House Passes Bill To Automatically Register Young Men for the Draft
The Selective Service should be abolished, not made more efficient and equitable.

The House passed a large defense bill Friday evening that included a provision that would automatically enroll young men between the ages of 18 and 26* for the Selective Service.
The House's version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which would authorize $895 billion in military spending, passed by a vote of 217–199. It's unlikely to be picked up by the Democrat-controlled Senate because of numerous amendments regarding abortion, diversity efforts, and transgender medical treatments. The Selective Service provision, though, is part of an enduring bipartisan effort to keep the framework for military conscription in place, even though the draft ended in 1975.
Automatic registration would replace the coming-of-age tradition that all 18-year-old male U.S. citizens experience when they get a card in the mail from Uncle Sam informing them that they're required under threat of criminal penalties to register for the Selective Service.
Supporters of the legislation framed it as a more efficient and cost-effective method.
"By using available federal databases, the [Selective Service] agency will be able to register all of the individuals required and thus help ensure that any future military draft is fair and equitable," Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D–Pa.) said on the House floor. "This will also allow us to rededicate resources—basically that means money—towards reading readiness and towards mobilization…rather than towards education and advertising campaigns driven to register people."
The other, unspoken effect would be removing young men's choice to engage in civil disobedience.
The draft is a hobby horse for Houlahan, an Air Force veteran. She also spearheaded a House bill in 2021 to require women to register with the Selective Service, effectively doubling the draft pool.
As Reason's Matt Welch wrote in 2021, the Selective Service is not a proud part of America's civic fabric but an on-again-off-again tool of the Pentagon:
The Selective Service System was first founded in 1917 to feed bodies into America's World War I efforts. It was disbanded in 1920, fired back up in 1940, re-formatted in 1948, and then terminated in 1975 as part of Washington's decisive shift to an all-volunteer military. Then a panicky President Jimmy Carter in 1980, alarmed by the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan, reinstituted draft registration as a just-in-case rite of passage for boys to complete within 30 days of their 18th birthday, under theoretical penalty of five years imprisonment and (eventually) up to $250,000 in fines.
While there have only been 14 convictions for Selective Service refuseniks, and none since 1986, those 100,000 or so young men per year who disobey Washington's marching orders are typically barred from working government jobs, receiving student loans, and (in around 40 states) obtaining a driver's license.
There is a growing centrist consensus among liberals and hawkish conservatives on expanding the Selective Service. The American Civil Liberties Union, for example, is fighting for the right of women to be conscripted and argues that the Selective Service is an example of overt sex discrimination.
But equality in the service of a broader deprivation of rights is no virtue, and conscription remains an immoral institution at its core.
"Conscription of any kind contravenes any constitution that professes to guarantee individual liberties," Fred Etcheverry wrote in Reason in 1972, when the draft remained an active menace to young men. "Otherwise, what is to prevent conscription from being the twelve months Senator Taft feared or the two years we now have, the four years of the National Service Act Bill, or forever? If conscription is limited to an emergency, then who decides what is an emergency? Is ten percent unemployment a sufficient enough emergency to warrant conscription?"
Mandatory national service of some sort or another is a perennial bad idea trotted out by nationalists and technocrats concerned about "unity," but America's all-volunteer military is not a self-inflicted weakness. It's a sign of strength—a free citizenry's confidence that they will know when to fight. The Selective Service is a vestige of fear. It should be abolished, not made more equitable and efficient.
*CORRECTION: A previous version of this story misstated the proposed age range of automatic enrollment in the Selective Service.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Freedom isn't free. There's a hefty fucking fee.
Freedom cost a buck o' five.
Fuck Yeah!
Idk why everyone is overlooking the words of the actual bill. Here let me help:.
“AMENDS THE MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT TO REQUIRE THE REGISTRATION OF WOMEN FOR SELECTIVE SERVICES”
https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/fy25_ndaa_executive_summary.pdf
This is what got sent to the senate. It’s not being spoken of anywhere in the media, they’re just hoping to get this slipped in I guess. Fucking horseshit.
They're not overlooking the words of the actual bill. The link you posted is for the bill sent to the Senate by the Senate. This article was for the bill passed by the house. They are not the same thing. This article did talk about attempts at adding women to selective service in multiple paragraphs, though, so it's hardly just being ignored.
I predict more than a few parents will be paying for airfare to send their young men and women to place such as Thailand. I for one would do everything I could to keep my kids out of another useless stupid war that benefits only a few rich men.
