Following are my top five favorite political cartoons from this past week. Vote for your favorite at poll…
by Rick McKee at Cagle.com…
by Michael Ramirez at Townhall.com…
by Bob Gorrell at Townhall.com…
by Lisa Benson at Townhall.com…
by Glenn McCoy at Townhall.com…
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
The liberals won’t stop until society treats men and women as being the same. No differences allowed to be acknowledged at all. If they had their way they would remove genitalia as a part of the definition too. Thus absurdities like homosexual ‘marriage’ become accepted. And soon…women registering for the draft. Women who voted for Obama should be required to be in the first wave of any attack.
truth -
Where did it all go wrong? When women were allowed to work? Vote? Own property?
The horrors!
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”
– Ann Coulter
“The liberals won’t stop until society treats men and women as being the same. No differences allowed to be acknowledged at all. If they had their way they would remove genitalia as a part of the definition too. Thus absurdities like homosexual ‘marriage’ become accepted. And soon…women registering for the draft. Women who voted for Obama should be required to be in the first wave of any attack.”
You’re being hyperbolic. Liberals acknowledge some differences between those who are male and female, but simply believe that everyone deserves an equal opportunity at everything regardless of external characteristics like that. That doesn’t mean that the military will suddenly have a fifty-fifty quota, only women that can meet the male requirements should be allowed to fight on the front lines.
““If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”
– Ann Coulter ”
Lol I wonder if Coulter thinks that her write to vote should be taken away as well. Or is it only liberal women who shouldn’t be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights?
OK Ex-RINO. Then you should be the first to register your daughters for the war. I will be at home protecting my daughters from people like you.
”Liberals acknowledge some differences between those who are male and female”
OK Jack, take me down your straight and narrow then and tell me what are the biggest differences that they acknowledge?
The Ramirez cartoon on the Hagel nomination hearings was not so surprising when one considers who nominated him.
A business dictum I read years ago stated matter-of-factly: First class managers hire first class people; second class managers hire third class people.
The first class manager recognizes the value of top notch talent and is not afraid of losing his job to an up and comer. Rather he relishes the value these people bring to the effort. Plus, when it comes time to pick a successor for his or her position there is a ready pool of qualified candidates.
The second class manager is always concerned first about him or herself, how they will look by their appointments and whether the person poses some kind of a threat to his own position. Rather than seeking out people who will bring a diversity of opinion, the second class manager wants conformity, is manipulative, prone to micromanaging, jealous of subordinate’s accomplishments, egotistical and hard to work for, and in general a drag on the enterprise. I have seen many of these in my years in industry.
The entire cadre of Obama’s czars and most of his appointments are not cream of the crop types, and Hagel’s total ineptness at the hearing is a good illustration of this. In Hagel and Kerry Obama has two people who are as ideological as he is and will tell him what he wants to hear. Shame on the Republicans who vote for either of these. As for the Democrats….it is what we have come to expect of them.
“OK Ex-RINO. Then you should be the first to register your daughters for the war. I will be at home protecting my daughters from people like you.”
Well, his and your daughters, as well as my daughter, can make their own decisions at the age of eighteen whether they want to go to war or not. You know, when they are adults and make their own decisions. And personally I would rather neither of my kids go to war. My daughter is not more precious and important to me than my son is.
“OK Jack, take me down your straight and narrow then and tell me what are the biggest differences that they acknowledge? ”
I seriously think that conservatives confuse not liking socially enforced and compulsory gender roles with not acknowledging any sex differences at all. I’m not going down that rabbit trail with you. There may be some trends according to gender, other than obvious anatomical differences, but the point of equal opportunity is that people aren’t bound by those, and that people are judged on their merits rather than what their genitals are. For example, it may be a trend that men are less nurturing, but that shouldn’t mean that men should automatically be barred from having full custody of their children or lose out on jobs caring for kids or the elderly, if they are qualified and want to do so. They shouldn’t be discriminated against or shamed. Same with women, it may be true that women are generally physically weaker and less aggressive than men, but that doesn’t mean a qualified woman should be banned from a job requiring those attributes, as long as she can keep up.
Gawd I can’t type. In my 2:18 comment… right instead of write.
“I’m not going down that rabbit trail with you”
And you said I was being hyperbolic….
That wasn’t hyperbolic it was flippant. ;)
I just meant that I am not having a long conversation about the difference that men and women supposedly have. The only point I think matters is, that no matter what trends each sex may have, everyone is an individual, and no one should be barred from equal participation in activities if they are qualified. No matter what their sex generally is like.
“My daughter is not more precious and important to me than my son is.”
They are both just as ‘precious’ Jack. But I do feel more protective of my daughters then I do of my sons. When my 17 year old son went out at night I didn’t worry about girls taking advantage of him nearly as much as I worry guys taking advantage of my 16 year old daughter when she goes out. I suggest you do the same when your daughter’s time comes.
