As part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2022, H.R. 4350 passed by the House, wording for equal responsibility for both men and women to register for selective service has been included and forwarded to the Senate. We can expect that, as has occurred in the past, the radical left will remain mostly silent and allow the conservative right to be vocal and derail equal responsibility for defense of the country.
Many of you may not be aware, the US Supreme Court declined to hear the National Coalition For Men V. Selective Service System lawsuit deferring to Congress to act. The National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service recommended ending male only selective service registration stating, “[m]ale-only registration sends a message to women not only that they are not vital to the defense of the country but also that they are not expected to participate in defending it.” In spite of this recommendation, last years NDAA was modified in the Senate to remove responsibility for females to register for the draft.
For those of us who believe in equal rights and responsibilities for all U.S. Citizen’s this is a non partisan issue and as such Republican, Democrat, and Independent alike should be voicing their support for equal rights. With SCOTUS punting the issue our remaining avenue to achieve equality is to move this legislation past those in the Senate who are blocking this legislation. As such I encourage all to contact their Senators in support of equal rights and responsibilities for men and women. Below is a copy of a letter I sent to my (Mississippi) Senators modified as a template for your use in whole or in part. My Senators are both Republican so I framed my argument from that perspective and you should modify your argument to fit your views and convince your Senators.
Date:___________________
Senator _________________, and Senator________________,
Dear Senators;
I am writing in support of equal protection under the law. Specifically, Selective Service (SS) Registration which is mandatory for males but excludes females, a fact which would be corrected under the recently proposed NDAA. Through the years the right to vote has been limited to citizen’s and tied to the responsibility to defend the country and homeland, a history of such is here for those unfamiliar, https://nymensactionnetwork.org/2018/11/rights-with-responsibilities-voting-and-selective-service/. Today we are giving the benefit of citizenship to non citizen illegal aliens and the right to vote to females with no corresponding responsibility and in some local elections also the right to vote for illegal aliens with no corresponding responsibility.
Let me first address the fear purveyors who have responded to equal rights and responsibilities for men and women with the usual “daughters will end up being cannon fodder,” the “it will undermine unit cohesiveness and effectiveness,” and the added the inflammatory to protect the helpless women, “pregnant women will be forced into the military” portraying equal responsibility to country as a left wing anti-family agenda. Chauvinistic male chivalry and feminist gynocentrism walk hand in hand in the objections for females registering. Ironically, the radical feminist left remains publicly silent on the “equality” issue while letting Republican’s carry their water, dividing Republican’s on the issue. This propagandist rhetoric flies in the face of fact and common sense when we separate selective service from military service and assignment to duties for those drafted.
The forced registration with selective service carries with it severe penalties for non compliance, including some of the benefits granted to citizens, and individual rights up to and including possible incarceration, at this time applied only to men. Those males that are unable to serve in a front line combat role due to physical or mental ability, and those that will not be called up due to manpower needs being met, are NOT excused from registering as it is at the time of need that we determine each ones ability to serve in what capacity. To require men to register who will not be called to serve, with no corresponding requirement for women to register and be subjected to penalties for not doing so, creates an arbitrary and capricious unequal treatment under the law as a male physically unfit for combat duty and a female physically unfit for combat duty are treated differently in spite of equal inability to perform. Registration of men only is discriminatory and on its face unconstitutional. As such, registration needs to be applied to all male and female citizen’s with them both being subjected to the same penalties for non registration or the requirement for registration eliminated.
Prior to the Vietnam era the draft was run by local boards with exemptions for those in college. During Vietnam this was found to be discriminatory as minorities were disproportionately drafted and the SS instituted a lottery draft based upon date of birth to correct this. Historically SS has had exemptions from service such as the sole financial provider for a family. I expect that SS would develop rules and regulations regarding the exemption or deferment of pregnant females and parents solely, or jointly, responsible for the care of a child. And just as the last remaining son historically was restricted to non combat duty, parents of young children could also be similarly treated and any legislation should properly indicate this.
