Now to your other post:
I'm convinced of my convictions because I'm right. Be enough of a man to let a person know when you're insulting them, it;s not that hard to include the person you're slaming in the to field.
First, you're absolutly right. I should have included you in the recipient list. But you found it, so no harm done.
Now so, you're have your convictions because you're right. You have not been influenced by the ubuitous attempts at social reprograming. Ok, I tend to differ, and all healthy cultures in history do not bare you out, but answer me this question.
There are 'way more men, healthy, strong and willing to serve, that the military can make use of with current funding levels, who by physical nature and psychological orientation at birth are uniquely suited to violent and armed conflict. Why allow women, who are suited to nurturing and childbirth, the historical role of a woman, physically and psychologically, in any culture if that culture is to survive, to place themselves in deadly danger to satisfy a infinitesimaly tiny number of them the frequently misplaced and false desire to be like men?
As I have asked in other words, why in the hell scratch around in the watermelon patch for the rare volunteer strawberry? Why not stick with the strawberry patch? For what purpose, so that Martha can use the tiny involvement of combat women to agitate for the de minimus goal of making a golf club include women against their will and over their objections?
