Death is NOT the Worst of Evils

Should your daughter or wife be forced to fight a war? The Democrat presidential candidates think so. During the CNN/YouTube Democrat debate, they responded to the question, "Should women register with the Selective Service when they turn 18"? Of the five Democrat candidates that responded, all five were adamant that "yes, women should register". They then spent their two or three minutes extolling the wonderful capabilities of our female soldiers. Senator Edwards even took the opportunity to grandstand by showing off the guest of his wife - a female war hero.

According to the Selective Service (SS) website, its not just male U.S. citizens that must register. It is also an obligation for undocumented aliens; and it is also interesting to note that you DO NOT need a social security number to register.

In answer to the SS question, the candidates all qualified their response by saying that they didn't support a draft. That's nice. Then why is it that not one of them, as congressmen, has introduced legislation abolishing the Selective Service? (hmmm. Wait a minute. Where is that copy of the U.S. Constitution I have kicking around. Oh, here it is. Lets see. 13th Amendment. Ah! Let me quote from the Constitution of the United States.

"Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Well well, it seems that they don't need legislation. It was right here all the time. See, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote a complete lack of freedom; it is not dependent upon compensation nor its amount. Military conscription is, therefore, nothing more than involuntary servitude.


Of course all of these answers were nothing more than political posturing. The question posed to the candidates was not, "Do you think women make great soldiers" which in some cases they do. The question was more or less, "Would you force all women to serve?" There is no question that there are a lot of women who already serve capably and honorably. The problem that confronts the military is one of Selective Capabiliity (SC) vs. General Capability (GC). First of all, there is an undeniable physical difference between men and women. On one hand, if we are speaking of SC, there are some women that are FAR more capable than some men at fulfilling the role of soldier, but they are a very small percentage. Contrarily, most men can be taught to fight at least somewhat competently. Men have a fighting instinct even though it is deeply repressed in some. An all volunteer military has resulted in the ranks being filled with the most capable from both genders. Those who are more capable physically and mentally, regardless of gender, will join up. Those who are NOT capable physically nor mentally will not. Speaking of GC, however, as in the case of a draft, the armed forces would be filling up with women who had no place in combat.

Finally, even though the Democrat candidates declare categorically that they do not support a draft, they positioned themselves as progressive supporters of the ability of women to fight. They are mistaken in that they are using SC results to support a GC policy. If women WANT to fight, let them. But supporting a GC policy and thereby sending a woman who is clearly not capable physically nor mentally would be like bringing a knife to a gunfight.