“I just meant that I am not having a long conversation about the difference that men and women supposedly have”
So you want to call me out for saying that liberals refuse to admit that there are differences between men and women but then you say you will only discuss it in generalities. Why do you suppose that you are so uncomfortable talking about what liberals see as the biggest differences?
“They are both just as ‘precious’ Jack. But I do feel more protective of my daughters then I do of my sons. When my 17 year old son went out at night I didn’t worry about girls taking advantage of him nearly as much as I worry guys taking advantage of my 16 year old daughter when she goes out. I suggest you do the same when your daughter’s time comes. ”
Okay, males are more likely to be victimized by every single type of violence except for sexual assault and rape (and that’s debatable when you add in institutional abuse, such as detention and prison rape). Almost 80% of murder victims are male, most of them teenagers or young men. Aggravated assaults and muggings are also committed overwhelmingly against male victims. Check the Bureau of Justice statistics if you don’t believe me. And even sexual violence is an issue for boys, 1 in 6 boys are sexually abused before the age of 18. It’s for this very reason I don’t like gender roles, people think “oh, I don’t need to worry about protecting my son as much as my daughter” because boys and men are supposed to be able to defend themselves from violence, when the reality is that our boys need just as much protection and worry as our daughters.
So, if you don’t mind, I think my children are equally in need of protection and worry no matter what age or gender they are.
“So you want to call me out for saying that liberals refuse to admit that there are differences between men and women but then you say you will only discuss it in generalities. Why do you suppose that you are so uncomfortable talking about what liberals see as the biggest differences?”
I’m not “uncomfortable”, I think it’s a non-issue and basically useless. People are people, and everyone is a unique individual, who may line up with whatever general trends that are traditionally associated with their gender, or may not. Most people don’t fully fit into whatever a “man” or “woman” is by popular definition, which is why I think trying to make judgments based on gender is pretty useless. It’s much better to judge people and allow them access to whatever activities or occupations based on merit.
truth –
If you believe your daughter(s) have lower ceilings in regards to what they can accomplish in life simply because they are women – that’s your call.
If my girls want to serve the military, that will be their choice. I’m quite amazed at my daughters and feel that they’ll do just fine in whatever they choose to do.
Jack, Males have pretty much one track minds in what they want in dates at the age of 16. If you feel it is not necessary to acknowledge that then your daughters may pay a price.
I plan on treating my children basically the same when it comes to dating.
Ex-RINO, it is not a ‘lower ceiling’. It is that I acknowledge that God created them male and female and I am willing to acknowledge differences between them. Jack is backing down on my challenge for him to tell me, from a liberal’s perspective, the biggest differences liberals are willing to acknowledge between men and women. Are you willing to elaborate any?
I’m not “backing down” from anything. I just think it’s not the point, and never was the point when it comes to equality.
Okay truth – let’s explore this.
Where is the line that you want to draw?
Should women be able to vote?
Serve in political office?
Serve as CEOs?
Should high school girls be able to wrestle?
Play football if they are good enough?
I can’t tell if you think that the lines are pretty much good where they are now except that you don’t like the front line serving, or have the lines been crossed years ago and we should backtrack?
I’m guessing Jack isn’t answering the question you posed because it is a fairly stupid question. Women are women and men are men, but when it comes to opportunities within this country, there are not many areas where we should place limitations simply because of one’s gender.
Yes, let’s explore this. We can begin by you answering what I have been asking and telling me what you acknowledge as being the biggest differences between men and women? Why is this so hard for a liberal?
This is very weird, truth, given that you’ve said you have kids and such…I don’t want to get graphic on an internet board here – so I’ll link to Kindergarten Cop to explain the basic difference between boys and girls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhrYWNAKFSY
I don’t find the funnies particularly funny anymore, not even in that “wow, they nailed that on the head” kind of way, but I know it’s just me. It’s hard to smile when this stuff is so seriously wrong. Think reverting to my former apolitical self would be a wonderful vacation, but I am sure it’s too late for that. Makes my Jesus joy all the more sweet though!!
Lol Ex I totally forgot that movie existed. Excellent.
So you willing to say that men and women have different genitalia then. I know some liberals who are seriously backing a ‘transgender’ dudes right to sit in the ladies sauna at the health club. You don’t think every guy who dresses like a girl or get breast implants should be able to be called Suzy and have society treat him like a girl, correct?
truth -
I’ve had some weird conversations with you, but this one might take the cake…you trying to trap me and Jack in hopes that we don’t realize that women don’t have a penis.
Very, very odd.
Ex-RINO, Other than genitalia, is a liberal mind able to discern/acknowledge any big differences between men and women?
