Doesn't seem quite the same to me.

and a possible consequence of being drafted.

At the time, I compared it to kidnapping. Actually, I still do.

Seriously? Nobody’s been drafted in nearly 50 years. And if it’s reinstated, women may also be included. Try harder.

Is there an active draft right now? Are males (particularly white males) being impacted by the draft? Did I miss a declaration of war from a man who once said he was going to end endless war?????


Right on f'n cue!!!!!!But what about the menzzzzz (anguished, tortured voice)????? Be sure and let me know when men have to have probes inserted into their reproductive organs against their will, in order to get a LEGAL medical procedure, as decreed by a body of non-medical women legislators.

And be sure to let me know when a bunch of republican state legislators, on a daily basis, are passing laws restricting male bodily autonomy, closing clinics where men can get LEGAL medical services. Let me know which catholic health care systems (often the only system for hundreds of miles), restricts or refuses any medical procedures for men.

Just another version of "all lives matter".

He went AWOL after 5 days of boot camp. It took months to catch him, but they finally did, and asked him why he had done so. He repied, "Well, the first day they gave me a comb. The second day they too me to the barber and shaved off all my hair. The third day they gave me a toothbrush. The fourth day they took me to the dentist, and he took out all my teeth. The fifth day they gave me a jock strap. And that's when I went AWOL."

I hardly think the draft is relevant to this election, since there hasn't been one since the very early 1970s.

Threats to women's reproductive rights, on the other hand, are happening even as I write this.

You might want to consider that, while you're at it.

Really? That is what we are going to do here 3 months from the most serious election America has ever faced?

N/T

That OP is mine - Harris supposed bollocks comes from a satire site

Sorry for shouting!

Would take an act of Congress to reinstate the draft.
Meaning the prior draft is no longer a law.

We are playing into right wing talking points on day one. Not you but ^^^^ . For fucks sake. If this is how we are going to play for the next 3 months we are not going to win, One voice on this is everything.

But there's one in every crowd, as grandma used to say. More to come, no doubt. Flick them off like bugs. Gran used to say that, too.

Stay encouraged, Soph0571.

Thanks for sharing this with us.

❤ lmsp

All of this. And please call me Soph. Only call me Soph0571 when you are cross with me. Then I know i have fucked up!!!

This is the only possible example of a law that could regulate men and not (in the past) women

I was citing it as a tentative example. There are very obvious differences between conscription and the multitutde of laws restricting reproductive freedom. I wrongly thought these were obvious.

My intent was never to hijack the thread, you are reading an intent that never existed

You people really need to chill out.

Where have I heard that before?

for decades.

...the OP contained an open ended question.

That encourages people to reply with the first accurate thing that pops to mind.

But, I understand your point! And agree!

It's the whole point of using them in pedagogy and in interviews. They don't elicit *yes or no* answers.
Stimulates thought and evokes a response.
I'm not recalling the psychology behind it, but it's accepted practice in many fields to use open ended questions for this very reason.

I am asking where did I ask an open question. I made a statement.

The main question in the title!
You made a statement. And a sound one.
The title is a take from the quote attributed to Ms. Harris, which asks "Have you ever heard of a law...". That was the question that you said "had" you
That's open ended. It makes people consider an answer.
It's nothing you stated. It's really Kamala's question.

You are so eager to read something into my post that was never intended.

What is wrong with you people? I just just amazed and appalled at the responses here. It was a 4 word reply with a question mark after it. Suddenly I am now part of a right wing conspiracy to lose the election.

BTW, my screen name is not ^^^^

If you are going to accuse me of introducing right wing talking points you should address me by my proper screen name.

-

That was my impression anyway.

Now go out there and work to get Biden/Harris elected, and all will be forgiven.
=======

I will miss her as a senator, and will welcome her as a Vice President

-

thank you.
=========

1. There isn't a mumbling word in the draft laws which preclude women from being drafted. During WWII Congress came within a month of authorizing women being drafted into the Nurse Corps. Until the mid fifties only women could serve in the Nurse Corps.

2. Until the mid seventies only 2% of the active duty force could be women. Further, because the combat restriction a great many of the jobs were off limits to women. Again until the mid seventies women couldn't serve on board ships or be air crew members (exception air evac and hospital ships and that was officers only, MDs and Nurses). Most of the combat support jobs were also off limits.

3. Except for a very short period during WWII, there have always been more women volunteering that there were available slots. In 1962 my recruiter told me that for every ten women who volunteered only one was accepted.

4. One of the reasons these restrictions started to go away is ... wait for it ... the draft ended.

Now if we get into another major shoot out, women may well be drafted. We'll see.

Follow up question,

Have there been women in positions of power in the United States to directly send men to war against their wishes?

You can be technically correct and still VERY wrong.

The gov't does not control male sexuality/reproduction like it does to women. It is true there are many antichoice women and prochoice men - but overall it is male society which seeks to subjugate women. Thus, until women have equal representation/power to men in the system, they are far less accountable for the antichoice position than men are.

Historically men started all of the wars and drafted other men to fight it.

The draft, in modern times, is more about conservatives (many of whom are women) and the rich starting wars and not caring if poor or PoC men get used as cannon fodder. IOW it is a class issue.

I believe women will be subject to the draft in the near future, the Obama admin supported this position.

Seems like the government has a lot of control there.

to make decisions about the male body?" No where in that question is it implied it's asking ONLY about the male body. Therefore, my answer is correct.

There ARE laws that give government the power to make decisions about the male body.

This is specifically males.

It doesn't say "ONLY the male body".

"Can you think of any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the
the male body?” The death penalty laws give the government power over the male body.

goals of the antichoice position, which is the subjugation of women.

She was my pick for Prez from the start. I'll settle for VP. And yes, Vice President Kamala Harris WILL kick their fucking asses.

and the fact that the traitor called kamala nasty is even better,,,every woman he is petrified of he calls nasty.

let them whine. We have a ticket that can drum trump and his grifter family and corrupt administration out of Washington D.C. Just let them whine. It's a done deal and anyone who doesn't like it can go cry in their beer.

After reading many of the comments, my first thought is "why the Democrats are losing........"

Thank you for your thoughts...........

... though it is not common anymore, it has been very much used earlier. Some newer examples:
In June 2014, a Virginia judge ruled that a man on probation for child endangerment must be able to pay for his seven children before having more children; the man agreed to get a vasectomy as part of his plea deal.
In 2013, an Ohio judge ordered a man owing nearly $100,000 in unpaid child support to "make all reasonable efforts to avoid impregnating a woman" as a condition of his probation.
Kevin Maillard wrote that conditioning the right to reproduction on meeting child support obligations amounts to "constructive sterilization" for men unlikely to make the payments.

But again it is the women being hit the hardest:
Though formal eugenics laws are no longer routinely implemented, instances of reproductive coercion still take place in U.S. institutions today. Between 2006–2011 148 female prisoners in two California state prisons were sterilized without adequate informed consent.

-

that doesn't make you wrong, because precedents are also part of the law.

There are three type of laws in the US:

Administrative Law (like the building codes),
Legislative law (like those passed by Congress),
and law by Precedent, but unlike the other two, they aren't set in stone.

They are only used by lawyers to support legal arguements in court.
=======

Coerced sterilization as you note, has been applied to both men and women, with women receiving the largest brunt of it.

compassion, and all the other good human characteristics Democrats embrace.

Vice President Biden believes in and lives by the same principles.


If that's nasty, then I'm quite nasty.........