LDS Freedom Forum

As we all know, women are now allowed to serve a mission as early as the age of 19. More recently, the Defense Department announced that it is lifting its ban on women serving in combat. Women will now be eligible to serve as infantrymen on combat patrol and even in elite special operations units. A thought occurred; could there be any correlation to these two changes in LDS policy and US combat policy? During the Vietnam War, LDS men serving a mission were granted a deferment. Thoughts?

That's an idea I had not thought of.

As long as you only send "women" like Napolitano and Hillary onto the front lines then fine. However I would oppose the US government drafting young women for combat. If it ever came to that I would urge all young women to take steps to avoid service -- in other words pregnancy.

rko_2002 wrote:As we all know, women are now allowed to serve a mission as early as the age of 19. More recently, the Defense Department announced that it is lifting its ban on women serving in combat. Women will now be eligible to serve as infantrymen on combat patrol and even in elite special operations units. A thought occurred; could there be any correlation to these two changes in LDS policy and US combat policy? During the Vietnam War, LDS men serving a mission were granted a deferment. Thoughts?

Great observation! I do think you are on to something.

There was talk about women now being drafted and a mission could help young lds women from going to war. There is supposed to be a big war, so this idea could very well be correct. I wonder if being assigned to combat units will be random and required or if women will have a choice. That would be really sad if a bunch of women will soon find themselves ordered to the front line. Only some wanted this but all will have to suffer?

Second thing I thought of when they lowered the age, a huge war could be coming... How do men avoid it? Get their wives pregnant? I'm on the later years of the draft (unless they raise it) err...

Thanks for the connection of the new women policy!

What is the draft ages?

From a quick search on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_System" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Selective Service law as its 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 the Selective Service, Congress would have to amend the law, which currently exempts women from registration.[42] The constitutionality of excluding women was decided in 1981 by the United States Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg, with the Court holding that registering only men did not violate the due process clause of the Constitution. "The existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicates the basis for Congress' decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them."[43]
At the request of President Bill Clinton, the Department of Defense reviewed the issue in 1994, noting that because women are excluded by policy from front line combat positions, excluding them from the draft process remains justifiable in DoD's view. Although no conclusions were reached, DoD recognized that policies regarding women need to be reviewed periodically because the role of women in the military continues to expand. The Selective Service System takes the position that it would be able to register and draft women with its existing infrastructure, if given the mission and additional funding.[42]
On January 23, 2013, the Pentagon decided to end its policy of excluding women from combat positions. Military and Legal analysts speculate that this will open the door for Congress to begin the process to amend the law and remove the exemption from registration requirements.[44]
[edit]


Intersting, didn't think the possibility of women being in the draft would happen. But then again our society and culture has changed - women are doing most evrything the men do already. So, we get the gays into the military (openly) and now women fighting the front lines and possibly joining the draft, and the shifting going on with the generals, what is going on?

Fiannan wrote:However I would oppose the US government drafting young women for combat.

Women in combat reminds me of the Book of Mormon. When the women and children were recruited as soldiers, the country's days were numbered, therefor, I have been concerned ever since women were "allowed" to be recruited as combat soldiers. Not a good thing. Most definitely not a good thing.

Melissa wrote:From a quick search on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_System" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Selective Service law as its 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 the Selective Service, Congress would have to amend the law, which currently exempts women from registration.[42] The constitutionality of excluding women was decided in 1981 by the United States Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg, with the Court holding that registering only men did not violate the due process clause of the Constitution. "The existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicates the basis for Congress' decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them."[43]
At the request of President Bill Clinton, the Department of Defense reviewed the issue in 1994, noting that because women are excluded by policy from front line combat positions, excluding them from the draft process remains justifiable in DoD's view. Although no conclusions were reached, DoD recognized that policies regarding women need to be reviewed periodically because the role of women in the military continues to expand. The Selective Service System takes the position that it would be able to register and draft women with its existing infrastructure, if given the mission and additional funding.[42]
On January 23, 2013, the Pentagon decided to end its policy of excluding women from combat positions. Military and Legal analysts speculate that this will open the door for Congress to begin the process to amend the law and remove the exemption from registration requirements.[44]
[edit]


Intersting, didn't think the possibility of women being in the draft would happen. But then again our society and culture has changed - women are doing most evrything the men do already. So, we get the gays into the military (openly) and now women fighting the front lines and possibly joining the draft, and the shifting going on with the generals, what is going on?

