Online Survey: Should women be forced to register for the draft?

There is growing controversy about the proposal to force women to register for the draft. It has become a point of contention in the presidential primaries. Jazz Shaw from reports:

Ted Cruz on Sunday [February 7, 2016] said he opposes requiring women to register for a potential draft, breaking with Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie, all of whom indicated support for opening up the Selective Service to women during Saturday night’s [GOP] debate.

“I have to admit, as I was sitting there listening to that conversation, my reaction was, ‘Are you guys nuts?’” Cruz said Sunday, speaking at a town hall here. “Listen, we have had enough with political correctness, especially in the military. Political correctness is dangerous. And the idea that we would draft our daughters to forcibly bring them into the military and put them in close combat, I think is wrong, it is immoral, and if I am president, we ain’t doing it.”

To applause, Cruz went on to note that he is a father to two daughters, and he wants them to follow their dreams.

jerry boykin

U.S. Army Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin

Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, Family Research Council Action’s Executive Vice President, released the following statement regarding comments made during Saturday’s presidential debate in which several candidates expressed support for requiring women to register for Selective Service:

“Some of the presidential candidates appear to be espousing the politically correct position that women should be required to register with Selective Service. In supporting this draft registration policy, these candidates demonstrate a serious misunderstanding of the imperative for combat effectiveness and of the American people. Ask the question of why America, since the passage of the Selective Service Act, has never required women to register for the military draft. Americans do not want the government to send our daughters into battle against their will, and it is frankly shocking that any Republican candidate for president would not oppose the suggestion in the strongest terms.

“The real issue is whether we should place women in Infantry and Special Operations units where the mission is to close with and destroy the enemy. Removing the restrictions on the types of jobs women may hold means necessarily that some women who are drafted will be involuntarily assigned to units that will be directly engaged in combat with enemy ground forces. Every candidate who wants to earn the trust of the American people should oppose the Obama administration’s policy that is paving the way for requiring our daughters to go to war against their will,” concluded Boykin.

The Selective Service website notes:

Women Aren’t Required to Register – Here’s why:


Selective Service law as it’s written now refers specifically to “male persons” in stating who must register and who would be drafted. For women to be required to register with Selective Service, Congress would have to amend the law.


The constitutionality of excluding women was tested in the courts. A Supreme Court decision in 1981, Rostker v. Goldberg, held that registering only men did not violate the due process clause of the Constitution.

There are nations that have a universal conscription such as Bolivia, Chad, Eritrea, Israel, Mozambique and North Korea. Israel has universal female conscription, although in practice women can avoid service by claiming a religious exemption and over a third of Israeli women do so. Israeli men are required to serve in the Israeli Defense Forces for 3 years and women for 2 years.

Since the founding of America women have volunteered and played key roles in supporting or serving in the military. With the current all volunteer force women are volunteering to serve and most recently the U.S. Department of Defense announced that combat roles have been opened to allow women to join some of the military’s most elite forces.

Please take this quick and confidential survey on women’s roles in the U.S. military:


Why Senator Mike Lee Wants to Keep Women Out of the Draft

Why Women Shouldn’t Be in Combat

Generals Say Women Should Have to Register for Draft

Military appeals courts confront sexual activity by HIV-positive troops

morgan reese with dog ranger

Morgan Reese with her dog Gunner.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Morgan Reese. Morgan is pro-military, pro-Second Amendment, a crack shot and certified gun smith. She is an avid reader of books, particularly those written by former U.S. military special operators.

Morgan resides in Texas and is a professional model, appearing in numerous publications such as Recoil Magazine.

To learn more about Morgan please visit her Twitter page @MorganReeseXO.

2 replies
  1. Philip Blumel
    Philip Blumel says:

    Men shouldn’t be drafted either. Free countries defend themselves with volunteers. Certainly governments do not possess the moral right to press their people into involuntary service.

  2. David Marshall
    David Marshall says:

    Drafting women?
    “The Feres Doctrine should not be applied for military personnel who are harmed by inappropriate human experimentation when informed consent has not been given.”[5] Your suggestions on the to-date unsuccessful elimination of this Doctrine, before drafting women, would be most welcome.

