What if a bill was put forth in congress concerning the selective service and including women that said...?

Question

The Military Selective Service Act as amended through July 9, 2003 will be reenacted on July 1, 2007.
Women shall be included in the draft, however they will serve in non-combative roles such as doctors, nurses, engineers, etc.
College students will only be exempt from the draft if the following conditions are met: 1) A student who is in their first year of college will be exempt if they held a 3.56 GPA or higher in high school, had an SAT score or 1000 (without the writing section) or better, and was in the top 30% of their class; and 2) During the course of the student’s college career, he or she must have a cumulative GPA of 3.1 or higher.

This law will go into effect on June 30, 2007.
what would be good reseans to negat this bill?? any amount of answers would be appreciated

Answer 1

These are in no particular order, but here goes:
1. Too vague. The bill does not state the age range of the women to be drafted.
2. Discrimination on the basis of gender. Although the legislature might have a reasonable basis for passing such legislation, it would be discriminatory in effect for men.
3. Potential class discrimination pertaining to college: A rich kid whose parents can afford to send their kids to an SAT prep class is more likely to score higher on the SATs than a poor kid whose parents couldn't afford such preparation
4. Potential racial discriminatory effect. Statistically, African Americans and Hispanic Americans score lower on standardized tests than do whites and Asians. Consequentially, those getting pulled out of college in their first year would likely be minorities, because of the fact that the majority of African Americans and Hispanic Americans live below the poverty line, and do not have ready access to things such as SAT prep class.
5. "During the course of the student’s college career, he or she must have a cumulative GPA of 3.1 or higher." - Completely imprudent. There are a lot of engineering, biology, chemistry, etc. majors in colleges who have a 3.1 or lower GPA because, lets face it,. those majors are much more difficult than, say, communications.

Answer 2

I think the GPAs should change. I was a good student, but still on accumulated a 3.26 in high school and college. Lower it to 3.0. That'll motivate but not discourage.

You can't limit women to 'non-combative' roles. Medical personnel and engineers are always in the line of fire. Even 'office' jobs get their share of mortars. Lose the 'no women in combat' guff. It's antiquated and limits the military's ability to accomplish the mission.

Answer 3

College students have always been available to draft as a last resort (exemtions allowed) & unless they are in certain fields (Doctor or scientist, etc).
Personally, I do not care what a students grades are if they are needed to serve & if a draft is in effect. It is harder to have a 3.1 at Duke or Harvard compared to community college. How do you know what kind of student someone really is or how hard school is?
The draft is hard on everyone & always has been. I hope it continues to be unneccessary & college students can stay in college.

Answer 4

No exemptions. None. If you've got a pulse then you're in the draft. If the Democrat party wants a draft that's fine, only this time, everybody gets a chance to play.

Answer 5

All college proves is that the graduate lived off Mommy and Daddy until he was 22 because he was afraid to grow up. If you don't pay people a salary to go to college, they aren't worth anything. These inferior brown-noses have ruined our country because they have been picked by the economic bullies to run it for them. They wanted puppets and got dummies.

Answer 6

A good reason would be them trying not to draft "smart" people. I believe that the other end of the spectrum would be better. Put more smart peolpe in, leave more not-so-smart ones out. I do think it would be about time that they added women, though.

Answer 7

not enough heretofores and aformentioneds

who begat who's, OR references to section 10 article 3's