The Pentagon made a historic move Thursday when it lifted its ban against women serving in combat, according to USA Today.
A 1994 restriction prevented women in the military from serving in combat, including service on the front lines. However, many argued, including the American Civil Liberties Union, that reality showed women already serving on the front lines.
U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), a member of the Armed Services Committee who strongly supports the historic change, issued the following statement after the announcement.
“I applaud the Secretary for formally removing the ban," Reed said. "The reality of today’s battlefield is that all who serve are in combat.”
The military's lift of the ban opens up 230,000 posts to women in the military, according to USA Today.
We wanted to know what you thought about the military's decision to lift the ban.
On Sharon Patch's Facebook Page, we asked, "Do you think women should serve in combat?" One user, Mike Conforti, weighed in by saying:
They do serve in combat. I know women that have died in combat. They have always played in critical roles from MP's to medical to Chemical et.. But putting them with Infantry units would be disastrous and would cost lived. I served in Iraq and at times along side women who were attached to us to help search females. Certain combat ground units need to stay all male. Equipment alone can way up to 60+ lbs, that's half of a typical female soldiers body weight. That weight can be grueling for a 180 lbs man. Plus you have the sex distraction. That's the last thing you need to be thinking about or worrying about in Iraq. Women can be and have been attached to combat arms units and that is the best way to go about it. Attach them when needed for missions but not in a permanent capacity.
What do you think about the military lifting the ban? Tell us in the comment section below!