Women should be able to serve on the front lines in combat positions

And Imabench got himself banned. 1) Women already hold just about every kind of post/job in the military and make up a substantial portion of the military My problem with this argument is that it doesn’t actually say why the Army should allow women in the frontlines. I will summarize Imabench’s argument into the following syllogism. P1. Women hold just about every kind of post in the Army P2. ????? C1. Women should be let into the frontlines. I consider this logic flawed, and here is another syllogism to highlight why. P1. Men hold just about every retail or waiting [Waiters] jobs. P2. ????? C1. Men should be allowed to be a waiter at Hooters. The military is in no obligation to let women into the frontlines just because they hold ~95% of the Armies positions, just like why Hooters as no obligation to let men in. If you don’t like Hooters, replace it with Victoria’s Secret. I suppose you could say something along the lines of “They proved they can do it.”. If Imabench were to claim this, he would be repeating himself with his second argument. 2) They would just be given the OPPORTUNITY to serve on the front lines. P1. Someone who meets the standard requirements can join the army. P2. That person could be a women C1. Women deserve the opportunity. Fair enough, but I have an issue with both premises. I feel like that you don’t understand that you don’t simply join the Army. In [1] it explains that if you are a man and you have no testicles, you will have a hard time joining the army. The same source goes on to say if your penis is amputated, then you are also DQ’d. The Army doesn’t care about just the fitness part, they care about your health, which also reminds me that they don’t like people with a history of suicide attempts to join. P1 is off-base, as there is more things to take into consideration. You might say women have no issue with this, but I will explain. Women, and only women, can get pregnant and women are more likely to have depression then men.[2] The idea that women will ever be as good as soldiering as men is absurd. The logic to let women into the army should also apply to people with autism, ex-cons and people who need an inhaler every 3 days. They can lift 100 pounds. They can run 10 miles in 12 minutes. So why bar them? The reason is the same as to why I don’t want women in. 3) Women in other countries are already allowed to serve in front lines, and they haven't had any issues. I really can’t speak for other countries, but I heard Israel had issues with women. [3] About 1 in 5 women suffer sexual harassment in Israel’s army, and there is various small issues.Women in combat is a recent thing, and I believe research is needed if women want to be placed in the front lines. 4) Gays Of course, women and men have different bodies, and my reasons to bar women are why women can’t, but men can. To assume women would act like gays in some situations is naïve. 5) Gangs We do not consciously let gang members in the army, even if we did, that doen't mean they would endanger the mission. [1] http://www.military.com... [2] http://www.healthline.com... [3] Stuart A. Cohen Israel and Its Army: From Cohesion to Confusion, pg. 68