Hunter’s strategy in debating this topic is typical of social conservatives, demonstrating their inability to understand how to make an effective argument (or, alternatively, when not to make one at all). As per usual, something is naively assumed about the subject of the minor premise. All war is hell; women should be protected from hell; therefore, women should not be sent to war.Share
I will note in passing that this is not actually an argument against forcing women to register with Selective Service, but one against permitting women to be in combat—and that unsinkable luxury liner has already sailed.
Hunter, himself a veteran, showed graphic images of combat maimings and killings to the committee: “The draft is there to get more people to rip the enemies’ throats out and kill them,” he said.
How did he assume that this would be interpreted? That women should not be permitted to be in the military, where they may be asked to rip out the throats of our enemies?
On what basis? (Read more.)