done when there's no other viable options.

reimbursed further by being provided with the ability to go to college without having to deal with the bullshit of having to repay a loan.

So you are now talking about something completely different than either of us were talking about before.

It doesn't change the fact you are still talking about forced servitude, which I am opposed. If such a thing were such a great deal, there would be no need to force anyone to do it.

They know they don't need to sweeten the deal when those kids are already taking the deal as is. That is the problem with an all volunteer army. Our wars are fought by the bottom social rung of our society, so there is not the same opposition to opportunistic wars. Teens with no other decent opportunities for a job and healthcare benefits tend to be the ones who sign up to serve. They have a tough enough time getting their high school diploma; I imagine most of them are not even thinking about college.

I am with you. I think the draft should be mandatory across all sectors of society--no bone spur exceptions. Suddenly, nondefensive wars will be seen as unthinkable. But I am realistic enough to know that will never happen. The rich would never allow it.

National Service? I could get behind that. I think it could be a good thing and I would think it could be made attractive if people could volunteer without the onus of it being military if military isn't your thing.

And who would get them. Can see it now: sorry, all of our non-military
units are filled so its off to the corporate wars for you. Champagne units
all over again.

of how it's executed, not the plan itself. The government employs/employed people in just about every field you can think of. Maybe we could end a lot of government contracting if they were growing their own. Kinda like they used to before we started drowning the government in a bathtub.

Many women soldiers exposed to depleted uranium in Iraq wound up with deformed babies and damage to their reproductive systems. No young woman should be forced to suffer this. A man can serve and assuming he survives can still father children. Not so with women in certain circumstances.

Also I totally object to both parents potentially being drafted. Young children need both parents but especially a nursing mother.

I am all for any woman who wishes to volunteer having full rights to advance as far as she can in the military.

But just as we have OSHA requirements to keep women of child-bearing years out of certain very dangerous lab situations where there is high risk of exposure to dangerous chemicals and radiation, we should certainly not be forcing women of childbearing years or who are already parents of young children to head overseas to combat. Bad enough to risk loss of one parent, but we should never take away both.

Also the risk of rape is extremely high for women in the military. I've done articles on this and interviewed women who were raped, even by commanding officers in a wartime setting. The rate is probably about 30% of women in the military who have been sexually assaulted in some fashion, much higher than for men. Do you really want that for your daughters? I don't.

I have long been a women's rights advocate for equal pay and opportunities, but ignoring biology to put all women potentially at risk for the "rights" of others strikes me as a sad thing for our society.

I hope to God we never have another draft.

There are lots of other jobs women can do. I'm not making that argument though. I served with enough women not to think that.

But, I think the days of general drafts are over -- unless something dramatically changes.

For example, women, because of their smaller size, make perfect pilots.

There are plenty of non-combat state-side jobs that could accommodate a breast feeding mother. And most draftees would be young, unmarried and without children anyway.

And we need to end rape in the military, not accept it and use it as an excuse for keeping women out.

The unfairness of drafting women is that they are still not even recognized as equal to men under our Constitution. Of course, that never stopped the US from taxing women like men.

How can we even think about sending women into mandatory combat if we don't give them equal pay for work at home?

As for non-combat statewide jobs, while they may be available there is nothing compelling the military to only assign young women there. I know of plenty of young women, even mothers, who were overseas in dangerous assignments. One friend of mine came back with a very aggressive cancer from chemicals she was exposed to; she was a single mom and left behind a young son.

And she was nearly raped by a commanding officer, too.

I think a lot of people advocating for this as "equality" don't really know that they could be subjecting our daughters and granddaughters to.

Of course it's bad for men, too.

The answer is to keep the military all volunteer, and keep us out of wars except when there is truly no better alternative. We should not be fighting them for oil, profits or to make some president feel macho.

"More than 16 million Americans served in the armed forces during the war. Fewer than a million ever saw serious combat. The infantry represented just 14 percent of the troops overseas. But wherever they fought – in North Africa or the South Pacific or Western Europe — the infantry bore the brunt of the fighting on the ground — and seven out of ten suffered casualties."

https://www.pbs.org/thewar/at_war_infantry.htm

During the most costly war in history, the odds of an American, male or female, serving in the military of being wounded or killed or even seeing serious combat was small.

Your comment:

"Many women soldiers exposed to depleted uranium in Iraq wound up with deformed babies and damage to their reproductive systems."

What is your source for the above?

Multiple court cases and lobbying Congress. I can find articles on it if you want.

I saw a post about the ERA bill in Virginia's on Facebook from a widely followed local news guy and the rightwing comments went directly to the draft. This must be a talking point they've had infused into their heads. I did a little search and posted that this IS something NOW and feminist groups have been advocating for 20-30 years. Crickets in responses.

not have equal rights.

The excuse of not passing the ERA was always that it would subject women to the draft.

Now there's no excuse. The time for the ERA is NOW.

Can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Young women need to sign up for selective service when they turn 18.

Until then, no.

No equal rights, no equal service.

don't have equal rights in America and have long been subject to the draft as condition of citizenship like all other men. While women, especially white women, many of whom like to call themselves "security moms" and voted for Bush (and now "adorable deplorables" and vote for Trump) knowing they are exempt from the draft.