Women and War (112 views) Subscribe   
  From:  David (DavidABrown)    4/30/2003 1:35 pm  
To:  ALL   (1 of 23)  
 
  592.1  
 
  Does The Military Have The Nerve To Celebrate Mother's Day?

April 30, 2003     by:  Phyllis Schlafly

The reason these sorry things have happened is that the men in our
government and in our military lack the courage to stand down the
feminists and repudiate their assault on family and motherhood. 

The face of war is never pretty, but this time war showed us images
we have never seen before. We saw pictures of mothers being sent to
Iraq to fight one of the cruelest regimes in the world. 

What is the matter with the men of this country -- our political and
military leaders -- that they acquiesce in the policy of sending
mothers of infants out to fight Saddam Hussein? Are they the kind of
man who, on hearing a noise at 2 a.m., would send his wife or
daughter downstairs to confront an intruder? 

Three young women were part of the maintenance crew that took a
wrong turn and was ambushed by the Iraqis. Shoshana Johnson,
fortunately, has been rescued, thanks to an Iraqi who told the
Americans where the U.S. POWs were hidden. 

In the joy of reconciliation, let's not forget the shame on our country
that this single mother of a two-year-old baby was assigned to a
position where she could be captured. She didn't volunteer to serve in
combat; she volunteered to be an Army cook. 

Jessica Lynch didn't volunteer for combat either. She wanted to be a
kindergarten teacher and joined the Army because jobs were scarce
in West Virginia. 

Jessica was rescued by U.S. troops thanks to an Iraqi who was
disgusted by the way his fellow Iraqis were slapping her around as a
wounded prisoner. Even that Iraqi understood that a female POW is
different from a male POW. 

The third woman, Lori Piestewa of Arizona, didn't make it back alive.
Her body was discovered by our troops in a shallow grave. 

Lori was the single mother of a 4-year-old son and a 3-year-old
daughter. Did the Iraqi threat to U.S. national security really require
those two children to sacrifice their only parent? 

The reason these sorry things have happened is that the men in our
government and in our military lack the courage to stand down the
feminists and repudiate their assault on family and motherhood. 

Shoshana, Jessica and Lori were the victims of trickle-down
feminism. The female officers (plus the militant feminists who would
never serve in the military) demand the "career opportunities" of
combat roles, and claim that a servicewoman is fully deployable six
months after giving birth, while the privates get the really dangerous
assignments. 

The pictures of a terrified Shoshana being interrogated by her Iraqi
captors and of Jessica carried on a stretcher show the toll on the
mothers. How about the costs to the little ones left behind? 

The war picture that graphically shows this side of the problem was
of an apprehensive two-year-old, Teresa Garcia, hanging on for dear
life to the legs of her mother, Army Captain Dorota Garcia, as she
stood suited up with rifle and gear, ready to depart for Iraq from Fort
Hood, Texas. 

Cable television is giving us 24-hour-a-day front-line coverage of the
war in Iraq from imbedded and non-imbedded journalists. Funny
thing, one statistic is missing from their comprehensive reports. 

How many mothers of infants and toddlers (among the 212,000
women in the U.S. military today) are over there in the Iraqi war? How
many are single mothers, and how many are married mothers whose
husbands are already serving in Iraq, leaving their children parentless
at home? 

How many are like Army Spc. Tamekia Lavalais, leaving behind her
21-month-old baby whose father is already in Iraq. She said she
wouldn't have joined the Army "if I'd known this was going to happen."

The government won't give us the count on mothers, and reporters
seem afraid to ask. Is it because that statistic is classified
information that would be harmful to national security if the enemy
knew it, or because that statistic would be harmful to the reputations
of U.S. politicians and generals if the American public knew about
our military's anti-motherhood policy? 

Or is it because reporters are chicken in the face of the militant
feminists? Bernard Goldberg tells in his best-selling book "Bias" that
even tough Sam Donaldson "turns into a sniveling wimp when it
comes to challenging feminists." 

The politicians have brought this embarrassment on our nation
because they allowed themselves to be henpecked by the militant
feminists. The whole idea of men sending women, including mothers,
out to fight the enemy is contrary to our belief in the importance of
the family and motherhood and, furthermore, no one respects a man
who would let a woman do his fighting for him. 

Women serve our country admirably, both on the home front and in
many positions in the U.S. Armed Forces. But there is no evidence
in history for the proposition that the assignment of women to military
combat jobs is the way to advance women's rights, promote national
security, improve combat readiness, or win wars. 