F**** you and your draft registration. F***the Army. F*** the Pentagram.
No more American blood shed for the shitehole israel or ukraine.
All wars are banker’s wars.
I disagree, I think we should send all of the Marxist, and alphabet people in the military to the Ukraine front lines. The good news is we don't even have to give them ammo or firearms
You beat me to it. We could use that as a mechanism to cleanse our universities of the Pro Hamas youth. Hell, conscript those commie professors too.
I’m sure Zelensky needs more cannon fodder. And it would be the first useful thing any of those people have done in their entire lives.
I'll give you that. Otherwise allow young people who are learning a trade, something actually useful, to remain home. otherwise they end up as canon fodder while the CEOs of Raytheon, Boeing and Lockheed become wealthier.
More than 70 years of dismal foreign policy disasters.
...the Pro Hamas youth...
It's hilarious that you so-called patriotic Americans are much more irate about the youth supporting Israel's enemies than our own.
Terrorists, they're supporting terrorists and they are enemies to America.
Supporting terrorists? US taxpayers are being forced to send money and weapons to the terrorists in the rogue Israeli regime. That needs to stop.
Yes, because disagreeing with you should be a death penalty offense.
While you're wishing on a star why not wish we had a nation that was so just and so amazing that millions would put their lives on hold and proudly join its military when called to do battle in its defense. Why not wish our nation was so well loved by the world that instead of having hundreds of overseas bases to subtley and sometimes not so subtly influence them a single call from our president got them to do the right thing just because it was right.
It's right there in the name itself, Selective Service, as in you select what branch you'd prefer to go into and you select if you're going to do it or not.
Obviously the military was never going to put you into your selected role unless by chance you also meet the requirements and if they actually need whatever that thing is, but by making it automatic they remove the entire notion of selection.
It's not really a big deal I suppose, since ultimately it probably won't be used and even if there was no selective service obviously they can just show up at your house and take you in the night. They already know who you are and where you live, the form telling them how you'd best like to be fucked was simply a formality.
Government runs on the myth that it protects you from foreign enemies and local robbers. When in reality the government steals far more from you than the robbers ever would, and your role is to defend the government from the enemies it makes, so it can continue the racket.
Where do Reason libertarians stand on taxpayers financing conscription of 60 year old men in Ukraine? Including those with dual US citizenship. They're literally being dragged off the street with a one way ticket into Biden's proxy war meat grinder. If an all volunteer military is a sign of strength what does that tell us about Ukrainian men. I guess they could vote their rulers out of office. Except Tony Blinken says elections are no longer required.
It's (D)ifferent. It's for the survival of one of the best senatorial money laundering ops since democracy was brought to Iraq.
Ukrainian men weren't allowed to flee the war zone, either.
Remind me—where in the US is Ukraine located?
Somewhere between Congress and Raytheon headquarters.
Somewhere in your wallet, if I read the situation correctly.
Well we don't think taxation should exist so...
Nobody should ever be drafted into a woke military that's been made lame and gay and full of overweight clowns who can't tell which bathroom to use.
General Kathleen Kennedy?
Put a chick in it and make her gay!
Draft her, and send her to the eastern front!
#YouToo
"By using available federal databases, the [Selective Service] agency will be able to register all of the individuals required and thus help ensure that any future military draft is fair and equitable," Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D–Pa.) said on the House floor.
And now we know where Jeff, Sarcasmic, Sqrlsy and Buttplug will land on the argument.
Have you considered what the Daily Beast says Trump might do?
Apparently everyone in Washington is warning that he might do to them what they've been doing to him.
Sure is a lot of pearl clutching going on about trumps revenge from the left. (Fucking maddow. Lol.) Almost like they don’t believe in fortification.
I’d like to think that there is just enough fear of something they may not be able to control to keep the dem machine from doing that twice in a row, but I’m a bit of an optimist.
I have no idea what’s gonna happen, but I don’t think there’s any way sleepy joe wins a non fortified rematch. The JFK option seems most likely. Interesting times.
Trump should create a federal appointment titled ‘Lord High Executioner’. Then appoint me to it. Granting broad authority to deal with the Marxist scourge.
I would give those pinkos shitweasels something to REALLY clutch their pearls over.
Don't they have to ask the young people which gender they identify as first, draftable or not draftable?
I would label all the democrats as Pinko Genuine Draft.
Sign them all up for submarine duty.