Yeah I agree, I do not really know what is going on but I doubt it is good.

Intersting, didn't think the possibility of women being in the draft would happen. But then again our society and culture has changed - women are doing most evrything the men do already. So, we get the gays into the military (openly) and now women fighting the front lines and possibly joining the draft, and the shifting going on with the generals, what is going on?

One thing women can do that men can't is have babies. During WW2 Russia had some women who chose to fight with the Red Army but only men were forced. So even after millions of men died in the war the birth rate afterwards actually increased. Why? Becase Stalin urged women to find good men, preferably married ones, and get pregnant by them. So even in a devastating war
women can replace the population. However, if they die in war that kills the future of the country even if the country wins the war.

Or maybe that is what the elite really want?

A Random Phrase wrote:

Fiannan wrote:However I would oppose the US government drafting young women for combat.

Women in combat reminds me of the Book of Mormon. When the women and children were recruited as soldiers, the country's days were numbered, therefor, I have been concerned ever since women were "allowed" to be recruited as combat soldiers. Not a good thing. Most definitely not a good thing.

In fact, it reminds me of Coriantumr and Shiz, well, I think we all know how that turned out...

Either way, my whole stance on the military is if they had to draft someone, draft me, and let my wife be the mother that she decided to be. Because I respect my own wife's decision, and support it, in fact, I would give my life for it.

Fiannan wrote:

Intersting, didn't think the possibility of women being in the draft would happen. But then again our society and culture has changed - women are doing most evrything the men do already. So, we get the gays into the military (openly) and now women fighting the front lines and possibly joining the draft, and the shifting going on with the generals, what is going on?

One thing women can do that men can't is have babies. During WW2 Russia had some women who chose to fight with the Red Army but only men were forced. So even after millions of men died in the war the birth rate afterwards actually increased. Why? Becase Stalin urged women to find good men, preferably married ones, and get pregnant by them. So even in a devastating war
women can replace the population. However, if they die in war that kills the future of the country even if the country wins the war.

Or maybe that is what the elite really want?

Well, I doubt that they care if women cause depopulation by not having enough babies or aborting them, how far away is putting them in the line of fire from that idea? As far as I am concerned, your gender will not matter in the end, I am pretty sure the enemies of God will give out the order to anyone, man, woman, or even schoolchild, to destroy the church of God, and you will either go with that order or you will join, or at least ally out of detestability of that order. (Disclaimer: Just my Speculation)

However, the true part is, the adversary doesn't discriminate in whom he calls to oppose the Lord, as Jezebel and milder modern anti-mormon women could attest.

Fiannan wrote:

Intersting, didn't think the possibility of women being in the draft would happen. But then again our society and culture has changed - women are doing most evrything the men do already. So, we get the gays into the military (openly) and now women fighting the front lines and possibly joining the draft, and the shifting going on with the generals, what is going on?

One thing women can do that men can't is have babies. During WW2 Russia had some women who chose to fight with the Red Army but only men were forced. So even after millions of men died in the war the birth rate afterwards actually increased. Why? Becase Stalin urged women to find good men, preferably married ones, and get pregnant by them. So even in a devastating war
women can replace the population. However, if they die in war that kills the future of the country even if the country wins the war.

Or maybe that is what the elite really want?

:ymdevil:

I think that it's sad and sick that we have to open this option right now, and we don't even have a mainland invasion with millions of our own people killed. What's sad is we can only see too clearly who will get blamed for the dead, burned, mutilated women coming home in body bags.

I understand the number of YW applying for missions has far outpaced those by YM, since the announcement, and that the missionaries will soon be about 50-50.

Also, with these changes, I am quite sure an effect will be that far fewer LDS (who serve missions younger) will go into the military.

I welcome these changes!

DrJones wrote:I understand the number of YW applying for missions has far outpaced those by YM, since the announcement, and that the missionaries will soon be about 50-50.

Also, with these changes, I am quite sure an effect will be that far fewer LDS (who serve missions younger) will go into the military.

I welcome these changes!