In any discussion of the military it is important to understand that it takes many persons to keep one person in front line combat. In today’s military only 10% of personnel are in a war zone and only a small percentage of these are front line combat troops. A major war with a major power would certainly increase the percentage of front line troops directly in harms way including those not assigned to combat roles. While I do not intend to belittle those who serve in any fashion the fact of the matter is that even in the worst of conditions most will not be in danger of being “cannon fodder” unless we were in a major war against a world power threatening the US itself and in such instance the entire US population would be in danger justifying all who can to serve in defense of the homeland.
The military service assignments are (supposed to be) based upon merit and ability. Many persons in the Military are in positions that they had not primarily been trained for as if there was a need for manpower and they show an aptitude to perform the duties required they are reassigned. The argument that women are smaller and weaker than their male counterparts only means that those who are will be placed into non physically demanding assignments consistent with their abilities, which is already done for males. How is it equitable and right to draft a 19 year old black male with a high school diploma and make him a cook serving stateside while exempting a white female 19 year old from being drafted to be a cook stateside?
The argument that drafting females will undermine unit cohesiveness and ability flies in the face of the fact that women are already allowed into combat positions. That argument means that the current military is already incapable of performing its duties. If drafting women would cause this is true then the argument is made that women should be restricted from joining the military to begin with. You simply cannot make one argument without the other. The fact is that 83% of the jobs in the military are non combat and can be performed equally by males and females with an aptitude for that position. In addition to combat roles it is reasonable that more men would be serving in strength necessary positions such as laborers moving heavy supplies and materials as they have the ability to do so. But this should NOT be an excuse to exclude the females who can perform those duties.
In an effort to show that women are “equal” to men in outcome I fear and believe that standards were reduced for military personnel. But this is a military command and performance problem, not an equal responsibility when it comes to the draft problem. Both men and women in an unprepared military, indeed also the citizen’s they are sworn to protect, will suffer the consequences of improper training, drafted or volunteer alike. The critical feminist theory and the woke critical race theory which is infecting the military is a readiness issue that needs to be addressed by Congress. Indeed, an unprepared military which suffers personnel losses in conflict supports the need to draft all able bodied and competent men and women to defend the country.
The military is increasingly full of high tech careers driven by mechanization and electronics. Women are now 65% of college graduates and it seems to be a waste of talent to exclude them from these high tech positions which do not require strength to perform. How is the military served by drafting a male college graduate to sit in a facility in Nevada and fly a drone while we pass over a similarly educated and able bodied female college graduate? Females also disproportionately enter the medical care fields. Are we to exclude these very necessary personnel from the draft which will require the positions to be filled by men, many having the abilities to perform front line duties?
The short sighted view that we will not need females to serve in defense of the country ignores the fact that war with one or more super powers may result in our country being attacked. Communist China, our greatest adversary, has over a billion more people than the US, 2 million already in the military (600,000 more than the US), and 35 million excess males with which to draw on in a major conflict. Conflict with China opens the door to opportunistic conflict with Russia. Hostilities with China or Russia, or BOTH, are certain to put our Pacific territories, Hawaii, and Alaska in danger and even the West coast of the continental US. Are we going to draft 50 and 60 year old males for homeland defense against invasion while leaving 20 and 30 year old able bodied females to sit home and do nothing?
The gynocentric “daughters will end up cannon fodder” argument shows a value being placed upon females while showing a misandrist view towards “expendable” men. Simply, why would your son being used for cannon fodder be acceptable and why is ones son required to sacrifice while the daughter not? It is also contrary to the US Constitution, SCOTUS aside which bypassed the issue and punted to Congress (who also failed to uphold equal protection under the law in the last NDAA). But just as discrimination against minority men during Vietnam resulted in reduced combat effectiveness so too will discrimination against men in future conflicts. And how is discrimination against men not discrimination against the subset minority men?
