It sounds like you simply think that forcing employers/unprivileged employees to bear the costs of military service and child rearing is good policy. And it sounds like you would rather label those who disagree "sexist" or "anti-soldier" rather than actually debating this point.

Sorry, but that's just an ad-hominem.

Yes, the employer is worried that someone might miss a few days of work. This worry isn't sexist/anti-soldier, even if it results in fewer women/soldiers being hired. It would only be sexist if fewer women/soldiers (rather than fewer absences) was the goal.