America is alone in this extraordinary social experimentation to send
mothers to war. We hope, when the war is over, that the President
and the military will change these shameful feminist policies. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read this Column online:
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2003/apr03/03-04-30.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eagle Forum
www.eagleforum.org
PO Box 618 eagle@eagleforum.org 




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII)   5/6/2003 2:21 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (2 of 23)  
 
  592.2 in reply to 592.1  
 
Women get captured, women get killed, thus women shouldn't be in the military. Uh huh. 
I don't know if I buy the idea that women can handle anything men can handle, but the idea that we shouldn't send women that have had kids into combat doesn't sit right with me. It's like saying that that's all they are good for: raising their kids. There are some women out there that are just as good as firing a cannon or driving a tank as their male counterparts; pushing them aside because of their gender or family situation comes off as wrong to me. Actually, the reasons behind our current conflict don't sound right to me either, but that's another post. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/6/2003 6:04 pm  
To:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII)   (3 of 23)  
 
  592.3 in reply to 592.2  
 
Hi Charlie,

Well Stated!

There is a lot going on that on in the current events that do need thought and discussion.

I specifically posted this material because We are not getting the Truth from the media any media!

Jessica Lynch is a wonderful brave woman that is why it makes it all the worse that the uncaring media has decided to fictionalize her life (and our history) by inventing a story around her.

This morning I read an item about how most of the Media Event around her is "thin soup" and "undocumented spin."

I for one am tired of the fact that the Best News that we can get is fake!

I forgot to highlight it but the first posted article in this thread comments that these women and our society are "Victims of Trickle Down Feminism." 

Is that a great comment or what.

God Bless you,
David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  revnike    5/6/2003 7:46 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (4 of 23)  
 
  592.4 in reply to 592.1  
 
Our women in the military are doing a great job.

Jessica Lynch was a true warrior!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's interesting that not one, not a single feminist group has hailed Jessica Lynch as a hero, or heroine.

 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/6/2003 8:25 pm  
To:  revnike    (5 of 23)  
 
  592.5 in reply to 592.4  
 
Hi RevIke,

This topic really isnt about whether or not she or any person in uniform is a hero they ALL are.

I hope that people will begin to sift through the Propaganda Storm that is being passed off to us as news and to set aside emotions to start to ask questions about what is really going on.

This is about our actions and our commitments as a country.

Where we are at Socially and where we are going.

Is our society now at the point that Mothers are on the front lines!

If you think that the Military is anything less than the Hardest most Dangerous job that you will ever encounter then it is evident that you have never spent one minute in uniform let alone deployed to a hostile area..

God Bless you,
David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII)   5/6/2003 8:41 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (6 of 23)  
 
  592.6 in reply to 592.5  
 
"Is our society now at the point that Mothers are on the front lines!" 
Have we gotten to the point where you have kids and all you're good for is raising them? I'm not personally "military material", and as far as I'm concerned, anyone, male or female, fertile or sterile, childbearing or childless, that decides to serve in our armed forces should be applauded, not shunned because they're "abandoning" their children. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  revnike    5/6/2003 8:47 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (7 of 23)  
 
  592.7 in reply to 592.5  
 
I am a woman ordained minister.

I did my first years of ministry at a VA hospital that would NOT hire an evangelical chaplian.  So I worked for free for five years.

I have seen the effects of war.  I have heard war stories.  I have heard men cry.

Now, that said.  Women have always fought in battles.  They have not been in armies...but in the days of hand to hand combat, they picked up pitch forks, axes, and they fought...especially as the walls of the fortress were breached.

Women on the American frontier fought.  They picked up shot guns and they fought next to their husbands and sons to defend their homestead.

Women, in this society have actually asked to be in the military.  It is probably the only place where a woman is paid what a man is paid.  Women are proud to be in the military.  Women are doing a good job in the military.

And yes, we do have mothers in the battle field.  One of them was a prisoner of war.  

We have women missionaries who have been captured, tortured, and killed.  Christian women have gone into hostile areas and dangerous areas as missionaries.  And they were mothers.

I don't think it is the danger that is the definitive thing here.  

 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/6/2003 9:23 pm  
To:  revnike    (8 of 23)  
 
  592.8 in reply to 592.7  
 
Hi, 

To both of you.

Thank you for your valued input.

