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.
If we repeal the 19th amendment (women's right to vote), everything else will return to 'normal'.
BUMP
>> Shouldn't our hearts be turned to a special protectiveness for our daughters, our wives, the mothers and future mothers of our children?
Have our hearts turned to stone?<<<
Two different viewpoints.
The first viewpoint isn't taking into consideration the fact that men and woman have different physical capabilities and strengths, different psychologies and emotional natures, and different roles according to nature. Women are actually supposed to be protected by men, this is natural law as well as stated in Christian and Judaic scripture as well as the Vedas. When families and society have broken down, then the gov't steps in to take care of the abandoned and other women who aren't making it very well. It is a testimony to the difficulty women face in "making" it in a man's world. Of course, the gov't does a rotten job, makes the situation worse, and "feminism" is doing everything it can to destroy the natural family, and the natural qualities of women, so women from a young age have their minds and hearts twisted and hardened against men. One solution I see is to get kids homeschooled and away from being influenced by mass media, which is own and controlled by homosexuals and feminists.
If women are not to be exempted from contributing their voices toward the governance of our society, they must bear responsibility for maintaining that society consistent with other citzens.
Besides, that bill (proposed by Charlie Rangel et al.) is a dead issue...proposed for the sole purpose of fomenting dissent against President Bush's plan to carry out military action against terrorist states. It never stood a chance.
You can rest assured the pampered status of American women is secure for the time being.
Red
is just another way of saying the old standards no longer apply, whether for good or ill. One can lament the fact that transportation is no longer by horse, but it makes no sense to insist people should still keep a bail of hay in the garage.
Abortion is only a symptom.
I think he's right...
100% agreement. Or femininity. (That word doesn't look right...) So-called "feminism" is mis-named. Feminists are AGAINST real womanhood and womanly qualities. They hate the natural differences between men and women because of envy of men ("Why should THEY be stronger? Why should THEY have more power?") and also because of envy of God Who created the world the way He did. And, (facts have to be faced!) because a lot of men had abused their natural position of abandoned women, used and abused them. So both sides need to get back to their rightful spheres, and this can only be done by accepting God as the Supreme authority. Otherwise it can't happen. I can see from most of the posts on this thread that even people who call themselves Christian (and I am not questioning anyone's sincerity of belief in general) believe social-Darwinist nonsense about the roles of men and women.
Men and women are very different, and have different strengths and weaknesses that complement each other. To force either to imitate the other is madness, and we see it everywhere.
And I speak not as a sectarian, my main holy scriptures are the Vedas, with the Bible next. The role differences between men and women are innate and cannot be changed. By imposing external change, trying to force men and women to be what they are not, society is breaking apart. What that really means is that many many people's hearts are being broken and families are being broken.
If conservatives are to be effective, we need to be consistent.
"Women in combat" demeans women by forcing them to behave like men; and demeans the men who allow it.
Is the world a better place in these past four decades? Or are we living through a real Matrix, inconceivable a generation ago, that desires the occultic obliteration of sexual distinctions?
"Women in combat" is the homosexual dream-come-true.
I'm against any forced conscription. But the military is a profession that requires a masculine aggression, and should stay that way.
Unless we really want more Hillary Clintons and Janet Renos.
Our ancient ancestors realized this long, long ago. Those who didn't figure it out have no descendants to speak of today.
Call me a sexist, but men and women are created for specific roles. Basically, men are designed to take life, women are designed to give and sustain life. If we try to mess with this formula, our folly will be studied (and hopefully learned from) in future history books.
That being said, I am deeply disappointed by FRiends on this thread. Mainly in their belief in Chuck Rangel, who is mistakenly feeding the sheep the idea that there is conscription in America right now - maybe on the campuses to join the DNC, but that's for another thread.
Then of course, let us not forget that THERE IS NO DRAFT.
Welcome to the 21st Century, where we are fighting such a thing as assymetrical warfare. There is no more "in the rear with the gear". There are no more REMF's to gripe about in the trenches. We are fighting this one in a series of armed perimeters, where there will be "Gooks on the wire" everywhere you look.
Now did I use enough Vietnam slanguage for everyone who believes that quagmire thing, and forgets that THERE IS NO DRAFT.
Nonsense and gratuitous projection on your part. Women want to supplant men. Laying the blame on men for that is ridiculous so long as women control their own lives.
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.