    In 2016 Congress’s own to date ignored “hazardous” human experimentation “lessons” learned now span seventy two (72) years without correction, i.e., 1944 – 2016![5]  A dysfunctional U.S. Congress still withholds military needed for treatment and experimentation identifying records, as proven by their from 1999 through 2007, eight (8) times rejection of the “Veterans Right to Know Act”.[4]
    “To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” is the U.S. Congress’s responsibility under the 1791 U.S. Constitution, Article I, Sect. 8, Clause 14, and under the Bill of Rights, Amendment VIII is the, “…nor cruel and unusual punishments.” [1]&[2] 
    Congress’s own ignored 8 December 1994 U.S. Senate Report is, “Is military research hazardous to veterans’ health? Lessons spanning half a century.”, i.e., human experiments then back to 1944 [5] that are continuing to date! The Senate Report records that “Every year, thousands of experiments utilizing human subjects are still being conducted by, or on behalf of, the DOD.”  In its “I. Introduction” is its’, “III. Findings and conclusions” that states, “K. DOD and DVA have repeatedly failed to provide information and medical follow-up to those who participate in military research…” plus “N. Participation in military research is rarely included in military medical records, making it impossible to support a veteran’s claim for service-connected disabilities from military research.”  To-date U.S. Congress scorned is this 1994 U.S. Senate Report’s, “The Feres Doctrine should not be applied for military personnel who are harmed by inappropriate human experimentation when informed consent has not been given.” On 26 February 1953 was the TOP SECRET Department of Defense (DOD) Secretary’s NO non-consensual, human experiments Memo (Copied, in part, herein).[8]  On 22 Aug. 1975 it was unclassified.  In 1950, three years prior to the Memo, the U.S. Supreme Court Feres Case determined that an accidental barracks fire death was a U.S. is not responsible “incident to service”![9]  Twelve years after the Memo became unclassified, the 1987 U.S. Supreme Court STANLEY decision makes clear that deliberately injured, experimented on and not consenting Military Personnel are “incident to service” guinea pigs![7]  Approved was a U.S. Military, sovereign immunity Doctrine of the king can do no wrong, injurious 1958 non-consensual LSD experiment. It was in direct disobedience of the DOD Secretary’s 1953 order.  “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW” is written above the main entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court Building. The 1987 U.S. V. Stanley Case, Footnote 4, Page 688 states, “To conceal these activities from the american public in general, because public knowledge of the unethical and illicit activities would have serious repercussions in political and diplomatic circles….”.[7]
    The U.S. Congress’s Oath of Office is: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”[10]  Doesn’t this mean the U.S. Congress stopping their own proven betrayal of service personnel [5] by their documented DOD, “experiments that were designed to harm” and the DOD’s “Degrading Treatment” [6] by the rape of service women?  Please require your members of congress to obey their abandoned Oath of Office!  Shouldn’t U.S. Service Personnel have the same U.S. Constitutional, Amendment 8, Rights [2] that convicted rapists and murderers keep under, The International, “…Freedom from Torture, or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.”?[6] Due to honorable military service to our country, forever left behind are those U.S. Constitutional rights granted to convicted rapists and murderers?
    As of 2016 the U.S. Congress has yet to make a “Rule” preventing injurious, non-consensual experiments on and the rape of U.S. Military Personnel!! The U.S. Congress’s Dereliction of Duty? Please have the U.S. Congress put a stop to the current practice of using our deceived loved ones as guinea pigs.[5] Help eliminate the U.S. Supreme Court’s Feres non-consensual, experimentation Doctrine that it is OK to use U.S. Service Personnel as human guinea pigs.[7&9]
    Thank You.
    David Marshall
    100% disabled 1952-1956 USAF Jet Aircraft Mechanic; B.U. 1957-1961 B.S.M.E.
    References:>>> [1] Enacted on 15 December 1791, U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Section 8, Clause 14. “To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces”. >>>[2] Enacted on 15 December 1791, U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendment VIII, Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. >>>[3] 25 July 2012 U.S. Magistrate Judge LSD records decision. >>>[4] The “Veterans Right to Know Act” was proposed by H.R. 3256, 1999; S. 2953, 2000; H.R. 511, 2001; S. 405, 2001; H.R. 5060, 2002; S. 2704, 2002; H.R. 4259, 2005 and H.R. 2434, 2007. >>>[5] December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 “Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans’ Health?….” Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 103rd Congress 2ND Session. >>> [6] “U.S. Report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Article 7 – Freedom from Torture, or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.” “1994 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage>>>%5B7%5D U.S. SUPREME COURT, JUNE 25, 1987, U.S. V. STANLEY , 107 S. CT.. 3054 (VOLUME 483 U.S., SECTION 669, PAGES 699 TO 710) >>>[8] 26 February 1953 Secretary of the Department of Defense no non-consensual human e order, pages 343-345 in, “The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in Human Experimentation” George J. Annas and Michael A. Grodin (N. Y.: Oxford University Press, 1992). >>>[9] Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950)>>>[10]
    The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code; Human Rights in Human Experimentation, in part, page 343:
    Memorandum for the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of the Air Force
    26 Feb. 1953
    SUBJECT Use of Human Volunteers in Experimental Research
    1.  Based upon a recommendation of the Armed Forces Medical Policy Council, that human subjects be employed, under recognized safeguards, as the only feasible means for realistic evaluation and/or development of effective preventive measures of defense against atomic, biological or chemical agents, the policy set forth below will govern the use of human volunteers by the Department of Defense in experimental research in the fields of atomic, biological and/or chemical warfare.
    2.  By reason of the basic medical responsibility in connection with the development of defense of all types against atomic, biological and/or chemical warfare agents, Armed Services personnel and/or civilians on duty at installations engaged in such research shall be permitted to actively participate in all phases of the program, such participation shall be subject to the following conditions:
    a. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. (Emphasis added)
    /signed/ C. E. WILSON
    Copies furnished: Joint Chiefs of Staff Research and Development Board
    22 Aug 75
    Per S. Clements DDR&E OSD (PA)
    Complete (343, 344 & 345 page) copy of the 26 February 1953 memo, on request.


Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *