Equal rights, equal obligation

On October 15th, 2015, in a article from USA Today titled "Draft women? Why not?", Glenn Reynolds addresses his views on introducing women into the draft, which I think is more aimed at equal rights activists but would certainly hit home for most Americans. Glenn Reynolds is a distinguished professor of law at the University of Tennessee, widely known for his political weblog Instapundit and having published numerous books, columns, and academic articles.

He starts with his disagreement with the draft itself but points out that if there is to be one then women should be included. He backs up his argument by comparing that in the past "a sexual division of labor - in which women focused on childbearing and child-rearing while men engaged in war - tended to make societies to much more formidable" and compares it to modern changes in gender equality. Stating that the division of labor has adjusted through the years due to women's primary role no longer being childbearing and that today's average age of fertility is more in a female's late 20's to 30's, well after the age a draft would be in effect. He also addresses this question of fairness by pointing out that by giving equal rights to women should bring the same equal obligations that they have to the nation as men.

I agree with his point in that women should be included in the draft. I feel as though it would strengthen our society as a whole and move more away from the cliché that men are superior to women. I'm not saying that women should be put on the front lines but their inclusion in military support roles would greatly benefit our military. 

Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton

In his Huffington post, dated September 30th, blogger Ben Spielberg targets democrats in his article titled "Bernie Sanders, Not Hillary Clinton, Deserves Union Endorsements". His argument breaks down why Bernie Sanders should receive union endorsements over Hillary Clinton. Ben Spielberg is the co-founder of 34justice, a political blog that critically analyzes political and cultural issues.

It begins with how The National Education Association is considering an early endorsement of Hillary Clinton and how that could jeopardize the member's trust in the union leaders. He describes how Hillary does not have as strong a track record as Vermont candidate Bernie Sanders stating "on practically every topic -- from criminal justice issues to health care to foreign policy -- Sanders has Hillary beat". He even displays the different donor lists from both the candidates and shows Hillary's backers are mostly represented by banks, corporations, and media groups while Sanders backers are more comprised of unions. At one point showing her ties to the corporation Walmart as a previous board of director and revealing her continuing ties to anti-union business. He uses this evidence to prove how Hillary is a suboptimal candidate when comparing her credentials to Sander's.

I agree with Spielberg in his claim of Hillary being an inferior candidate and his logic of how Sander's should get more union support. Based on Spielberg's points in the article and previous research on Sander's objective in his campaign, I do feel like he is a better representative in terms of the people's views when compared to Hillary.