Wow, where to begin...
Okay so according to you, women are too valuable to have the right to die for our country? Should we have IQ tests for those entering combat arms and if they score too high we disqualify them because they are too important to society and would be better off being a scientist? After all, we don't want to let "precious people" in our society in in combat, that right is reserved for the people who have no other use to our country.
You just twisted my post into something that I did not say. I definitely did not say that some people are more expendable than others and I definitely did not imply that in any way.
Women do not create life alone, life is the product of a female AND a male. Just because they carry the fetus until it is born does not make them holy. Men and women are two halves of a whole, each as important as the other. The human race depends on both.
You are correct.
If women are sent to combat, they will die just as much as men. If so many
men have died in wars yet the population remains stable obviously the death rates of women in war will not affect it any more than men dying.
Explain how a population of any nation sees no change after a war that drastically drains it of lives?
If women die in war it will make the same impact that the men dying in all past wars has made. You are acting as if were going to ship 100% of the female population to the front lines...do you realize that less than 1% of our population is in the military? Out of that 1%, less than half are women, and out of that 0.5% I will guess less than half would volunteer for combat roles. Out of that 0.25% of women in the combat role, not all will see combat and certainly not all will die.
Tell me how losing less than 0.25% of the female population will hurt our reproduction?
If a conflict the scale of WWII comes again, God help us all because women will be the least of our problems.
You failed to consider the effects of greater scale conflicts. Your numbers are meaningless if the big picture changes. During WWII, the % of our population employed by the military was almost 13%, and a very tiny fraction of that were women. If another world war erupts, heaven forbid, the assimilation of women in our military would spell disaster for them and America's families, as I mentioned before.
I will also give a quick solution to the last few problems you mentioned.
difficulty of assimilation? It was difficult to assimilate other races into the military and society in general but difficulty is no excuse for withholding rights. I believe you said you were a minority in an earlier post. Does that mean your race should have never have been allowed in the service because it was so difficult assimilating them?
Women have different physical and medical needs than women. You are erroneously comparing the assimilation of minorities, who also happen to be male, to the assimilation of women, which is a completely different story. Many of our generals today are expressing their opinion that the military is simply unready for such changes to the military's living quarters, redistribution and redesign of equipment, and other logistical problems facing a large influx of a different gender in the military, not to mention the costs.
risk of rape? Women risk rape by being near men, so we should completely segregate women from working with men in any career field right?
Any human being risks being hurt by another just by being near them, this doesn't mean they should be segregated. Women can also be raped in the non combat arms branches yet they serve there.
You are missing the point by a mile. Would you consider the situation of men and women together in a battlezone in a world war the same as the situation of men and women together in an office cubical? When both are thrust into highly destablized, chaotic situations, it is much more likely that rape can occur than male and female coworkers chatting over their morning coffee at the workplace.
distracting male soldiers? That is the problem of the male soldier. They can be trained to avoid such distractions. Women should not have their rights taken away just because some men lack self control.
That is not the problem of a male soldier. You cannot "train" men to suppress their sexual instincts as much as you can "train" men to shoot a weapon. We are not taking away anyone's rights here. Females and males alike have to consider the consequences before deciding whether to fully "equalize" society, as in destroy traditional gender roles by allowing women into the military.