The US already has a lack of patriotic support for our Constitutional Republic and Country problem. 50% of Democrats polled stated that if the country was invaded they would flee instead of fighting for the homeland. As during Vietnam one would expect a large portion of them, unwilling to stand against invasion, would dodge a draft forcing them to serve and fight overseas. Especially with the precedent that a future President will issue a blanket pardon for their illegal actions. Woke ideology is driving Conservatives and Christians from the military, these categories fostering many who volunteered to serve negating the need for a draft. All branches of service are now report having recruitment problems and recruitment goals are being missed. Clearly the patriotic are avoiding a hostile military work environment. And the millions of illegal aliens entering the US, male and female, are by circumstance excluded from defending the homeland, here for the benefit but not the responsibility, nor loyalty to the Republic.
Excluding females and draft dodgers from the draft leaves about 4% of the entire US population, roughly 13.5 million males aged 18-25 years old to fight in defense of the country. How long before a male blue collar carpenter realizes he has been forced to dodge bullets while another 18-25 male dodges his responsibility to the US in Canada? How long before a minority male realizes he is being pounded by artillery while his job at the furniture factory pounding nails is being filled by a male illegal alien, enjoying the benefit of citizenship at the citizens expense? How long before a male college graduate realizes he is forced to lead a combat platoon into battle before he realizes his counterpart female college graduate is working her way up the corporate leadership ladder, a non dangerous career path he wasn’t allowed to get on? Discriminatory draft policies undermined military effectiveness in Vietnam and we are forgetting our history and dooming ourselves to repeat it.
If the federal government is going to maintain a data base of possible persons required to serve in the time of need they need to apply it to men and women alike with the same penalties for avoiding the registration. At the time of induction, which should be based upon manpower needs, the person should then be separated into military basic training for ALL and then individual Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) training based upon aptitude and ability. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (https://www.bls.gov/ooh/military/military-careers.htm) lists one category (MOS class) for combat personnel (164,000, about 17% of military personnel in 2021) and 12 for non combat personnel (970,584 personnel in 2021). Certainly minimum mental aptitude and physical qualifications have been developed for each specialty, as previously stated most being able to be completed by men and women regardless of sex according to the abilities of the individual.
As early as WW II the US Government used females in support roles in non combat areas to free up men to fill the personnel needs in combat areas. I am not suggesting that females be universally excluded and restricted from hostile combat areas but inversely I am also arguing that they should not be universally included. The MOS and units where men and women work side by side should be based upon effectiveness and if women should reduce the effectiveness of a unit involving males, or men reduce effectiveness of a unit involving females (a factor not even looked at) unit staffing should be then adjusted according to sex, but not otherwise.
Regarding standards for each MOS, as previously stated they should be based upon the minimum qualification needed to complete the tasks and assignments at hand and, absent unit cohesion issues as stated above, sex of the individual should not be considered. All should be required to serve but each according to their ability to serve the needs of the entirety and complete the tasks, goals, and objectives of the unit. The failure to recognize the importance of support roles undermines the ability of the whole to achieve the objectives.
By requiring all to register for selective service we would be supporting patriotism and announcing that all have a duty to OUR country in the of need. We would also be valuing past, present, and future sacrifices of each and every individual who has served, in any capacity, our country in the time of need. It would also be upholding the view that we are all created equal, with equal rights and responsibilities under the US Constitution which is what brings us together in common as citizens of this Republic.
The only failure of our Constitution has been a failure to apply it equally to all persons individually for the God given rights it defines, rights which come with a corresponding responsibility to the Constitution and the individual citizen’s of this country. The extension of the rights of citizenship without the corresponding responsibility to serve equally, each according to their ability, is undermining allegiance to the Constitution and to this Republic, and to each other. I encourage you to stop the sexist bias which undermines our military and make selective service equal for all.
Sincerely,