Should women be drafted into combat?

Question

Yes or no?

If no, why not?

What about gay men, or men who claim to be gay, and apply same reasoning. Yes or no?

Answer 1

No.

Answer 2

Tough question. It seems logistically imprudent for several reasons already mentioned. Women posess the ability to bear children which is vital in the aftermath of the wonton destruction of war. You could make a logical argument that the presence of a female in a combat unit composed primarily of males could prove to cause more trouble than good; on the other hand, this analysis relies heavily on assumed male/female dynamics in close quarters in general human interaction. And as previously mentioned, the potentiality for excessive cruelty toward women upon capture should most certainly be considered.
While I personally believe that as a male (as a matter of honor and duty) I should shoulder a greater share of the national defense burden, I can understand why people would object to the exclusion of women from the draft . I would support the inclusion of women in the draft for non-combat and administrative duties, but ultimately it may prove to be more of a hassel than a benefit (after all, pregnancy is an immediate honorable discharge making draft-dodging a pretty easy alternative).
In any case, there are women currently serving in combat support roles who are fully capable and willing to serve their country which would seem to contradict the assumption that "they don't have the stomach for it."

Answer 3

If we invoke a draft then yes they should and so should gays of any sex. I know that ticks some people off but either we are equal or we are not. Either the military discriminates against gays or it does not. All of these gray areas and fuzzy laws don't help us. If the military wants no gays then simply say "we are GOING to ask and your GOING to tell. If you're gay then we don't want you" If they are willing to do that then they can say no gays will be drafted and I won't argue. Same goes for women. If the military says "Women are second class sort of citizens that are not obligated to protect their country", then they can say no women. Until they do then we are equal in risk as well as reward.
I wouldn't worry about it too much because I seriously doubt that we will have a draft any time in the near future.

Answer 4

No ONE should be drafted. It hasn't worked well for the US military in the past. But that aside....... I don't think women should be drafted. Women are not cut from the same cloth as men. I believe that if women want to join and fight...then why not...same goes for the gay, but not everyone is made of the same stuff male or female. This is why a draft doesn't work in the first place. Some people are born to fight and others are not. We each have are own talent and at times of war everyone should use whatever talent they have to support our Country and our troops if you are not qualified enough to be one. For example, some people are great with numbers, or organization or caring for people and there are places in the military that they can be put to use as well, but not on the front lines. Bottom line...our military should consist of willing and able participants who have it in their hearts to be there....not by people who are forced to be there.

Answer 5

No one should ever be drafted into combat.

No one should ever have to volunteer for combat.

But, it happens. If a draft were reinstated in the United States, its citizens SHOULD have the right to refuse if they do not support the cause. But they won't be allowed that, and in that case I believe yes, women should be called in the draft equal to men.

Answer 6

Yes, they must be drafted. They wanted equal rights and demanded that they be allowed on what used to be a man's territory so let them do it then. Let them see how much fun it is to be on the front line.

Equal rights are equal rights and equal rights also means equal responsibilities. If they truly want equality, they must be drafted. Why should only men have the responsibility of fighting wars which protect men and women?

This is for both women and gays.

Answer 7

No...and No
I can see the problem of a platoon full of PMS gals, with locked and loaded rifles, all crying with headaches.... who could deal with that? Possibly only a Mormon who has several wives, but normal thinking people couldn't deal with it. As far as gay guys...what about lesbians? Isn't that a fair question too?..anyway..A platoon or company of gay guys..whew..I think that is probably against the Geneva convention.

Answer 8

I don't see why not.

Women are just as capable as men. To prevent them from taking a direct role in combat simply because they're a woman doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

The only reason I'd say no is because of the additional risk female soldiers would be under if captured, and because romance on the battlefield could create conflict.

Answer 9

there're 2 kinds of productivity, one is material re-product (mostly done by men), another one is population re-product (mostly contributed by women), 2 of them keep the human society last generation by generation, If a large amount of women go to the war and die, who give birth to children?..... one woman less means at least one child less, without human, who joins the war 20 years later?

Seriously, as long as men don't extinct, a few of them left could make the population back to normal size in 20 years because one man could impregnant 100 women, that's why soldiers are mostly men.....Now that women take the risk of giving birth, men should take risk of being attacked by invaders.

Answer 10

Point 1: There is No Draft for men or women at this point in time.

Point 2: No, women should not be used in front-line combat
my belief is they will generally not have the stomach for it, its a dirty business, therefore be more of a hindrance in warfare, there are plenty of second-line reserve jobs they can do to free up men for the actual task of combat.

Answer 11

No for one main reason it is the goose that lays the egg not the gander.
Meaning it is the women that get pregnant and have babies not us guys.
As for gays in the military that was stopped during WW I because of problems in the trenches i.e. close quarters in the trenches concerning gays or more to the point gay couples in same outfits freaking out when one of them got killed in action.
Being in the middle of a fire fight is no time for anyone to be freaking out because their lover just got killed.
As far a gays serving in the military there are plenty of support jobs they can do.