Posted on 01/15/2005 4:19:58 AM PST by Clive
In the context of the article, it seems to be referring to the "Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot, among others" previous mentioned.
But I can see how it can be taken as you see it.
Based on the fact this guy seems to have a something similar to a brain attached to his neck, I'll give him the benefit of doubt
Actually I am not "suggesting" anything about female combatants I was pointing out the fact I felt the author was using the Christianity portion as a means to an end and that was to point out that women did not belong in combat.
Yet everyone was posting only about the fact that he began his praise in the right direction and than switched suddenly to another topic which was probably the real reason for the article.
I did not state my views in any way regarding this issue.
It is important to note that rape, in this sense, is not what it typically is. It is a weapon of terror used against an enemy soldier. And anyone who thinks only women are at risk just don't know the facts.
DUH, The Muslim fanatics terrorist we are battling now are highly religious and spend a whole lot more time expressing their devotion then we do.
Oh it's so nice to see it stated so plainly.
Maybe we could ahve aprisoner swap. We send them our liberals and they send us their conservatives. Everyone would be happier.
Now you see I dont agree with you on that, I feel these Muslims are using their religion as an excuse to kill. They arenjt devoted to Allah they are devoted to hatred and murder. They can spend the better part of the day bowing to Mecca it doesnt change the fact they only want to kill and their religious devotion gives them an excuse.
He stated both his premises in the third sentence. He addressed both issues. Not exactly a turn.
I stand corrected. Thank you for pointing that out, somehow I missed it.
This is the most profound statement in the article, and possibly of the year. This simple fact eludes most of the "equality" freaks out there. It seems that all the people that are calling for diversity are the ones who are trying to make everyone the same.
The day women as front-line soldiers die to defend any country is the day that country is no longer worth defending.
Freaking well depends on where that 'front line' is. If it's outside my front door, it's lock 'n load, baby.
See how these "journalists" think -- for them, when a leader says something which may, indeed, be wise, what's more important to them (the journalist) is whether or not what the leader says will "land him in a certain amount of trouble."
If the decisions are wise ones, as this writer indicates, who cares what the rest of the world thinks?! Far too many at home (here in America) put way, wayyyyyyyyy, too much stock in what the rest of the world thinks of us. If the countries performing the elitist, holier-than-thou critique were "right," they (well, most of them) wouldn't be sh!tholes of countries in the first place.
"If almost everyone who attends your church is still a democrat, I'm pretty sure you're going to the wrong church."
You try finding a black church that isn't overwhelmingly Democrat.
bttttttt
"If almost everyone who attends your church is still a democrat, I'm pretty sure you're going to the wrong church."
What a strange thing to say. It raised this question in my mind: How do you select the right church?
As to the point of the article... Women on the front line... I've met a few that could pull it off but most women aren't that good in the combat skills department. Of course in dire circumstances I'd expect every man, woman and child that could lift a rifle to do so. And I think they would and that's what makes the US worth defending.
Good article. THX.
Yes, some atheist have no moral compass, and ironicly, those that do are following the Lord whether they want to or not. All good things come from The Lord, even the goodness in atheist.
Good article. Thanks for posting.
While I don't believe that wimmin belong in combat, I also take issue with the Woman As Mommy characterization; we have been battling for a long time now against the idea that the only thing a woman has to offer to the world is her uterus. Anyone who has worked in any kind of shelter or outreach or settlement house or visiting nurse program knows all too well that Mommyhood is not only not a hard-wired, always-included part of being born female, it is something that a lot of wimmin can't be trained to do. And the continued insistence of Hallmark Men that ALL women are created with an intrinsic talent for motherhood is as foolish as the assertion that all Blacks have rhythm and all men are born to play football. This falsehood is causing a great deal of misery among women who are not so gifted and who assume that there is either something fatally wrong with them or with their children because they would rather do almost anything than spend another five minutes with a child.
While I agree that many women are unfit to be in combat, I think a far larger percentage are unfit to be mothers. When we can admit that, we'll be on our way to eliminating a lot of problems from society at large.
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.