Judge crosses red line: Ruling would mandate drafting young women?

· February 25, 2019  
    Font Size A A A
Gavel on an American flag
FabrikaSimf | Shutterstock

A society that forces women to fight for it is not a society worth fighting for. A country letting unelected judges transform society and decide every social question, including the eradication of human sexuality, is not a country at all. If we, as a nation and as a movement, allow the latest radical judicial ruling to go unanswered, then we are neither a country nor a society worth fighting for.

Late Friday, with the flick of the pen, Judge Gray Miller, a George W. Bush appointee to the Southern District of Texas, gutted the most foundational values of natural law, “ruling” that the all-male Selective Service is unconstitutional. He did not issue an injunction, however.

There are two particular trends of societal transformation without representation that Republicans and even conservatives have allowed to metastasize without any opposition in recent years: judicial supremacy and gender-bending social policies. This latest insane judicial ruling merges the two. There is no longer any room to retreat, to ignore, or to countenance the latest nuclear attack on not just America but humanity in general. This judicial musing should be the final straw that breaks the camel’s back on judicial tyranny and mobilizes us to finally do what our Founders envisioned would happen in the face of a fraction of such judicial tyranny: Completely disregard the ruling.

We have never even had a transparent debate over women optionally serving in combat roles, as the unelected leftist bureaucrats in the Pentagon have unilaterally made these changes without Congress. Now, we have a Republican-appointed judge telling us that the time has passed on debating mandatory conscription of women in combat, when we never even started such a debate. He therefore pronounced the Military Selective Service Act of 1971 unconstitutional. Social transformation without representation indeed.

Let’s be honest: The phony conservative movement has allowed the gender-bending movement to win 50-year cultural battles overnight without meeting any opposition. Let’s also recognize that this same phony movement has legitimized every judicial violation of sovereignty, borders, life, marriage, and human sexuality without much of a fight. Will the most extreme convergence of these two evils finally mobilize us into action?

For too long, many Republicans refused to fight the women-in-combat agenda, convincing themselves that no harm would come of it and that it was strictly voluntary for those women who could somehow meet the standards. Obviously, standards have been lowered, social cohesion in the military has been harmed, and combat readiness has been hampered, as proven by the only comprehensive study done by the military on integrating women into infantry units. But apologists for the “women are men too” agenda failed to see the point. This was no joke. If women are men too, then men are women too. As we are seeing on a daily basis, men masquerading as women are destroying one form of competitive female sports after another.

When you eradicate all legal, social, political, and scientific differences between Adam and Eve, the result is the de-civilization of your society. And now here we are: If women really are men too, then why shouldn’t women be forced into the draft?

Some will dismiss the significance of this judgment given that we currently do not have a mandatory draft. This ruling, if actually acted upon through a future injunction, would only change the status of women for Selective Service. However, they are forgetting why we have Selective Service. One day, we might need a draft, and if women are regarded as 100 percent equal to men in terms of responsibility to physically defend a country, then they will be forcibly drafted if we allow this baseline to be established. Is it too much to ask that we let women be women and, as a society, offer them at least the choice of being defended without having to serve in traditional male roles?

Tiny Israel began as a ragtag nation under siege from all sides with just a few hundred thousand men. It pioneered women in the military but never forced women to serve in the military. Women can fulfill their service obligation through “national service,” which includes jobs like helping out in preschools or shelters rather than being conscripted into military service. What form of insanity would ever prompt people in this country to think a nation of 325 million people should ever have to resort to mandatory draft of all women? That is straight-up immoral. It is a death knell to a civil society.

Rep. James F. Wilson, R-Iowa, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee back in the 1860s who helped draft the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause, said emphatically that it was “establishing no new right, declaring no new principle.” “It is not the object of this bill to establish new rights, but to protect and enforce those which belong to every citizen,” declared Wilson in 1866. We are now to believe that a judge can twist this clause to the point that it can be used to create an insane new principle that countermands the most basic laws of nature and civilization.

I strongly oppose integrating women into infantry units, but there is a very big difference between women who voluntarily want to serve in combat vs. coercing all women to register for Selective Service. For a single judge to believe he can adjudicate such an issue by saying natural law “smacks of archaic and overbroad generalizations about women’s preferences” is hubris beyond belief.

Sure, this was just a declaratory judgement given to a group, “National Coalition for Men,” and not a nationwide injunction. And of course the Selective Service is not currently treated like a draft. But with our national security going down the tubes because of policies in both parties, there could easily be another draft in our lifetime. If we accede to this notion of a unisex utopia, it will destroy the last vestige of our civil society.

Later this week, Congress will debate a resolution implying that the president overstepped Article I by promising to reprogram a few billion in defense funding to secure our own border rather than use DOD funding to construct more walls for Jordan and Afghanistan. One thing legislators will never consider: Any legislation rebuking the even weaker Article III branch of government for usurping every congressional power under the sun, evidently now including the power to “raise and support Armies.”


Want to keep up with what’s going on in Washington without the liberal media slant, establishment spin, and politician-ese?

Sign up to get Blaze Media’s Capitol Hill Brief in your inbox every morning! It’s free!

* indicates required


Author: Daniel Horowitz

Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.