I personally wouldnt wish some of the baggage of military service on anyone male or female because it is a lot to carry around.

I think society is really out of touch with just how involved military training is, how physical it is, how dangerous the deployments are and regarding some of the lifelong effects that it has on people, both physically and emotionally.

What Im saying is that there is a huge cost to serving in the military one where you, your family and your friends will never be the same and we need to Count this cost not ignore it and not pretend that it doesnt exist.

I think it is important to take a realistic look at what is going on in our society and to plan and shape a better future.

It was my hope and desire that this topic would not get caught up in the propaganda about women in the military as Equal Rights, and instead Lets start putting our efforts into Equal Rights and freedoms of comfort and safety.

Its not ok that male and female can equally have their car stolen or that they can equally be POWs or that they are now equally vulnerable to danger and suffering.

What is ok and what we should be striving for is that we can equally have a hope and a future. That we can have relationships and families built on trust and respect. That we can build up each other and support each other and I for one dont see this current concept of women being told to act like men and men being told to act like women and neither one being told to be reliable and respectful as all that beneficial.


God Bless you,
David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  revnike    5/7/2003 6:57 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (9 of 23)  
 
  592.9 in reply to 592.8  
 
I'm a stay at home mom right now.  I have a 9 year old foster daughter.  I am definitely not opposed to the traditional role of women.  Most of the women in my family were very strong, like battleships (you should excuse the pun), and they were stay at home moms.  Some ran businesses from home.

I don't think women have the right to more comfort than men.  Why should society go out of it's way to provide more comfort to women.  I think women who are nurturing children, the old, the infirm, the handicapped need to be provided for in terms of safety...or looked after, at least in that area.

Military service is stressful, to say the least.  The training can be brutal.  And the effects of military life can and does stay with people.  To offset that, the military is like a family.  They have incrediblel support systems.

{{{{Its not ok that male and female can equally have their car stolen or that they can equally be POWs or that they are now equally vulnerable to danger and suffering.}}}}

Why is it OK for a man to have his car stolen, and not for a woman???  And how do you prevent a woman's car from being stolen?  We generally don't send women into the front lines.  The women who were taken prisoner were taken because the "front line" shifted, and a rear unit found itself at the front.

I don't think women should act like men, nor do I think men should act like women.  The one thing that has impressed me soooo much about these military women (in the photos of them I've seen) is how attractive they are.  They all have fashionable hair styles.  They all use makeup.

The Black woman POW who was shot in the foot...when she was talking by telephone to her momma...she complained about the video tape of the 7 soldiers being rescued.  She was concerned bacuse her hair was a mess.  That sounds very much like a woman to me.

I think a woman can be a woman and also be a soldier.  Being a soldier is a job, a vocation.  A woman can take off the uniform at the end of the day and put on something feminine at home and be a wife and mother.

 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/7/2003 8:45 pm  
To:  revnike    (10 of 23)  
 
  592.10 in reply to 592.9  
 
Hi RevIke,

In continuing to clarify my point that it isnt ok for women to be equally in danger.

If there is not a support role in society than society will deteriorate.

It is up to the men to Support  give their life in the defense and protection of the Country, fellow men, the elderly, Women and Children.

Likewise it is Also up to women to give their life in support of their Children.

I take it that from the way this debate and Society is going that in the very near future we will be sending Children off to war to fight and to protect us Adults.

Society is structured, it has to be that way if it is going to survive and function.

We can see the re-arranging of Society in the Fact that Abortion is so common. A few years ago the majority of women would have died themselves rather than let a stranger kill their child and now women go and pay a stranger to kill the baby for them.

There really are a lot of men who will not go into Military service and they think that those of us who did are suckers, risking our lives, while they can reap the good life of college and a career and so I can really see where some would want to send children or women in their place.

But unless you are willing to stand up for something than it will crumble and face it American Society is crumbling, why, because Men are taught to not get involved.

Just my thoughts,
David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII)   5/7/2003 9:21 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (11 of 23)  
 
  592.11 in reply to 592.10  
 
So women should just raise the kids and stay out of man's way? 
I do believe I don't like the way you think, sir. 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/8/2003 6:28 am  
To:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII)   (12 of 23)  
 
  592.12 in reply to 592.11  
 
Hi,

Im talking about partnerships.

Its not about doing something because its considered a mans job its about doing the job that you can be best at.

