No, The Government Cannot Have My Daughters

Last night no Republican on the stage stood up against conscripting women into the military. This continues to anger me as a father of 2 girls (and 1 boy). At the time, I tweeted:

“I have 1 boy and 2 girls. My boy can be drafted to serve his country. No problem. Want to conscript my girls, you better SEND the army.”

Yes, I understand that we do not currently have a draft. And in fact they weren’t technically asked about drafting women, they were asked whether they believed we should require women to register for selective service, the predicate to a draft. The conservative answer to that question, as it is to any social engineering of the military is, “no.” There are women who have and do serve our country with distinction in the military – voluntarily.

But requiring selective service registration is a different thing. The entire purpose of registration is that you may be drafted. And due to recent decisions by the Obama Administration women may now serve in direct combat roles for the first time. So understand what they are saying when they say they’ll require your daughters to register. If there is a draft, your daughter may be summoned by the military to fight a foreign enemy – perhaps with able bodied men her age staying at home. And she may be required to serve in actual combat roles, against ISIS for example. Or China. Or perhaps to help defend Ukraine or Poland against a new wave of Russian aggression that previous Administrations were too timid to confront when they could have.

I am on this Earth to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever. But one of my chief sub-duties as a dad is to protect my girls. The suggestion that my girls could be conscripted by the government to be placed into harms way angers me. More than anything President Obama has ever done, the answers at the Republican debate last night makes me want to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights and go gun shopping.

The responses to my tweet have not helped. While most were supportive and fellow fathers echoed my visceral response, a few tried defending requiring my daughters to register for a future draft. The arguments for this seem to fall into 3 categories. I’ll list them and provide a response to each:

  1. The “serves feminists right” argument: This is the logical consequence of the left’s hyper-aggressive feminism. If they’re going to demand women’s equality in every respect, this is the consequence.

— I see the point. And it’s a great argument for why “allowing” women to serve in combat roles should have been fought even harder. But when our daughters are captured by ISIS or some even more barbaric enemy in the future, you know what I won’t be thinking? How the tables have really turned on the feminists now! Yes, aggressive feminism that refuses to acknowledge men and women as complementary (not identical) is stupid. That doesn’t mean we should sacrifice our daughters to make that point. This is not a game.

  1. “The constitution ties our hands” argument: With the Administration now allowing women to serve in combat roles, there is no longer any reason to exclude women from selective service registration. Courts will require men and women both be drafted.

— Let’s assume this is correct and courts will hold that selective service for men only violates the equal protection clause. Are we now saying that Republican Presidents — Commanders in Chief — just have to go along with whatever interpretation of the Constitution a majority of the Supreme Court reaches? We are conceding that the Supreme Court is the sole arbiter of the Constitution? If so, what about abortion? Same sex marriage? Eminent domain for private development? Affirmative action? This is not leadership and it’s not a faithful adherence to their oath of office. For that matter, why even bother with the oath of office for anyone but the Supreme Court? A Republican President should resist this even if he thinks the Courts will try to force him or her to conscript women. Let them try enforcing such an order over the decision of the Commander in Chief.

  1. The “in an emergency we need everyone” argument.

— We fought World War II without drafting women and modern warfare is much less infantry-dependent. I’m no dove. But if we are ever in a position where we must force our young women to serve because there are not enough able-bodied young men then we are overextended. Or a Republican President might question whether we are adequately compensating our military to attract those necessary to build the volunteer army necessary to defend our nation. He doesn’t simply force the women to take up arms because the tens of millions of able-bodied young men aren’t enough.

I simply will not let my daughter (or yours) die for me, as Owen Strachan has written. If any politician, Republican or Democrat, is going to force my daughters into harms way, it will be over my dead body.

Follow me on Twitter at @CaseyMattoxADF