Is Selective Service really anything but going through the motions at this point? You fill out a card on your 18th birthday and never hear about it again until you're too damned old to be drafted anyway.

I never considered the possibility I would be drafted to be legitimate.

What you say is true about the lack of resources for men's health and the relative lack of value placed on men's lives in the US, though.

You're telling me you're not willing to take up arms to defend your friends, your family and everything you hold dear from those who have the desire to take it away from you?

I certainly hope that if the day comes where that idealistic notion of yours is put to the test, you either man up.. or there is someone else around who can do it for you.. and then bitchslap you for being unable to stand up for yourself.

TBH, we aren't likely to ever have another conflict the size of WWII without it wiping out all life as we know it. But, it's possible that we'd see another Vietnam sized action.

That being said, I pretty much only care about the issue on philosophical grounds, it's a blatant violation of at least two constitutional amendments and needs to be resolved in one way or another. I personally think, we should just drop it completely because it's unlikely to come into play.

And it's also a way that the women's movement could express a meaningful commitment to giving as well as taking. Unfortunately, men are still way behind in some areas, even as we're quite far ahead in others.

I'm not in here to start a fight and I think there are a few folks in here who are wound just a little too tightly. I am a lover, not a fighter. Put whatever politcal spin you want to on it, call me whatever names you want, sling mud at me till you are blue in the face, it's not going to change what I am. I love ALL people. Obviously the feeling isn't mutual. So be it. I wish you nothing but peace and love and happiness. Obviously you do not. So be it. I don't criticize you for your choices and I would certainly never look down on you for your choices. If you want to live that way fine, but don't ask me to participate. It wont change the fact that in my eyes all people are created equal and I hold you with as much high regard and respect as someone who agrees with me on these issues. We are not countries and we are not borders. We are people. One and the same and forever.

I certainly don't wish that on anybody. Such stupid situations don't solve anything. Really, they don't.

And people who believe that generally get wiped out by people who don't.

I'm seen some suggestions that it may be why we're still around and the Neanderthals aren't; they were too nice and we wiped them out.

That's both incredibly cynical and generally only represents life in the ghetto. And even in the ghetto it's a stretch to say the least.

Being violent is one strategy that one can take, but as a species we're taking a different tack. Humans are getting generally less violent in the past, a lot of the head line news stories would never have been considered notable enough to talk about 80 years ago. I mean, rape within marriage was legal in parts of the US until the mid '70s.

Oh how I wish the rest of the world could have your notion.

I respect all people. I have no desire to ever see war. I have no desire to ever be in a situation where I have to end another human's life, for any reason, nor do I wish that situation on anyone else (I merely said I hope you could rise to the occasion if it happened).

I wish we could live in a world without borders, without countries, where humans were just humans.. no silly notions about skin color or religions or anything else causing strife.. however I am grounded enough in reality to know that at this time, that is not the case. I am grounded enough in reality to know that war and violence are very real things.. and until the day comes that it ceases being needed, I am willing to stand up to protect those I love from those who wish to harm them.

If that makes you think me a warmonger or a lover of violence, then despite your rose colored glasses, you still things in black and white.

I don't wear glasses.

I'm trying to figure out if you're being a smartass, or don't know the term 'rose colored glasses' >.>

OK. Open your borders, eliminate the police and military, get rid of any weapons you may have, and let me know how well it works.

People can only afford to believe they live in Happy Fluffy World because others are willing to kill to protect them.

If we could get everyone in the world to do that.. we'd be in great shape... until then, you're exactly right.

The actual reason why women were not in combat is because they have successfully trained men to be cannon fodder. Men fight women's wars. When a boat sinks, men are expected to just hand over lifeboats to women just because they are men. The argument against women in combat came from women because they don't want to be drafted!

My question for you is: if women are to be in combat, then shouldn't they have to sign up for the draft like the rest of the men? (Talking about United States here...) I guarantee you that if they were required to be drafted then, they would very quickly say how they are not combat material.

The law does not treat the genders equally. The last thing women want is equality. Look at the jobs out there. Do you see women working construction jobs at the side of the road, working on oil rigs, or being electricians? Where do most women work? They work in 'soft' jobs that are office based and many that lack much responsibility (an elementary school teacher's work is not equal to that of an engineer). If they were interested in equality, they would be wanting to do these engineering classes. But they don't.

If a woman calls the police and screams rape, what is the response? If a man calls the police and screams rape, what is the response?

If a man physically abuses a woman, he is hauled off to jail whether or not the abuse was real. If a woman physically abuses a man, what is he to do? If he is married in some states, he isn't even allowed to run away.

It is women who created the ban on women-in-combat. The only reason why they are interested in lifting it is because they think they women-in-combat will still remain unequal (i.e. a handful of combat women will be given a media reception that they are the eighth wonder of the world while all the combat men remain unnamed and unknown).

If anyone thinks women want equality, friend, you have been duped. Try splitting the cost of a date equally and watch what happens. Heck, watch what happens if you think the relationship should be 'equal' financially and not just the man transferring money over to her. Why not have the women transfer her money to the man time to time in a significant way?

There was a state (forgot which) where the legislature explored modernizing child support to look at BOTH the male and female's incomes instead of just looking at the male's. Boy, women rose up and shut that down fast!

There are many things I do not know about in life. One thing I am absolutely certain though: women do not want equality with men.

Yeah, I guess you're right. Men should be banned from the military. We're not even able to properly function in a mixed gender combat unit; hormone driven clowns like us shouldn't be allowed to handle advanced weaponry.

There are states in the US that do this, in fact I think it's the rule rather than the exception now. It's based on income and parenting time and there are men in my state receiving child support. The rub is most women haven't been earning much at the time of divorce because they'll be the ones opting to do stuff for the kids, that's the results.

Many of your views are rather backwards, but I thought I'd point out that this particular one is outright wrong.

Divorces do not yet come out equal, that much is painfully true, and more are initiated by women. But if the woman is earning more and the father has at least 30% parenting time he'll get child support. Men can also receive spousal support, though in practice I don't know how often this happens.