Genuine Draft Lite
They would all be rejected for obesity and/or drunkenness.
Still suitable to be deployed as human shields.
If Rob Reiner was drafted he could save thousands of lives!
So how would the people doing this tell the cdifference between men and women?
I'm sure the federal government has some biologists on the payroll.
Per Biden's Title 9, all they have to do is ask them which gender they are.
That's why they would have to draft women—so that men could not escape the draft by claiming they're not men.
See, I think that for fairness sake, we need a half century or so where the only people who have to register for Selective Service are female. I don't care what gender they pick.
For equity.
Seriously it's gonna be hilarious to watch them wriggle out of this.
This just shows how much bullshit this poly gender crap is. Selective Service only cares about what’s on your birth certificate. That’s it. You can call yourself a polyamourous dragonkin, but if you came out of your mother with a dick you’d best hope the next big war happens after your 35th birthday.
The American Civil Liberties Union, for example, is fighting for the right of women to be conscripted
There's a right to involuntary labor now?
Equity!
And the the ACLU will push for more arrests and imprisonment of women.
The really funny part is that the modern ACLU can't see how funny it is.
Defending your right to be enslaved, for the good of the collective.
They have no sense of humor whatsoever.
100% safe and effective with no downsides!
Seems as dumb as the people saying "tax me more!"
They can just send the Treasury a check if they want to.
And young women can just volunteer to join the military.
“The Republicans are trying to take away my food freedom to eat vat meat!”
Does anyone ever really volunteer to labor? I sure wouldn't if it wasn't necessary.
Jefferson Davis facepalms from his grave.
Isn't that the core ideology of the anti abortion crowd?
If the ruling elitist vermin wants to bring back the draft, then their kids must be the first ones drafted...with no deferments.
Otherwise, fuck them and their warmongering ideas.
This bill was approved by 211 Republicans and 6 Democrats. It was opposed by 3 Republicans and 196 Democrats. Which party represents the elitist vermin?
Which party represents the elitist vermin?
All of them.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., sponsored the automatic registration language and called it both a money-saving and common-sense reform.
A federal district court ruled in February that the male-only draft is unconstitutional. The White House is appealing that decision.
One could view this sort of legislation as an opportunity for 'libertarians' to spark a serious discussion about how citizens can/should limit government action re war/peace since said war/peace involves mandating citizens to risk something important like their lives and liberty and into long-held issues of conscience like forcing them into acts of aggression and violence.
Instead, this is an opportunity for 'libertarians' to argue that issues of civic importance are irrelevant to citizens. So if the US wants an army, it can only be a mercenary army - a private army - that will only be beholden to those who pay via either taxes or, far more likely, the fraud of issuing public debt to be paid by those who would have in a different country risked their lives/time to serve in the military.
What a crappy irrelevant political ideology.
it can only be a mercenary army
Or, it can be an army of volunteers whom the government has successfully convinced of the the rightness of their military actions.
Something weird and unheard of? Like a well regulated militia?
Average military service now is roughly 14 years. I know we mostly do permawars now but still. That's not a single war. It's a career.
Average is meaningless. What's the median?
They should enroll young women between the ages of 18-26 for the Selective Service. With all this feminism and equal rights BS, it should be a no-brainer. If women ever have to be drafted, we will see a surge in pregnancies like never before. Thats because most feminists are there for good parts of feminism, but the bad parts of feminism, not so much.
Shit, we saw it in the Navy during Desert Storm with volunteer forces.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/jun/15/20040615-115647-8125r/
Of course, modern leftists feel that there’s nothing a pregnant woman can’t do as well as a man, so maybe this won’t be a problem after all.
pregnant woman
Please! It's "birthing person".
Yep. Some of the chicks in my unit worked very hard to get knocked up before our unit was deployed.
A DD and ban from all Federal financial assistance (e.g. WIC) would tend to discourage that. As would mandatory abortions.
Or what was done to GIs who got VD during WWII -- an active duty extension of the time "owed" the government, in this case nine months...
No punishment for soldiers who father the babies?
Uh... nominally there is a war being fought, you're already short-handed, and her body, her choice. What are you going to do, pull the men out of combat roles for having sex?
Once again, Chesterton and fences. One of those things that you've had the rule for so long, you forgot why you had it, even the moral pretenses as to why you put it up in the first place. So you tear it down. Then when the coyotes are harassing your livestock and stealing shit off your porch and you can hear the wolves in the distance... the fence seems to be between exceedingly benign and beneficial.