The fact is society as it is being socially changed "Isnt Working" it has nothing to do with my preferences or yours this Social re-alignment is a Failure!

After thinking about it some more.

Women can wear the Pants all they want and attempt to get men to wear the Skirts all they want but in the end it is Jesus who wears the Crown so we really do need to look to His structuring and his arraignment, His plans for society as Gods way is best.

You might think that you are mightier and more Nobel than me because you can spout feminist propaganda better than I can but really it just makes you look like a "Patsy."

God Bless you,
David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII)   5/8/2003 9:33 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (13 of 23)  
 
  592.13 in reply to 592.12  
 
You know what I hate more than being called names? 
Being called names by a self-righteous ++++++ who uses the bible as his reason to keep people in their "God-Given" place. 

God bless me? God help you, pal.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 6/22/2003 3:28:14 AM ET by OSMFALCON 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  revnike    5/8/2003 9:54 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (14 of 23)  
 
  592.14 in reply to 592.10  
 
You are right there are a lot of guys who WON'T go into the military, won't risk their lives, won't sacrifice themselves for anything or anyone, certainly not for their country.  They are the ones who always favor appeasement.

I'd rather have a bodacious woman in the military, albeit in a rear position, than a cowardly man.  Because when the lines shift and a commiteed woman finds herself at the front, she fights like heck.

If we want men to be the only ones going to war, and I don't know if that is completely necessary, as most women choose NOT to go to war or into the military...but if that is our desire as a nation, then we have to do something about the "sissifying" of American males.  We've made our males into "New Men," all touchy and feely.

Now some men are sensitive by nature.  And if that is the nature that God gave them, Praise God.  My husband is sensitive.  My uncle John was sensitive.  And both of them are loved by people who know/knew (my uncle passed) them and assoicte/ed with them.  They are men who make great teachers, social workers, nurses, EMS workers, etc. 

But the shame, the horrible truth is that we in America take men who are not the touchy/feely type and we try to shame them into getting all getting in touch with their emotions.  Best selling authors and TV talk show hosts belittle and laugh at them if they can't "access their feelings." 

This is where we have to go first...not putting down women who want to serve.

We have to ask...WHY AREN'T THE MEN STEPPING FORWARD???  WHERE ARE THE MEN WHO WANT TO DEFEND AMERCIA??? 

 

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/8/2003 12:28 pm  
To:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII) unread  (15 of 23)  
 
  592.15 in reply to 592.13  
 
Hi Charlie,

For what its worth I didnt call you a name.

I was hoping that you could hang in there and debate this issue as some good points are being brought out on All sides.

Instead you are Mindlessly Stereotyping my position.

For Starters the Bible is the Most Freeing Document that Mankind or Womankind will ever experience so No Im not intending to put people into bondage and you are Totally Misrepresenting the Bible if you claim that it Keeps people in a place where they do not want to be.

But of course you and your ideas are so Liberating and if someone doesnt follow you then you immediately retaliate and call them an  so hey your way must be better than Jesus way because you have the filthy mouth to back it up with.

After reading your post Im wondering why people, like you, think that Bravery is for Disobedience.

Nobody is impressed with your bravery to post an obscenity. Nobody is impressed with the bravery of an individual to have sex with a stranger, or to fight for rights to kill the unborn, or even for the bravery to drink and drive. These are not Brave occurrences. They are Stupid occurrences that people are substituting for bravery.

Real Bravery is a Stand for Righteousness. Those who commit to a lifetime of marriage prior to intercourse, thats Bravery. Those who stand up and oppose Abortion, thats bravery. Those who are strong and stand up against pressure from others and will not take the drugs and wont commit the petty crimes, just because their friends do, thats Bravery.

Thanks for your input,
David



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited 5/8/2003 3:35:13 PM ET by David (DAVIDABROWN) 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/20/2003 3:20 pm  
To:  ALL    
 
    
 
             Why Is Bush Perpetuating Clinton Policies?

May 21, 2003     by:  Phyllis Schlafly

Why is President George W. Bush continuing policies that were
initiated by Bill Clinton? The voters elected Bush to change
obnoxious Clinton policies, and they don't understand why Bush is
keeping the following seven in force. 

 1. One example is the Clinton Administration's abolition of the
     Army's "Risk Rule," which had exempted women in support
     units from areas that involve "inherent risk of capture." That
     policy change, ordered by the Clinton feminists, is the reason
     why a single mother of two very young children was killed in
     the Iraq war and another single mother of a two-year-old was
     taken as a POW. 

