I think what is being missed here is the overall needs of the military. For many years, people have been placed in jobs in the military that they tested for and showed an aptitude for. Those jobs still exist. It takes many different capacities and skills to run any business and the military is no different.
One of the major differences of military operations is physical capacity. A vast majority of the women that wish to serve do not have the physical capacity to accomplish the work load of some jobs especially combat. The needs of the job require upper body strength that women by their body shapes, hormones, bone density, and history do not have.
The women are better suited, however, than many of the men for most administrative needs and can work along side the men that aren’t capable of combat either. And I’m not talking taking short hand. Training and troop movement are a couple of tasks that are the backbone of the military and it doesn’t take a 225 pound body builder to do those tasks and at many levels.
“...than for your daughters and young wives to go through any conscientious objection process later.”
This statement is very disappointing. It appears that you are talking about women using God for personal preferences because is leads the reader to think it is being used as an excuse not to do something whether the reason is real or not. And that’s lying using God’s name. Taking the Lord’s name in vain is another way of saying “false believer” or “hypocrite.”
Jesus put it this way in Mark 7:6-9 “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: `These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.’
So going after a blank ticket of no women in the business is not only cutting them short, it is taking away a resource that is very important to our military. And the buttons that are pushed to launch don’t recognize if the finger is manicured and has a feminine touch.
wy69
We take the positions we take because the home/family is the very core of our society. Weaken the home/family by removing important components and you weaken the entire nation. That is even proven in crime statistics. In fact, without the core home and family, the Armed Forces have very little to defend; the country is shot.
Your use of Mark 7:6-9 is itself very disappointing, as the subject was the Talmudic traditions which tended to cast off the words of God. We are obeying the Scriptures themselves with regard to our homes and families and how they are trained. What we practice are not merely "preferences" or "traditions of men" as you suggest. Placing women in close quarters with men to whom they are not married, for example, is disobedience to God's order.
We had already been preaching for years (!) on the Biblical home structure when women first went in as "intelligence officers" in combat zones in Iraq. What we believe were already set Biblical convictions when the first talk of women being required to register for the draft came up at any official level around 1994.
We have archived letters to our elected representatives on this issue all the way back to 1994: to Lee Hamilton, Richard Lugar, Dan Coats, Evan Bayh, and more. If we had waited until after female registration had become law before we spoke out, then your position would sound reasonable. But the fact is we have been speaking on this issue for a quarter century already, and have been nailing it year-after-year whenever the NDAA comes up.
I am a veteran and was an Air Force NCO, and for a long time the NCOIC of a civil engineering structural shop that had some of the first women in that field. I also became a Christian during those years, called to preach in those years, was a young husband, and finished two years of Bible College training before separating from the Air Force. I was an assistant pastor of a Baptist church while yet in the Air Force. Even outside of combat, as an NCOIC of a unit, I saw the problems with women in close quarters with men to whom they were not married.
You are flat wrong to confuse "preferences" and "making excuses" with a man's deeply-help Biblical convictions. Unfortunately, it would be people who think like you who would be sitting on the boards when women of genuine Biblical conviction must apply for conscientious objection. You probably don't recognize deeply-held Biblical conviction on this subject. WE KNOW GOD; WE DON'T USE GOD.
On the side, you would do well with a much better English translation of the Bible than the one you quoted. The one you quoted came from the Minority Text originating out of Alexandria, Egypt and going through Rome. The base text for it is corrupt.