Nope. Women are exempted from registering with Selective Service.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_System#Exemption_of_women

http://www.livestrong.com/article/144937-rights-of-unmarried-fathers-in-ohio/

https://www.google.com.hk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#sourceid=chrome-psyapi2&ie=UTF-8&q=america%20more%20men%20raped

I somewhat agree with you on circumcision, which is why I left it out.

No they arn't. in january 24 2013 steps started to add woman to to selective service. https://www.sss.gov/wmbkgr.htm NOTE:  On January 24, 2013, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta announced the end of the direct ground combat exclusion rule for female service members, following a unanimous recommendation by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Based on the American Forces Press Service’s news release, “Defense Department Expands Women’s Combat Role,” dated January 24, 2013, key statements are highlighted below:

The secretary announced that the service branches will continue to move forward with a plan to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service. The change is intended to ensure that the best qualified and most capable service members, regardless of gender, are available to carry out the mission. Panetta added, “If members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job, then they should have the right to serve, regardless of creed, color, gender or sexual orientation.”

The secretary directed the military services to undertake an evaluation of all occupational performance standards to ensure they are up to date and gender-neutral. Specialty schools will be included in the evaluation, a senior defense official said. … the entire process is to be completed by January 1, 2016.

Once the policy is fully implemented, military occupations will be closed to women only by exception, and only if approved by the defense secretary, a senior defense official said.

Who do you think made these laws? Don't men make up 80% of US elected officials?

Did you read that before pasting it? That has nothing to do with Selective Service.

"Of all unintended pregnancies [in the USA], 4 in 10 are aborted" - http://www.operationrescue.org/about-abortion/abortions-in-america/

Looks like a lot of women absolve themselves already. This isn't counting those  who use safe haven laws or adoption.

But you're right, women do have to do those things, unless they absolve themselves. Men also have certain responsibilties when it comes to child-rearing, such as providing financial support, the difference is, there are NO means of absolving yourself legally, at least in many places.

The part I bolded is especially important, as you know, men can be the ones who stop working, there's no legal requirement or whatever that forces women to be the ones who stay home. Just because it's the cultural norm doesn't make it valid for your argument. Here in Hong Kong, actually, a far larger proportion of women return to work shortly after giving birth... this doesn't, in any way, change what should be the equal balance in legal abilty to absolve.

Actually, in many places, yes, they do. In my home country of the United Kingdom, if a man does not agree to voluntarily provide financial support for a child, the Government will forcefully take the income from the father and credit the mother.

Yes I did. It has everything to do with selective service. Did you even read it? Its from the selective service gov. website...."to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service" means woman will be added to the draft if the draft is ever removed from standby.

I am not quite sure I understand your argument. The cost of going through with the pregnancy are high and if the man wants to be a part of the childs life should share the burden of these cost centainly. But I believe the comment you were responding to was referring to the father choosing to not be a part of the childs life by making it clear when an abortion can occur. In that event the father should be responsible for part of the cost of an abortion but not forced into an eighteen year commitment to have a child for a night of sex.

Also giving men the ability to become pregnant would not solve the problem without chaing the law, as their would now be women forced into eighteen year commitments to children they did not wish to have.

And while women also absolve men of responsibility with an abortion that may not have been their desired choice as they may have been willing to care for the child.

I feel really sorry for men who have been genitally mutilated. They will not be able to enjoy sex correctly, and will suffer from impotence after a time due to the lack of feeling. I can understand why some porn stars do it because they need to last extremely long periods of time, and the lack of sexual pleasure will help that.

In the United States, women are almost 51% of the population (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html), and they get to vote without agreeing to be put in the draft.

In fact, historically, women have a voter turnout roughly 4 points higher than men. http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/voters/documents/genderdiff.pdf

If women wanted to elect more women into office, they certainly have the numbers to do it. Turns out they don't need to, as male politicians have historically proven to be very beneficial to women already.

Public choice theory, read up on it.