     When asked if this sending-moms-to-war policy might be
     changed, Bush said at his news conference, "That's going to
     be up to the generals." When Ari Fleischer fielded the
     follow-up questions, he accused the reporter of "dealing with a
     hypothetical." 

     But Jessica, Lori and Shoshana are not hypotheticals. They,
     and Shoshana's 2-year-old baby and Lori's three- and
     four-year-olds, are all victims of a Clinton policy that Bush
     could change with a stroke of his pen. But, according to
     Fleischer, this hasn't risen "to a higher policy level." 

     What's a higher policy level than defending mothers of infants
     against being killed or captured by the axis of evil? Keeping
     faith with a shameful Clinton policy? Fear of the frightful
     feminists who applaud our government giving Jessica, Lori and
     Shoshana their career opportunities on the battlefield, and who
     assert that mothers are fully deployable a few months after
     giving birth? 

 2. Why doesn't Bush terminate other Clinton rules that impose
     the feminist agenda on the military, such as coed basic
     training? The Army Training Command admitted that coed
     basic training, which is gender- normed to reduce female
     injuries, is "not efficient" and of no military value. 

     That gave Bush a great chance to liberate the Army from
     Clinton's foolish policy. Without presidential leadership, the
     generals are certainly not going to act on their own. 

 3. Nor, without a presidential decision, will the generals overturn
     Clinton's convoluted "don't ask, don't tell" enforcement
     regulations, which a federal Court of Appeals found to be
     inconsistent with the 1993 law banning homosexuals from the
     military. 

 4. The feminists in the Clinton Department of Education engaged
     in aggressive enforcement of Title IX, using bureaucratically
     invented words and rules that were not authorized by the
     statute. They used Title IX to punish men by forcing colleges
     to abolish 171 wrestling teams and hundreds of men's teams
     in gymnastics, swimming, golf and even football. 

     President Bush appointed a commission to study the
     distortions of Title IX, but he foolishly gave some of the
     commission seats to feminists, and they used the media to
     grandstand for their side of the controversy. Secretary of
     Education Rod Paige then announced he would not implement
     any changes that were not unanimously recommended, so
     Clinton's anti-male policies about college athletics will
     continue under Bush. 

 5. The Clinton Administration persuaded Congress to pass a ban
     on semi-automatic assault rifles in 1994, and the ban will
     sunset next year. Senate Democrats have introduced a bill to
     continue the ban and, to the shock of the National Rifle
     Association, Bush announced that he supports the
     Democrats' bill. 

     President Bush seems to have forgotten that his steadfast
     support of Second Amendment rights was the main reason he
     carried the Democratic states of Arkansas, Tennessee and
     West Virginia in November 2000. If he had lost any one of
     those, Al Gore would be president. 

 6. Then there is the matter of Clinton sending U.S. troops to
     Bosnia and its relation to the International Criminal Court (ICC)
     Treaty which Clinton's emissaries enthusiastically helped to
     write and Clinton signed as one of his last official acts. Bush
     had a wonderful opportunity to withdraw our troops from
     Bosnia when the ICC impudently asserted jurisdiction over
     Americans even though Bush had "unsigned" the ICC Treaty. 

     For a brief few days, Bush stood tall for the protection of
     American service personnel by threatening to pull our troops
     out of Bosnia unless the United Nations promised us
     immunity from the ICC. But then he wobbled, accepting a
     lame compromise that left the U.S. with the almost impossible
     task of trying to negotiate separate immunity agreements with
     the 139 ICC countries, while at the same time keeping our
     troops on duty in Bosnia as a fig leaf to cover the ethnic
     hostility that is still as bitter and dangerous as ever. 

 7. Another Clinton policy, Executive Order 13166, requires all
     government agencies, and all entities receiving federal funds
     (such as doctors and hospitals), to provide their services in
     any foreign language demanded by a client. The perfect
     opportunity to rescind this costly unfunded mandate was
     served up when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled two years ago
     that no one has a right to demand government services in
     languages other than English. 

     But President Bush chose to continue Clinton's pandering to
     non- English speaking minorities. Regrettably, Bush breathed
     new life into Clinton's EO 13166 with all its follies and costs.