Because as bad as women having babies solely to get out of service is, there are always worse ideas. Like forcing them to serve while pregnant. Or worse still, using them as a domestic political para-military psyops force.
Donnie will be pleased to find he has more goose-steppers for his beloved military parades. With full immunity and a chokehold on the judiciary Donnie can pursue his goal of eradicating all political enemies and other "vermin".
Literally pushed by Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D–Pa.), but this retarded politruk troll thinks he can blame the anti-war candidate.
Votes in favor of HR 8070
Republicans 211
Democrats 6
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/118-2024/h279
(all together now for ML, Jesse, and other Trump-tards):
DEMOCRATS FAULT!
I realize that you hate reading stuff, but this is literally from the very article above that you are trolling under:
"The draft is a hobby horse for Houlahan, an Air Force veteran. She also spearheaded a House bill in 2021 to require women to register with the Selective Service, effectively doubling the draft pool"
But in the end she voted with the rest of the Democrats against the bill, and it wasn't because of the draft. Oh, no. Your Nazi's were 100% for that.
That article you won't read lays out exactly why. The Republicans removed all your proggy tranny and babykilling shit:
It's unlikely to be picked up by the Democrat-controlled Senate because of numerous amendments regarding abortion, diversity efforts, and transgender medical treatments.
This is exactly why Open Society fired you, Plugly. Your "sick burns" and hot takes that end up making Team Blue look even more retarded.
Your “sick burns” and hot takes that end up making Team Blue look even more retarded.
Honestly, I can't help but be impressed by that. Making them look more retarded is a godsdamned difficult task.
Shrike is up to that task. Between marathon child porn viewing of course.
So it’s got bipartisan support (that’s how it works now right)?
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., sponsored the automatic registration language and called it both a money-saving and common-sense reform.
Remind me which party has been trying to get rid of its main political enemy for the past 8 years?
Remind me which president kicked off his 2024 campaign with the promise “I am your retribution”?
presidential candidate I meant, obviously
Imagine thinking that retribution for the American citizen is bad. For a formerly homeless alcoholic hick you have a remarkable tendency to think like an eighteenth century French aristocrat.
It's all the CNN watching, huh?
Just to be clear, you are defending promises of vengeful punishment against political enemies. Others in the past have made and followed through with such promises. We know who they were and what happened next. Why is this something you want?
Just to be clear, I am defending promises of vengeful punishment against criminals and fascists who shit all over the constitution and are doing Nazi and Stalinist shit RIGHT FUCKING NOW, shill.
If your Stasi are allowed to get away with what they are currently doing, using the FBI and the political apparatus against dissenters and the political opposition, unpunished, then it is truly the end of the fucking Republic.
They absolutely have to be punished so severely that no fucking bureaucrat ever thinks of doing what they are doing ever again. Trump needs to make the rubble bounce.
But you don’t want that because you’re totally cool with spying on citizens, political prosecution, mass censorship and a two tiered justice system if it helps team blue.
Idiot fascist drunk.
Remind me which candidate is actually pursuing retribution against political enemies.
There’s a difference between being his supporters (who the democrats clearly hate with a passion) retribution and literally using the government apparatus against your political enemies.
Even Westboro Baptist couldn't have thought this stuff up. You've got to watch the clip.
BREAKING: LA City Council members have removed "No U-Turn" traffic signs in a gay neighborhood.
They say the signs were homophobic.
No, this is not satire.
Fucking truth is truly stranger than fiction.
I'd like to say this is peak Clown World but I'm always proven wrong.
I don’t get it
I think John's were cruising for dick in the neighborhood, and were turning around to pick up the gigolo. Must have been bad to put up traffic signs. Somehow removing the signs are a "win" for the LGBTQXJD+ community.
Maybe the expert, E Nolan Brown, is going to write an expose on it soon.
Sad
Maybe they’ll replace them with “Don’t Turn Around” signs.
Keep straight signs feel appropriate trolling.
My city, Spokane, Washington just arrested two teens on felony charges for leaving skid marks that scuffed ‘pride’ related street graffiti.
Toss a crucifix in piss and get an arts grant, burn an American flag and set a bomb off in the Capitol and get three books and a movie, but don't you dare blaspheme the alphabet sex cult symbol.
For a moment When I read the headline I thought it was Babylon Bee or The Onion.
Consumer sentiment unexpectedly falls to lowest level in months
People are idiots, believing what they see in their bank accounts instead of what award winning economists like Paul Robin Krugman say.
