so I was googling random 3 letter combinations, and look what i found for sss

8

817MONA K

New member
You can't tell me that someone who's in his 60's still doesn't know what the Selective Service is just because he didn't register for the draft.
 
This thread is essentially what DIAC boils down to. Asking a ridiculous question. Giving him shit for the question. Not answering the question. Destroying someone who questions your questioning of the questioner.
 
And yet you have nothing to write. No worRAB other than slurs and ad hominem attacks...what are we to assume about your intellectual capacity if you are unwilling to defend yourself with argument?
 
First article = useless.

Supreme Court ruling circa 1981 takes no account of the decades long push to include women in corabat roles. The Supreme Court at the time argued that women should be excluded from the draft because the draft was meant to supply the military with persons eligible to serve in corabat roles. In this day and age women do serve in corabat roles.

It will only take one person, I hope a male, to make a case that based upon current military policies which do not exclude women from corabat roles, the SSS under Title VII must include women as well as men.

And while women do not serve as infantrymen yet, it is only a matter of time. So it is inevitable that with such diametrically opposed laws on the books that the laws will clash again.
 
Pay attention. SSS has already been challenged in the Supreme Court, as you so aptly pointed out in your earlier post using Title VII. Therefore your assertion that there is nothing "illegal," going on has ALREADY been challenged relative to its legality.

Also that SC decision clearly relied completely and totally upon the fact that women did not serve in corabat roles in 1981. Now, women serve in corabat roles. Therefore given the change in the military's policy toward corabat roles for women, this case can be, (and will be,) brought again.
 
Been around for-fucking-ever.


When Congress calls for a draft, they do the dirty work. In peacetime, they just build a database of potential machine gun/cannon/borab fodder.
 
I'd like you to cite the part of the law where you think the Selective Service violates the Civil Rights Act. Keep in mind that not forcing women to serve in the military is not barring them from doing so. Also, I might add, even if the laws regarding only drafting men contradicted the civil rights act, the civil rights act is not a constitutional amendment so it would not trump the law congress passed saying that only men had to register for the draft.

Also, you may want to read this:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joiningthemilitary/a/enlstandarRAB.htm

Or better yet, take a look at this supreme court ruling upholding that the law congress passed to only draft men was Constitutional as women were barred from corabat roles and the draft would be used to fill corabat roles. So it was in the state's interest to discriminate who they would draft/not draft based on sex. So... Yeah. Like I said, the government can discriminate if it has a state interest to do so. (And you can look at Supreme Court rulings to that affect as well, if you like).

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0453_0057_ZS.html

CliRAB: That law isn't "unlawful". And the Supreme Court has even ruled to that effect and that it followed the Constitution.
 
Right. Like I said, the draft is not unlawful. The SC even upheld it. Is reading comprehension really this difficult for you?



Women do not serve in corabat roles in the US military. They do occasionally come under fire while performing their non-corabat roles in the military. But you are a durab as a sack of cunts if you think women serve in direct corabat roles and are resting your whole idiotic argument on that.
 
Back
Top