Posted on 09/24/2003 8:21:32 AM PDT by xzins
In January of this year, 2003, a bill was introduced both in the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives which would re-institute the military draft. This bill would not only allow the government to draft our sons however (as bad as that is itself), but it would also allow the government to draft our daughters into the military for two years. Recently, I was listening to a Christian radio talk show discussing this bill. The question laid out to the Christian men was - what do you think about the government wanting to draft your daughters into the military for two years? I was appalled and amazed by the responses I heard. All of the callers except one thought it would be just fine for the government to take their daughters for two years. A few of the common responses given for such thinking were - “We live in different times now” and “The women wanted this equality, so it’s only fair” and “With all the government does for us, we should be willing to let them (our daughters) give two years of their life for them.” As I listened to caller after caller, Christian man after Christian man, declare how willing they were to give up their daughters to the government for two years, I realized how far gone we are as a nation. When Christian men can speak this way about their daughters they have lost a godly affection for their daughters. When you hear this kind of perverse talk, American men have forgotten their God-given function as fathers. What has made American men this way? Why do they no longer have a godly affection for their daughters? Why don’t they know how to function as fathers? There are two main causes. Number One: American men no longer have a godly affection for their daughters and have forgotten their roles as father because the way that Americans raise their children causes an unnatural separation between parent and child. This is seen from an early age. Many men have their wives return to work after their maternal leave time expires after giving birth to their child. So the child is taken away from the parents and goes to daycare. When the child turns four or five, they are off to the government school. Again, the child is separated from the parents, and this continues to adulthood. Most men send their children away from them at church too. They don’t act as priests in their homes and instruct their children in the faith, rather they dump them off on the church with it’s host of kiddy programs to supposedly do the job. This bill would allow the government to draft our daughters into the military for two years. When the child gets older, most men allow their daughters to date. They send them away with a young man alone, rather than establishing some form of godly courtship, hence denying their role as protector. Finally, most men want their daughters out of the house once they turn eighteen. Most do so by sending their daughters away to the university. This is how most American men raise their children and rule their homes. This is how most Christian men raise their children and rule their homes. My point is that this causes an unnatural separation between parent and child. Because of the separation which has been occurring since a young age and throughout the child’s life, it is easy for a man to say - “With all the government does for us, of course I’m willing to let them have my daughter for two years.” It’s easy because he’s already been separated from her all his life! Number Two: American men no longer have a godly affection for their daughters and have forgotten their roles as father because the State has become father. Men are to be providers, protectors, and priests to their homes. Most men no longer know or exercise these roles as father because the State has assumed the role of father. Herbert Schlossberg, in his book Idols for Destruction, best defines my assertion here. Schlossberg states: Rulers have ever been tempted to play the role of father to their people. The father is the symbol not only of authority but also of provision. “Our Father who art in heaven...Give us this day our daily bread” (Mt.6:9,11). Looking to the State for sustenance is a cultic act [an act of worship]; we learn to expect food from parents, and when we regard the State as the source of physical provision we render to it the obeisance of idolatry. The crowds who had fed on the multiplied loaves and fishes were ready to receive Christ as their ruler, not because of who He was but because of the provision. John Howard Yoder has rightly interpreted that scene: “The distribution of the bread moved the crowd to acclaim Jesus as the new Moses, the provider, the Welfare King whom they had been waiting for.” This statement by Schlossberg encapsulates what I mean when I say the State has become father. Men no longer know what it means to be men or fathers anymore because the State has become father. They’re still dependent little boys who’ve never grown up. All is taken care of for them. They’ve never learned what responsibility means because the State takes care of every desire, whim and need. Men have a duty as fathers to be providers, protectors, and priests to their homes, The draft is the ultimate expression and evidence that the State has assumed the role of father. and the State wants to take that out of men’s hands and assume the roles of father. Schlossberg goes on to state: The tyrant Diocletian, Emperor of Rome, in 301 A.D., declared the State to be “the watchful parents of the whole human race.” The State wanting to take our daughters away and draft them into the military is the ultimate expression and evidence that the State believes it is father, and has assumed the role of father. When Christian men allow the State to get away with this, they have abrogated their God-given duty and roles as fathers.
The paternal State not only feeds its children, but nurtures, educates, comforts, and disciplines them, providing all they need for their security. Once we sink to that level, as C.S. Lewis says, there is no point in telling state officials to mind their own business. “Our lives are their business.” The paternalism of the State is that of a bad parent who wants his children dependent on him forever. That is an evil impulse. The good parent prepares his children for independence, trains them to make responsible decisions, knows that he harms them by not helping them to break loose. The paternal State thrives on dependency. When the dependents free themselves, it loses power. It is, therefore, parasitic on the very persons whom it turns into parasites. Thus, the State and its dependents march symbiotically to destruction.
You, sir, are a Father.
Of course we have a double standard for our sons and our daughters. They're different.
Anyone who doesn't recognize the differences is being stubborn or dishonest or brainwashed.
They do not share the same responsibilities.
First, that doesn't answer the question you are replying to.
Second, any sectarian notions you have about who is suppose to do what in the United States do not apply to this discussion.
We are talking about the United States of America, not your family. Whether you like it or not, your conception of "how it's suppose to be" is functionally equivalent to saying there are certain jobs for white people, and certain jobs for black ones...and partner; that just ain't gonna happen.
So you go right on puling about how shameful it is that men can't keep women in line, but don't think for one minute you're fooling anyone. You are whining at the men, because you don't want to tangle with the women. They take your kind of nonsense MUCH more personally.
That's one leap of logic any self-respecting conservative chews up and spits out for breakfast.
Women would like to think they run the world.
Men tolerate that illusion in order to push the pawns around the board more freely.
If a society needs to dress up its women in combat fatigues and helmets, it's already lost all sense of morality, sexual or otherwise.
You are whining at the men because you don't want to tangle with the women.
Chewing...chewing...sputter...bajfwd...cough...choke...throwing myself over the back of a chair...
Uhm heLLOoo...You've never seen an EEOC statement posted at work? Maybe they aren't required when all your co-workers are cows, pigs, and chickens, but pretty much everywhere else has them. You might want to aquaint yourself with the eighties sometime.
That's one leap of logic any self-respecting conservative chews up and spits out for breakfast.
I'm sorry. You must have the term "conservative" confused with the term "luddite." Seriously dude: welcome to the new world. I don't know how they did it back in the old country, but in case you haven't noticed, we're still top of the heap, and it ain't cause we do it like they did back home. I also don't know what you think all those women are doing on election day, but it ain't askin' daddy/hubby who they should vote for.
Women would like to think they run the world. Men tolerate that illusion in order to push the pawns around the board more freely.
Come on. Tell us all about the Bilderbergers-Trilateralists-Illuminati. You know you want to.
You are whining at the men because you don't want to tangle with the women. Chewing...chewing...sputter...bajfwd...cough...choke...throwing myself over the back of a chair...
Tell ya what schport...next time you're in the business setting, try patting one of those pawns on the butt and tell her what a nice rack she has. G'head, g'head.
Only if she returns the compliment.
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.