Posted on 05/31/2004 10:12:50 AM PDT by Kentucky
If you have children, you know they are not treated equally, because they are different. The law should not try to treat the sexes equally. When they do, they have to gender norm and use all sorts of deceptive devices to try to make them equal.
Bottom line: Get women out of combat roles; do not draft them. Do not train them with men. This is PC at its worst, and I understand this stuff going on under the Clinton administration, but not one that is supposed to be at least a little on the conservative side.
It appears that even a fair number of "conservatives" on this forum have been Clintonized. Too bad
You keep talking about women in combat. Sad since I have done nothing but talk about men. And I do have children, two boys. I am a masculinist, an advocate for men's rights. Get over it.
I have a son who served in the Army for 7 years; he entered in 1993 just as Clinton was starting his poor excuse for a presidency.
He saw the Army go downhill, as drill sergeants had to be more "sensitive"; and affirmative action promotions, etc.
Men's rights; women's rights. What about adhering to the laws of God and nature that ARE right?
I love Doug Phillips, he's a sweetheart, but he's a noodle.
If Kerry gets elected it will be absolute!
I do not support the lowering of standards just to accommodate women. Nothing I have posted here even suggests that.
Men's rights; women's rights. What about adhering to the laws of God and nature that ARE right?
I'm talking constitutional rights here not God's law. If you are pissed off at Clinton for his mistreatment of the military, great but don't take it out on me.
How do you know?!
Eat doodoo and die. Click my profile to see more about me. Can you find a more Conservative profile. If so, show me.
Men are the only ones required to register.
I'm not taking anything out on you; you're taking this much too personally; it's merely a discussion. I don't know if you've ever seen Elaine Donnelly from the Center on Military Preparedness. Her concern is the feminization of the military and the dangers therein.
My concern is about the defense of the country. Undermining the military by gender norming does not enhance our defense.
I don't know what your issues are concerning men's rights; I've read a lot of what you are concerned about re: property rights and environmental extremism and I agree with you on those issues.
Our Constitution was conceived by people who were in concert with God's laws.
Very rarely and mostly in the legends. But female camp followers is indeed a long tradition.
The "powers that be" will continue floating trail balloons about the draft, then will save the day with a "brilliant" proposal: allow foreigners to join up and serve for a few years, with citizenship for themselves and their families as a reward.
This will serve several purposes. It will gain the support of many Americans who don't want to get drafted themselves. It will dilute the integrity (defined here as loyalty to the Constitution) of the American military. It will advance the one-world open borders policy of the gov't. It will dilute an already tenuous American culture. And finally, it's cheaper to employ foreigners in the military than Americans. So the politicians can cut the defense budget and give themselves more money.
I agree.
I don't know what your issues are concerning men's rights
They are too numerous to go into here but the long and the short of it is that the women's rights movement has weighted the scales in their favor leaving men behind. A prime example of this is in health care. We constantly hear how health research is focused on men and not women. Heart studies are brought out as proof. But when you stop to look at all the facts you come up with things that show reality. In the 1920s men lived one year less on average than women. As medicine improved the gap widened to 7 in favor of women. Men die of prostate cancer in the same numbers as women die of breast cancer but breast cancer receives 660% more funding.
Men's parental rights are a big one too but like I said too much to go into here.
Personally, as a woman, I'm tired of hearing about "women's issues" as if we live in different countries. And I agree that men have been shafted by courts ... BIG TIME ... when it comes to custodial and support of children. And the children suffer too.
I wish we could get back to common sense; probably not in our lifetime, unfortunately.
Thanks Mears. I agree with you. There's also the issue of how men and women, or even women and women interact in the workplace. Putting mixed sexes into a close in high pressure situation places dynamics on the operation I wouldn't want to see introduced there.
I have to say that I've not been a member of the military, and haven't served in a combat capacity. That being said, I've seen how women interact together, and how men have been trained to think of women differently their whole lives, which has to affect some of their combat situation thinking IMO.
So all those doctors, nurses, etc, in the military who happen to be women, have to go? I used those as examples, because women have been acquitting themselves in those roles, in regular (not auxiliary) military service for half a dozen wars now.
I agree with your comments. Thanks for the post. Good points...
Is it OK for me to take two sisters as my wives, as Jacob did -- and is it also OK for me to conceive children by two of my household servants?
Oh, speaking of slavery, that was OK in the Bible, too. So can we keep humans as chattel?
Are we to stone adulterers? And, in the event of a natural disaster, would you say it is OK for my daughters to get me drunk and seduce me, so they they can conceive children, as Lot's daughters did after the destruction of Sodom?
Beyond such absurdities -- exposing the absurdity of your reasoning -- why do you take a clearly EXCEPTIONAL case and seek to make it the rule? I mean, during a desperate manpower shortage in World War II (an exceptional circumstance), female pilots were used to transport airplanes from factory to airfield. But this exception did not overthrow the rule.
You arg engaged in bad logic, but of a type very common nowadays. I was once in a discussion of homosexuality when someone brought up the question of people born with ambiguous genitalia (hermaphrodites), as if the existence of a few thousand freaks of nature somehow affects how normal men and women should behave. I suppose it must be something in our contemporary culture -- we don't like rules or roles, and thus naturally think up every possible exception whenever someone suggests that, for instance, WAR IS A MAN'S JOB, which it most certainly is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.