[WOSG]

To be precise, the earlier poster's point was about the feminist agenda, not the intentions of women joining the forces.

Women who want to serve out of patriotism are great, but whether a particular woman can and in what capacity is a decision that should be grounded on best national security interests, and not based on feminist ideology, which is contrary to biological and civilizational reality.

There is something that should be said clearly: No person has a 'right' to serve the military. Those that are most helpful to defending our nation can and should be given the opportunity to serve, but there is no 'right' to service.
If you are too weak, hard of seeing/hearing, etc. you cant serve.

The feminist agenda put their goals of total sexual equality ahead of freedom, ahead of prosperity, ahead of family cohesion, ahead of justice, ahead of indeed national security. That agenda has forced a number of changes in our society that have had harmful effects in many areas.
No doubt, the introduction of women to more and more military roles has been a double edged sword, and the negative impacts of this has been ignored by the feminists for a simple reason: They dont care about our national security. Case in point - former congress-whatever Pat Shroeder.

[AFPhys]

You wrote:

There is something that should be said clearly: No person has a 'right' to serve the military. Those that are most helpful to defending our nation can and should be given the opportunity to serve, but there is no 'right' to service. If you are too weak, hard of seeing/hearing, etc. you cant serve.

The feminist agenda put their goals of total sexual equality ahead of freedom, ahead of prosperity, ahead of family cohesion, ahead of justice, ahead of indeed national security. That agenda has forced a number of changes in our society that have had harmful effects in many areas. No doubt, the introduction of women to more and more military roles has been a double edged sword, and the negative impacts of this has been ignored by the feminists for a simple reason: They dont care about our national security.

With great respect, I think you ought to change that to:

There is something that should be said clearly: No person has a 'right' to serve the military. Those that are most helpful to defending our nation can and should be given the opportunity to serve, but there is no 'right' to service. If you are too weak, hard of seeing/hearing, etc. you cant serve.

The feminist agenda put their goals of total sexual equality ahead of freedom, ahead of prosperity, ahead of family cohesion, ahead of justice, ahead of indeed national security. That agenda has forced a number of changes in our society that have had harmful effects in many areas. No doubt, the introduction of women to more and more military roles has been a double edged sword, and the negative impacts of this has been ignored by the feminists for a simple reason: They dont care about our national security.

Kudos. Well said ... very well said.