Haven't they seen that Blackrock, Amazon, Koch Industries, Halliburton and Berkshire Hathaway are making windfall profits? It must be Trump and the Rethuglikkkans deceiving them.
Real GDP (inflation adjusted for Trump-tards) up record $2 trillion with Sleepy Joe.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/248154/quarterly-us-real-gross-domestic-product-gdp/
As long as GDP includes government spending it is meaningless, because government steals and borrows without producing anything of value.
So glad you can learn basic things from the constant berating you recieve. In another 20 years you may understand things slightly.
Fucking this
You get a gold star for that! Oh wait, your democrats have reserved those for the Jews.
Food truck based economy!
And yet Americans have never been poorer. When are you going to learn that the record profits for Halliburton and Berkshire Hathaway aren't trickling down to anyone.
"Trickle down economics" would probably work if the inflation weren't raising things faster than the trickling was descending.
"The American Civil Liberties Union, for example, is fighting for the right of women to be conscripted and argues that the Selective Service is an example of overt sex discrimination."
Well, it is. I don't know how to feel about this. On the one hand it's decidedly unfair that young men have to register and young women don't. But it is of course even more unfair that anyone has to register.
I guess from a pragmatic standpoint, I'm in favor of requiring women to have to register and potentially be drafted. Because I suspect that is probably the most effective way to get the entire thing abolished.
That they’re not pulling their typical social engineering bullshit with the military for once, probably means they’re serious this time.
That’s probably the most terrifying aspect to all this.
Yeah, abolish it.
But if there's literally no difference between men and women (you can choose to be either these days), how can women be exempt from the draft?
We’ll see what wine moms think about the dreamy Zelenskyy when their adult children are pulled out of the basement and sent to Fort Jackson for “training”.
A democrat used the word equitable; it MUST be a bad idea.
The Selective Service should be abolished, not made more efficient and equitable.
Ultimately, yes. But given the choice between a system that is more “efficient and equitable” and one that is less so, the former is certainly preferable.
But If the Feds are able to send out cards to everyone required to register, then what is the point of the act of registering anyway? They already have the information needed to contact those people, so just copy it into the “registration” database and be done with it. But where are they getting that info in the first place?
But where are they getting that info in the first place?
Credit check?
Don’t educators like Dean Wormer notify their local draft boards on behalf of their students when they become eligible for conscription?
In 2003, Charlie Rangel introduced a bill bringing back the draft - but with extreme restrictions on how to get out of it or on how to get plum assignments, intended to show that the Republicans who support the draft nonetheless are against it when there's a risk to their own children. And sure enough the bill went down. (He introduced another such bill a few years late.
He was quoted as saying: "I truly believe that those who make the decision and those who support the United States going into war would feel more readily the pain that's involved, the sacrifice that's involved, if they thought that the fighting force would include the affluent and those who historically have avoided this great responsibility,"
In the later bill he also suggested a war tax.
His own position was that he disapproved of the US's willingness to go to war, and to sacrifice US lives (while keeping the scions of the wealthy and the influential away from the risks of combat), and he decided that if the People in general directly had to bear the cost in lives and lucre, they would be less willing to support the US's wars.
Rangel voted against his own 2003 bill. In fact, only two members voted for it. 402 members voted against it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_National_Service_Act
Yup. This made it very difficult for the GOP then to being in their own bill, as Rangel intended.
There's no way wealthy democrats would support a draft bill that wouldn't exclude their privileged children. Rangel was 100% correct, he just wasn't quite correct for the reasons he believed.
CHARLIE RANGEL!
Just another example of why Representative Government isn't.
The MIC needs to be starved.
No problem avoiding the draft under the Biden administration. If you are a male, simply claim you now identify as female. Viola! Problem solved.
Of course that means that FtM transgenders are now draft eligible in their place. So if there ever is another draft, I bet that will reverse that fad really quick.
"House Passes Bill To Automatically Register Young Men for the Draft"
Misleading, clickbait headline. At least the text makes up for it.
One section of the 536 Section, 180,000 word, 1008 page (PDF) bill included this language.
Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., sponsored the automatic registration language.
The House passed the National Defense Authorization Act mostly because it had to.
