It doesn't matter what you have between your legs, if you are an American citizen you should be treated like an American citizen to the highest extent of the written law, and currently, the written law isn't doing enough.
The government is a slow moving Rube Goldberg machine that has to be readjusted and tweaked over and over to get the marble onto the next part, meanwhile the obstacles are changing. The national government has so many checks and balances and chutes and ladders that it cannot keep up with the cultural shifts occurring daily. This has been shown in cases like civil rights, women's rights, equal marriage laws, gun regulation, environmental policy and gender equality. Society is ready for change and the government can't keep up with making those changes official and protected from those that aren't so "with it".
We all want something someone else has; be it a car, a vacation, that cool t-shirt, or equality. But some of us are granted certain rights inherently by being a human or by being an american citizen. Some humans, who are american citizens, who aren't the "norm" or the "standard" have been kept from those simple inherent liberties like legally pairing with their mate, earning the same salary for doing the same job with the same education, living in a clean world, protecting their family and property from perceived harm (real or assumed), or being expected to participate in tasks as others are required to. Such is the case with women and men being required to participate in the Select Services whether or not the military draft ever be reinstated.
CNN's Ruth Bien-Ghat asked the question that if "Selective Services is the first direct contact with the military many civilians have -- and the only one most will ever have. If it's reserved only for men, what message does this send about gender equity?" It sends the message that women are less than men; in value, in strength, in American society. That we should not earn, defend, and practice all rights available to us as American citizens. Why are some rights locked away from us by age old documents that are not representing the current American society?
As a woman I claim that I am a feminist, that I am for women's rights, and therefore, am not against anyone else's rights. I do not wish for a man to hold the door for me if my hands are full. But if I happen to be a human with my hands full and another human decides that they feel like holding the door open for me then that's awesome and I'll say "thank you" and most likely smile at the other human. We cannot claim "strength" when there is no burden and when the load comes to carry we sit down. We cannot be fair-weather Americans.
The American Government, with the help of many progressive states, is trying to keep up with the forward thinking ideals of the newer generations.
Military.com's article states that "Currently, U.S. law requires most male citizens and immigrants between the ages of 18 to 25 to register in the selective service system. The Senate NDAA would require all female citizens and U.S. residents who turn 18 on or after Jan. 1, 2018, to register as well".
The policies of equal marriage, medical marijuana, and gender quality in the military are just the beginning of getting the federal government truly involved in making blanket policies in American duties to cover each individual no matter what you identify as, biologically are, etc., who wishes to take part in the opportunities provided by the United States Federal Government. The government is trying to keep up with us.
Future policies will hopefully involve anyone who wishes to have America defend their rights granted to them by the United States Constitution. It won't matter whether you're female, male, in transition, undefined, 'color' , etc. The only disqualifications will come down to personal family responsibilities, age, mental and physical capacity (even still there hopefully will be office based, maintenance, or support jobs available). The future American equality policies and laws will hopefully wipe out the biased-hetero-Caucasian-XY-chromosome-favoritism laws that prevent individuals who aren't in that limited group from participating in exercising rights and fulfilling responsibilities given to every American citizen.
Our government is trying its best to keep up with society. They can't do that if we don't let them know what we want. We let them know what we want by voting from local to national. We just need to keep reminding the government that we know what the we want; equality and freedom to be equal under the United States Constitution in written law.
To say the least, equality is not in a very united state. It makes me pause when I realize it's been over 150 years since slavery was abolished and almost 100 years since women's suffrage passed... and we still have many discrimination and race problems in our country today. It makes me pause, and it makes me sad, and it makes me question America's future.
ReplyDeleteSydney describes how our government simply cannot keep up with the changing times. The government is a "Rube Goldberg machine" that "cannot keep up with the cultural shifts occurring daily". I agree, given the size and diversity of the American population, the innerworkings of culture are constantly changing. It's rather unsurprising the government can't keep pace, but that doesn't solve the problems. As Sydney points out, many subgroups of our population are discriminated against, and sometimes legally.
A currently relevant example of discrimination is the Select Services and military draft, which do not involve women. She says such policies send a "message that women are less than men; in value, in strength, in American society." I had not thought about it that way, and I'd really never thought of the unisexual draft as discriminatory. My view on gender might differ from the common conceptions. I believe all genders are equal, in a humane and societal way; people of all genders deserve equal representation and right to express themselves. However, genders, specifically the natural bodies of males and females, are not biologically equivalent. On that point, my view is relevant. In many cases, being drafted calls upon your physical faculties, and men are physiologically better equipped for warfare and physical labor. I know not every person drafted does the same job, sees the same facets of war, etc., but the draft was gender exclusive for a reason-- just like our hunter-gatherer ancestors had roles split between the genders. That of course, does not mean social norms and laws aren't subject to change.
How the military draft example can extrapolate to the general population is this: maybe the question of gender restrictions shouldn't be asked by our governing institutions, but rather the people involved. If a woman wants to enlist and join the service, what say does the government have to stop her? Except for the draft laws currently being reconsidered, no say. What say does the government deserve in issues or policies like these? If the outcome were to negatively affect others as a result, then our lawmakers may be the ones to lead. If it causes no damage and is an arbitrary change in culture/society, should people or government decide?
Moving forward, I know everyone will take their stances on issues-- there's no avoiding that. However, we "cannot be fair-weather Americans", as Sydney puts it. I interpret that as 'we must seek to be kind, considerate Americans to our fellow Americans and humans'. So our government must "[try] to keep up with us" and "Future policies will hopefully involve anyone who wishes to have America defend their rights". I agree with Sydney: we must work together towards a government with equal laws and freedoms for everyone.