We're still hoping for a repudiation these Clinton policies. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Are you ready for a honest appraisal of the feminist movement?
Phyllis Schlafly's new book Feminist Fantasies tells you all you need
to know but didn't know how to ask. Order your copy now at
http://www.eagleforum.org/order/book/index.html#feminist
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read this Column online:
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2003/may03/03-05-21.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eagle Forum
www.eagleforum.org
PO Box 618 eagle@eagleforum.org 
Alton, IL 62002 Phone: 618-462-5415 
Fax: 618-462-8909 




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
From:  Strings17   5/21/2003 4:17 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (17 of 23)  
 
  592.17 in reply to 592.1  
 
While i usualy agree with Phyllis Schlafly i disagree with her portrayal of these women as victims.The military exist for one reason and that is to fight wars anyone wishing to reduce their risk should just stay out all together,they should not be getting pregnant if they are in.I have never understood why a man or women will enter the military and then decide to have a family knowing full well what could happen,can they not wait until they get out or is that too much to ask.Phyllis Schafly says that Jessica Lynch joined the army"because jobs were scarce in West Virgina" there are 49 other states why not move,surely if you dont mind traveling 5,6 or 7 thousand miles to Iraq or some other place going a few miles to find a job should not be too much of a problem.The other thing i find offensive about this is the suggestion that somehow a women dying in combat is worse than a man dying,his body blown to bits and scattered over a battle field is unpleasant but somehow does not compare to the outrage of a women suffering the same fate,people are people and dead is dead and its all the same.I am not against women in the military but they should enter with the full understanding that at some point they may face the possibilty of death or capture and if they find this hard to accept they should do everyone including themselves a favor and just do something else.These women may be alot of things heroes,warriors,brave take your pick but they are by no means victims.They made choices and payed consequences just like the men did,thats equality,is it too tough to handle. 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  David (DavidABrown)    5/21/2003 5:05 pm  
To:  Strings17   (18 of 23)  
 
  592.18 in reply to 592.17  
 
Hi,

Thanks for your input.

Im a little surprised that many dont seem to realize how very physically demanding that the military is.

I served an enlisted tour in the Military, with 19 months overseas in 3 deployments, and let me just say that to this day my body still feels the effects of walking and carrying a heavy pack around. What the military goes through in lack of sleep, sheer exhaustion, fatigue, stress, complete physical exertion it really is an amazing feet of endurance. Twice I was so exhausted that I was unable to have color vision and I could only see in black and white, everything I looked at was just like looking at an old newspaper and once some nerve endings broke off in the back of my eye and for four days I continually saw floating black spots in my vision and this isnt including the countless blisters, bruises, scrapes, cuts, sprains a few minor broken bone injuries, damaged hearing and aches and pains that will never go away and none of this was allowed to get in the way of the performance of duties.

Every day in the military you have to move fast and that means scrambling off of a helicopter carrying all your gear plus an additional three cases of 81 mm mortar rounds and a case of MREs, because safety depends on getting helicopters away fast and our departing from them fast. For us we would move from one location to another and this even included walking that day and all night in extremely harsh environments until the sun came up the next day. I could go on and on about rigorous of military life but one thing that I know is that civilians apparently will never know what the military is going through and it is only further illustrated in the fact that they want to place women on the front lines.

God Bless you,
David A. Brown



David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  Di (nostars)    6/1/2003 3:43 am  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (19 of 23)  
 
  592.19 in reply to 592.1  
 
<<that they acquiesce in the policy of sending 
mothers of infants out to fight Saddam Hussein?>> 
Believe me it would be the ultimate insult to Saddam himself ;) 





Christian Connectivity-- Christian Forum

  Watch this space for current promotions.
  

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  GatesFanLDS   6/21/2003 5:34 pm  
To:  Charlie Owens (ceoIII) unread  (20 of 23)  
 
  592.20 in reply to 592.11  
 
This is just my broad general personal opinion. Like everything...there are exceptions. 
Men are the 1st line of defence...in any situation. 

Women are the Last line of defence...in any situation. 

Once harm has gotten to the children...all is lost. 

Like I said...a broad general opinion. Please take it as such.
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
From:  David (DavidABrown)    9/28/2003 1:02 pm  
To:  GatesFanLDS unread  (21 of 23)  
 
  592.21 in reply to 592.20  
 
Urgent: Time to End Clinton Military Social Policies

I strongly encourage you to electronically sign the Americans for the
Military petition to President George W. Bush. This is a nationwide
campaign, initiated by long-time Eagle Elaine Donnelly, President of
the Center for Military Readiness, and endorsed by many other
pro-defense organizations, including Eagle Forum. 

