I registered on my 18th birthday at the post office in Texas.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project, who is urging the court to take up the issue, says requiring men to register imposes a “serious burden on men that’s not being imposed on women.”
A lot of people apparently didn’t read the article. Here’s some clarification, followed by some quotes from the article to back it up. (Mobile is being really weird with some formatting shit though.)
1. This isn’t a case of “haha stupid feminists wanted equality and it bit them in the ass.” The article talks about how feminist women deliberately pushed for this case to be heard, as they have in the past, with feminist reasoning backing up the specific issue of women not being required to sign up alongside men.
2. The outcome of this case will not determine whether women will have to sign up for the draft. It will decide whether it is constitutional, and if they find it’s not constitutional, it will be up to congress to figure out what to do about it.
2a. The possibility of *no one* having to sign up rather than *everyone* is discussed.
3.How a male-only draft even survived sex-discrimination laws was explained here by its inextricable link to another controversial rule that stood for a long time: women in combat.
1. “Ria Tabacco Mar, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project, who is urging the court to take up the issue, says requiring men to register ‘imposes a serious burden on men that’s not being imposed on women. It’s also sending a tremendously harmful message that women are less fit than men to serve their country in this particular way and conversely that men are less fit than women to stay home as caregivers in the event of an armed conflict. We think those stereotypes demean both men and women…. The issue of who has to register for the draft has been to the court before. In 1981, the court voted 6-3 to uphold the men-only registration requirement. At the time, the decision was something of an outlier because the court was regularly invalidating gender-based distinctions in cases about other areas of the law. Many of those cases were brought by the founding director of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who became a justice in 1993.”
2. “If the court agrees to hear the case, it wouldn’t be deciding whether women have to register, just whether the current system is constitutional.”
2a. “If it isn’t, then it would then be up to Congress to decide how to respond, either by passing a law requiring everyone to register or deciding registration is no longer necessary.”
3.The last time the high court considered the Military Selective Service Act, then-Justice William Rehnquist explained that the purpose of registration ‘was to prepare for a draft of combat troops.’ He said that because women could not serve in combat, the law was not unlawful sex discrimination that violated the Constitution… But military policy has changed. In 2013, the Department of Defense lifted the ban on women serving in combat. Two years later, the department said all military roles would be open to women without exception.”
Fuck yeah. No issue with women in military at all. Love it. But they should have to register for the draft too. It’s only equal.
They should just get rid of the draft altogether, it’s completely useless today. Last time there was a draft people were rioting and burning their draft cards in the streets, if there was one today im pretty sure they would have to draft people to fight against people fighting against the draft
The registration isn’t the problem, though, it’s basing the draft on gender that is blatantly illegal.