Should women be eligible for the draft?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Option 3 (normal)

[Goldwater]

Yes, although the draft should only be used if the country is actually being invaded.

[H. Ross Peron]

If we have draft in a case of total war then yes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Option 3 of course.

[Blue3]

If there is a draft, yes.

[dead0man]

3 is my vote, but yes, of course.  To not do so would be sexist.

[bedstuy]

Yes, but only the WNBA draft.

[Tender Branson]

Yes.

But "option 3" should not be an option here, because it distorts the poll results.

The question should be "should women be eligible for the draft in a system where the draft is the law ?"

[Antonio the Sixth]

Option 3 (normal)

^^^^

But if there is to be a draft, then option 1 (normal).

[DC Al Fine]

3 is my vote, but yes, of course.  To not do so would be sexist.

I don't get this line of reasoning. Why does violating a group's civil liberties mean we have to violate another group's civil liberties for fairness' sake? It's like finding out that black people couldn't vote in South Africa, and deciding that white people shouldn't be allowed to vote either because to do otherwise would be racist.

[Antonio the Sixth]

3 is my vote, but yes, of course.  To not do so would be sexist.

I don't get this line of reasoning. Why does violating a group's civil liberties mean we have to violate another group's civil liberties for fairness' sake? It's like finding out that black people couldn't vote in South Africa, and deciding that white people shouldn't be allowed to vote either because to do otherwise would be racist.

It makes perfect sense for someone who values equality as a positive good in and of itself, and not only as a mere corollary of liberty.

[bedstuy]

3 is my vote, but yes, of course.  To not do so would be sexist.

I don't get this line of reasoning. Why does violating a group's civil liberties mean we have to violate another group's civil liberties for fairness' sake? It's like finding out that black people couldn't vote in South Africa, and deciding that white people shouldn't be allowed to vote either because to do otherwise would be racist.

Your initial premise is that a military draft is not justified.  The implicit premise of that argument is that a military draft is justified.

But, in any case, the question would be whether you valued fairness/being non-sexist or maximizing individual freedom.  Sometimes people are willing to trade-off the policy outcome they would like for one group, in favor of being fair to everyone.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

If there is a draft, yes.

[TNF]

If there is a draft, yes.

...but ideally there shouldn't be a draft, because we should in all actually be trying to spare more people from having to do anything in the military that involves direct combat. With all that funding the DoD gets, it should seriously be looking to automate as many functions of warfighting as it can and turning the military into a professional MMORPG corps.

[Lief 🗽]

If there is a draft, yes.

...but ideally there shouldn't be a draft, because we should in all actually be trying to spare more people from having to do anything in the military that involves direct combat. With all that funding the DoD gets, it should seriously be looking to automate as many functions of warfighting as it can and turning the military into a professional MMORPG corps.

But then people start crying about how horrible and evil and 1984 unmanned drones are.

[TNF]

If there is a draft, yes.

...but ideally there shouldn't be a draft, because we should in all actually be trying to spare more people from having to do anything in the military that involves direct combat. With all that funding the DoD gets, it should seriously be looking to automate as many functions of warfighting as it can and turning the military into a professional MMORPG corps.

But then people start crying about how horrible and evil and 1984 unmanned drones are.

Just liberals and libertarians, who will be completely ignored by the people who make defense policy anyway.

[CatoMinor]

No, because there should be no draft or conscription or whatever other term you want to use to mask what it really is, slavery.

[perdedor]

The draft should be abolished and never reestablished for any reason. 

[windjammer]

Option 3

[politicus]

3 is my vote, but yes, of course.  To not do so would be sexist.

I don't get this line of reasoning. Why does violating a group's civil liberties mean we have to violate another group's civil liberties for fairness' sake? It's like finding out that black people couldn't vote in South Africa, and deciding that white people shouldn't be allowed to vote either because to do otherwise would be racist.

Since you are a self proclaimed reactionarian and national conservative I am surprised that you are anti-draft and even using the liberal/libertarian civil rights argument in this context. What about classical conservative virtues like duty to the nation, patriotism etc.?

[Del Tachi]

For all these people saying that the "draft should be abolished" all I have to say is...in the United States, the draft IS abolished.

The Selective Service system is in no ways a "draft", but rather only a way to collect information on young men who are of "fighting" age.

So, the real question should be:  In the United States, should women have to register for the Selective Service?

[politicus]

For all these people saying that the "draft should be abolished" all I have to say is...in the United States, the draft IS abolished.

The Selective Service system is in no ways a "draft", but rather only a way to collect information on young men who are of "fighting" age.

So, the real question should be:  In the United States, should women have to register for the Selective Service?

Its a poll about the principle, not the present US situation. If you want it to be related to the US it could be: If the draft was to be reinstated should it include women?

[Del Tachi]

For all these people saying that the "draft should be abolished" all I have to say is...in the United States, the draft IS abolished.

The Selective Service system is in no ways a "draft", but rather only a way to collect information on young men who are of "fighting" age.

So, the real question should be:  In the United States, should women have to register for the Selective Service?

Its a poll about the principle, not the present US situation. If you want it to be related to the US it could be: If the draft was to be reinstated should it include women?

Hmm...I like to think in more pragmatic rather than philosophical terms.

[perdedor]

For all these people saying that the "draft should be abolished" all I have to say is...in the United States, the draft IS abolished.

The Selective Service system is in no ways a "draft", but rather only a way to collect information on young men who are of "fighting" age.

So, the real question should be:  In the United States, should women have to register for the Selective Service?

Information for what purpose, exactly?

[politicallefty]

For all these people saying that the "draft should be abolished" all I have to say is...in the United States, the draft IS abolished.

The Selective Service system is in no ways a "draft", but rather only a way to collect information on young men who are of "fighting" age.

So, the real question should be:  In the United States, should women have to register for the Selective Service?

As for me, I think the SSS should be abolished. However, if it is to be maintained, women should absolutely have to register. I'm fairly sure men who do not register with the SSS are ineligible for federal student aid. So, there are actual consequences to that sexist policy.

To the answer the topic more clearly, I think women should be eligible for the draft were it to be reinstated. I do not believe that the draft should be reinstated though.