Elaine has over 9,000 signatures already, but many thousands more
are urgently needed in order to get the attention of President Bush
and policy makers at the Pentagon. The petition can be easily signed
at this address: 

             www.americansforthemilitary.com

Please spread the word through your statewide Eagle Forum e-mail
news networks between now and mid-October, and encourage
everyone to support this critical campaign with as many individual
signatures as possible. Contributions to help defray the cost are
optional but welcome. Elaine Donnelly and CMR will keep you posted
on future developments. 


   Phyllis Schlafly 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eagle Forum * PO Box 618 * Alton, IL 62002
Phone: 618-462-5415 * Fax: 618-462-8909
http://www.eagleforum.org * eagle@eagleforum.org 




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


  From:  LenBenHEAR/LIFE_or_death:SEE: John 3:36 (franknsense)    9/28/2003 11:25 pm  
To:  David (DavidABrown)    (22 of 23)  
 
  592.22 in reply to 592.21  
 
MILITANT FEMINISTS have put women in combat military postions. - 
toting guns and learning to kill like "G.I. Jane." ! 

GOD intended women to be wives, mothers, and bastions of 

gentleness, kindness and morality. 

It is an absolute abomination what satan has done to 
women in our day and Age. 


---> Isaiah 54:15-17 <---

"If you have not [and show not] (Divine) Love... all the rest profits you exactly NOTHING." - 1 Corinthians 13.

*LenBenHear/FranknSense/Romans 8:14 + John 3:8*

---> Isaiah 41:10-13 *Psalm 94:1-16, 21-23.* <---


VINCIT OMNIA VERITAS

* Truth Triumphs Over All *

(Always "speak the Truth in Love")...[see Profile] 

* There is a time for mercy...and a time for Judgement. * - (which one you get depends upon your honesty and humility before GOD)


 
NOTHING YOU AND I CAN OR WILL EVER DO can substitute for the mercy and grace found in the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, The Lamb of God. 

* HE IS The ONLY Way to forgiveness and reconciliation with GOD. WITHOUT THE BLOOD ATONEMENT THERE IS NO REMISSION OF THE ETERNAL CONSEQUENCES OF SIN. ---> The ETERNAL consequences of sin. 

* GOD IS SEARCHING EVERY HEART AND THEIR (actual) RELATIONSHIP TO HIS SON AND ETERNAL WORD! * * He is looking for REALITY: not pretense! * 


but the wise shall understand. 


WHAT IS HAPPENING?---> *Matthew 24:10-14* *Luke 21:22, 31-36* ~ II Timothy 3:1-9, plus verses 12-15. * HEBREWS 12:25-29 * 
- and THAT is what's happening. *FOR REAL* 

THE FINAL SIFTING IS IN FULL-THROTTLE!


* DO YOU HAVE AN ADVOCATE TO STAND BY YOUR SIDE THERE?



** The choices are yours...AND the consequences: whether good or evil. ** ~ ~Ecclesiastes 12:13,14. ~ 
================================== 
 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit   
Rate 
  
    
 


   From:  David (DavidABrown)    10/25/2003 8:17 am  
To:  ALL   (23 of 23)  
 
  592.23 in reply to 592.3  
 
Army denies special treatment for Jessica Lynch
Jesse Jackson: Lynch treated better due to media spotlight
Saturday, October 25, 2003 Posted: 10:44 AM EDT (1444 GMT) 
 
 
WASHINGTON (CNN) --
.
.

The parents of Spc. Shoshana Johnson, who was captured March 23 near Nasiriya along with Pfc. Jessica Lynch and three other members of the Army's 507th Maintenance Company, told The Washington Post that the military is not treating their daughter fairly.

.
.

Jackson said he believed the Army treated Lynch differently because of the media coverage surrounding her rescue. 

.
.

"First of all, Jessica Lynch deserves all the treatment that she is getting," Jackson said. "She was a victim of Iraq, and the Army built around her this caricature of American bravado. They said she was shot and stabbed and shot to the last bullet, and she did not say that, and that did not happen. But they sought to use her as a propaganda tool for American bravado." 

Copyright 2003 CNN. All rights reserved. Associated Press contributed to this report. 




David A. Brown
Basic Christian: Forum
www.BasicChristian.org

 
  
   Options  Reply Delete Edit  
 