The LP formed in 1971 and as soon as our 1972 vote hit home in January of 1973, the looters got their bench-warmers to make our women's plank into Roe v Wade and our draft plank into quiet back-burner policy. Now that the Dems and Grabbers-Of-Pussy have tasted machine-jamming libertarian vote clout, Dems hurry to protect women from slavery and youth from book, Beatles album and witch-burning prohibitionists. The GOP has no alternative but to calve off disgusting fanatics as a Jesus Caucus and schaisstposters in the Reason comments. Beginning in 1933, they had no alternative but to support Il Duce, Silvershirts, el Caudillo de Dios, the KKK, Bund and White Hitler's gang. History rhymes again. https://libertariantranslator.wordpress.com/2023/10/16/neutralizing-libertarians/
I think you are confused. In 1933, it was Democrats who belonged to the Klan.
American leftists supported Stalin, Mao Zedong, Castro, Pol Pot and Ho Chi Min. Now they support Hamas. At least they are consistent.
The Selective Service should be abolished, not made more efficient and equitable.
Yes, but like the border dispute, while we're working and waiting on the Ultimate Libertarian Solution, let's make it more equitable in the meantime.
The American Civil Liberties Union, for example, is fighting for the right of women to be conscripted and argues that the Selective Service is an example of overt sex discrimination.
This is the moment where CJ has the opportunity to understand that the thing is never the thing, the thing is always the revolution.
When I was 18, I strongly supported the Equal Rights Amendment, which the states were voting on. In part, it was out of self interest, even though I'm a guy. I figured that there was no way the Congress would support drafting women, so if the ERA passed, the draft would be ended for everyone. Whether or not that would have happened, I guess we'll never know. But it seems much less certain now, even if something like the ERA were to pass.
Young men...until the day comes when all "young" persons, be they male, female, trans, whatever, are equally included in such, then any and all notions of equality, equity, diversity, etc. are a joke.
The Selective Service should be abolished, not made more efficient and equitable.
Full stop. This is the way.
The calls for “We should get rid of the draft but if we’re not, it should be equitable.” are fundamentally morally compromised idiocy. There’s a bit of “men should just claim to be women to get out of the draft” devil’s advocacy going on, and I get that, but the rest is, as indicated, 100% intellectual and moral compromise.
The sink hole is engulfing the slippery slope that we’re more than halfway down and people are acting like a liberty-for-equity trade leaves us standing at approximately the same level. Like, “If we let them double the human capital they take, *maybe* they’ll pay out at a better rate!” when they shouldn’t even be doing business in the first place.
No drafting women. It’s been seen that women won’t defend themselves. We’ll get “Historic first woman who can’t answer the question ‘What is a woman?'” and “My body, my choice. Mask up, get vaccinated, or get your other rights taken away.”
Certainly not all women will fall for this. But the idea that women broadly don’t value men, even as objects, until the men are taken away and the women themselves are threatened is exceedingly anti-human and misogynistic. Imagine a man saying women shouldn’t get abortion but they also shouldn’t get drafted. That person is fighting for a life either way. Regardless of if someone thinks they’re a patriarch, they’re making a moral choice to save lives. The corresponding person, man or woman, that says women should have a choice to abort *and* should be subject to the draft. They would have the label of “feminist” but their position would be a fundamentally anti-life and immoral one.
The problem isn't that men and women don't want to volunteer for military service, it's that they don't want to volunteer for service in a "Woke" military! We have no one but the Left to thank for the degradation of our once great fighting force.
You lost me right here:
Seriously? We should stick with inequitable and inefficient current system? That makes no sense.
Selective service registration is the furthest thing from a serious problem, we can't assume that we can quickly summon a purely volunteer military in the event of a war, having the ABILITY to implement a draft of all eligible citizens is reasonable ABILITY for the federal government to have.
If I had a gripe, it would be regarding the exclusion of women from registration, but I'm old enough to be of a generation that doesn't think women should be forced into military service, but young enough to support the idea of women serving in the military in any capacity they are capable of and interested in.
The House's version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which would authorize $895 billion in military spending, passed by a vote of 217–199. It's unlikely to be picked up by the Democrat-controlled Senate because of numerous amendments regarding abortion, diversity efforts, and transgender medical treatments.
Side note : What is abortion doing in the NDAA ?
The House needs to stop. While I was the first of anyone of my peers to sign up, I do understand that I know of several people over the years who decided not to fill out the paperwork. They had religious or moral reasons to forgo the SSA mandate. I am trying to wrap my head around why the government would add Amish men to the roles. This is not Europe or Israel where the government just forces you to do stuff like this and enrolls you in whatever program they want.