Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 68skylark
I don't understand why they need to run down the service of female soldiers who are doing a good job.

The point isn't to run down the female soldiers or the job they are doing. Many are doing very well. We may very well be able to field an all-female army and still beat the snot out of the Arabs, who only seem to be brave and powerful with a bound, helpless victim.

The problem is that there was never a good reason to put women near combat in the first place. It was a political stunt. It is pushed and promoted by feminists who have not the slightest inclination to serve themselves.

For all of recorded history, with scarce exception the deal has been women staying home with the children while men fight. This is practical. How many empty slots do commanders have to fill that women have purposefully vacated through pregnancy?

"Oh," you say, "that isn't fair to the thousands of women who do faithfully serve." No, but the point of an army is not to deal out fairness or conduct a social experiment.

46 posted on 05/18/2004 5:52:09 AM PDT by hopespringseternal (People should be banned for sophistry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: hopespringseternal

I used to share most of the views you outlined in your post. But in the last few years my views have changed a lot -- based on the things I've read and some of the great female soldiers I've met and worked with.


49 posted on 05/18/2004 11:05:53 AM PDT by 68skylark (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson