A few weeks ago, Maggie explored the issue of women in combat and asked whether President Obama would be willing to draft Julia (despite the problematic data regarding women in combat roles). Maggie’s latest article featured at FoxNews.com continues that inquiry. You can go here to read the article in full or read an except below:
The Obama administration framed its decision to put women into combat as a matter of choice and fairness. “Not everyone is going to be able to be a combat soldier,” outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said, “but everyone is entitled to a chance.”
But there is little about war that is either about choice or fairness.
Here’s a big question President Obama ought to face head on: Is he willing to draft “Julia” on an equal basis with John and if not, why not? (“Julia” was the Obama campaign’s fictional construct of the average American woman, whose support they sought.)
Because President Obama has just single-handedly gutted the legal rationale for excluding women from the draft.
In 1981, the Supreme Court upheld a males-only draft registration law for one reason alone: “Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft.”
No, they shouldn’t be eligble for the draft because they don’t belong in combat units. But maybe if the daughters, wives, & sisters of those who voted for women to be in combat are drafted first, that may work for me.