A little update to your figures, a news source (some skepticism from myself, but a figure, projects that there may be a near doubling of the total missionaries in the church (projection: 90,000).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... s/1844423/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This would be a bad thing if woman were drafted. I don't even agree with the recent combat lift for woman. These changes are for the worst and yes I agree something is coming down the pike. It's a sign to me that when the ages for missionaries has dropped and these recent changes for within our military.

sadie_Mormon wrote:This would be a bad thing if woman were drafted. I don't even agree with the recent combat lift for woman. These changes are for the worst and yes I agree something is coming down the pike. It's a sign to me that when the ages for missionaries has dropped and these recent changes for within our military.

Not to mention within a short time for each other. It is my honest concern when I see plenty of people talking about equality in the military who at the same time somehow profess to fighting for a right against abuse of. Well, honestly, that's a dangerous road, and I don't think all of the reasons are fit to type on this page, but I trust that anyone on this forum can either figure them out, or at least read these editorials in case they can't figure it out in their heads. Does someone who think a woman being abused is bad not also think putting oneself in the most likely place to get hit, badly wounded, crippled, and add a bunch of women and potential mothers to those suffering from PTSD, severe depression, and other post-war sicknesses down the road, I know that there are women casualties from combat medics and other support positions, but this is different, if you are part of the main fighting force, the enemy pretty much guarantees you as a priority target. The Israelis pretty much figured that out early when really defending their own nation, but we somehow ignore that part of history.

http://townhall.com/columnists/douggile ... page/full/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://sergesblog.blogspot.com/2013/01/ ... -idea.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Either way, it just is an awful precedent, and it seems not coincidentially, a daunting one given that we are opening for more missionaries, mostly sisters to serve, it almost feels as if the world set up a countereffort to what we are doing. Hopefully though, my instinct proves right, and what really ends up happening is that few, if any, women actually, volunteer for real combat. I hope not, that probably would be another problem for the children down the road having mothers who potentially allowed themselves to be corrupted with the same violence as guys, and people need to realize that war violence isn't like sports violence or movie violence, it's an entire order of magnitude worse, if there are any movies close to reality, they would be Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan, or Saints and Soldiers. In any of those three, the enemies of war don't fight fair, people really feel awful from what they did, even in cases unintentionally, and yes, the people you don't want to get killed, get killed off. It's brutal, and I would warn anyone with concerns that these movies are all violent and graphic, with Saints and Soldiers being the most mild of the three, but still disturbing and a real challenge to the stereotypical action hero/ action heroine that we see in movies so often.

I think and worry that a lot of women and plenty of men who want the military don't get the point that the military isn't just some career or educational advancement, it's a risky business, and not glorious in the slightest.

Fiannan wrote:As long as you only send "women" like Napolitano and Hillary onto the front lines then fine. However I would oppose the US government drafting young women for combat. If it ever came to that I would urge all young women to take steps to avoid service -- in other words pregnancy.

My problem with the politicians comes along with the old Creedence Clearwater Revival's lyrics, "I ain't no senator's son!" and "I ain't no millionaire's son". I sadly fear that these very women, and their daughters would do what they could to have themselves, and their children, exempt from the very draft that they demand of the rest of us. Again, I can't say it absolutely will happen, but I fear that it will, and that like their children having special safety privileges above the rest of us, a military draft may very well be no exception. I hope the opposite, but I fear the worst, which is that they claim special privilege to avoid a call of duty.

DrJones wrote:I understand the number of YW applying for missions has far outpaced those by YM, since the announcement, and that the missionaries will soon be about 50-50.

Also, with these changes, I am quite sure an effect will be that far fewer LDS (who serve missions younger) will go into the military.

I welcome these changes!

I agree, it's great to see the little sister go on a mission this summer to Belem, Brazil. Funny that I found out that Bélem is Portuguese for Bethlehem. Either way, it's awesome news. I agree, hopefully with the mission field more open, a great many more sisters who want to serve missions can go. It was incredible to hear that at General Conference, and it still is, in fact. It's like they found a way to open it up to more missionaries.

Thank you, A Random Phrase, for your comment which states "Women in combat reminds me of the Book of Mormon. When the women and children were recruited as soldiers, the country's days were numbered, therefor, I have been concerned ever since women were "allowed" to be recruited as combat soldiers. Not a good thing. Most definitely not a good thing."

When I first heard the US government's change in policy I too thought about the Book of Mormon and everyone, including women and children, being called upon to bear arms. Who know if there is a correlation, but in either case, it is not a good sign of things to come.

Yep, rko. A very frightening sign, to be sure.