“When my 17 year old son went out at night I didn’t worry about girls taking advantage of him nearly as much as I worry guys taking advantage of my 16 year old daughter when she goes out. I suggest you do the same when your daughter’s time comes.”
That’s both funny and kind of sad. I didn’t have to worry about my daughters (both in college now) being taken advantage of because I didn’t raise morons. I guess idiot parents do things differently though.
I don’t think there’s any difference between men and women, other than genitalia. I’m just surprised that Kindergarten Cop statement isn’t more controversial these days, as sad as that is. *SMH*
I’m hearing the same thing from truth that I have heard from a number of more ‘traditional’ christians.
They tell us that “men and women are equal, they are both valuable. But each has their role to play, and their roles are different because men and women are different.”
Yep, the mens’ roles consist of anything to do with power, control, money, authority, etc. while the womens’ roles….not so much.
All of our resident liberals seem to be on this thread and other than genitalia I still haven’t heard any of them able to articulate even one difference between men and women. I know this is a tough question for you so I’ll give you some time to try and figure a couple out.
Ok truth, here’s one – women don’t have anywhere near as much need as most men to win pi**ing contests against each other :-)
“If you believe your daughter(s) have lower ceilings in regards to what they can accomplish in life simply because they are women – that’s your call.
If my girls want to serve the military, that will be their choice.”
Proof that libs don’t care if we have a good military, a mediocre military, or a lousy military, as long as everyone gets their dreams and fuzzy feelings..
truth –
Again, this is one of the weirdest lines of questioning you’ve ever thrown out there. Women have babies. Guys are much more likely to be serial killers.
How about you just get to what you want to say, or move on.
And I would like to know if you support women’s rights to vote, or if you think this is also where we’ve gone too far.
Ninek –
Don’t be an idiot – I never suggested that the military drop all of its standards – not has anybody.
The military require people to achieve certain standards in various capacities to take on the roles they seek ninek. Real life isn’t like Private Benjamin.
“Don’t be an idiot – I never suggested that the military drop all of its standards”
Ex-RINO. Are you saying that women cannot fight as well as men? Do you think all women should at least be required to register for the draft?
“The military require people to achieve certain standards in various capacities to take on the roles they seek ninek.”
Reality, Are you saying women shouldn’t be forced to fight on the front lines just because they aren’t as good at fighting? So your logic is that you would exempt yourself from risking your life on the front lines because there are men who can fight better than you and so they should have to risk their lives first?
“Are you saying that women cannot fight as well as men?” – at the risk of treading on Ex-gop voter’s toes, I’m confident you’ll find he intimated no such thing truth.
“Do you think all women should at least be required to register for the draft” – ???????????????????!!!
“Are you saying women shouldn’t be forced to fight on the front lines just because they aren’t as good at fighting” – no, I’m not and I disagree with the premise of your question.
Are you saying women aren’t as good as men at fighting?
“So your logic is…” – I think you surrendered the logic trail on this one a little while back truth.
“All of our resident liberals seem to be on this thread and other than genitalia I still haven’t heard any of them able to articulate even one difference between men and women. I know this is a tough question for you so I’ll give you some time to try and figure a couple out. ”
What part of “I don’t care” and “People should be judged on merit, not gender” do you not understand? Seriously, I don’t get it. Do you think that it’s inherently wrong for someone with XY chromosomes to prefer housekeeping and child rearing, and someone someone with XX chromosomes to aspire to be a CEO or an army commander?
My favorite activity is cleaning my house with my kids while I watch football. I’m only half a guy. ;)
“Do you think all women should at least be required to register for the draft” – ???????????????????!!!”
Does “???????????????????!!!” mean yes or no?
Jack,
Do you think all women should have to register for the draft at 18?
It means the question is both inane and moot truth.
Me too Jack. I cook for my girlfriend about three times as often as she cooks for me. And I like doing the laundry! Guess I left my testicles in a tank somewhere.
“Jack,
Do you think all women should have to register for the draft at 18?”
I’m anti-Selective Services so I’m probably the wrong person to ask. But yeah, if Selective Services isn’t abolished, both males and females should register and those who aren’t physically cut out for combative roles should serve in other areas. There are a million other areas that people who are less physically able can serve the country.
“Me too Jack. I cook for my girlfriend about three times as often as she cooks for me. And I like doing the laundry! Guess I left my testicles in a tank somewhere.”
Rotf. Honestly, I’m a great vegetarian cook (omg no meat, even less manly!!!!), and my ex-wife seriously never cooked dinner. Ever. I don’t know how cooking got associated with females anyway. Knives, flame, all seems pretty manly to me. ;)
The fact that you don’t eat meat does not bring your manliness into question from my perspective Jack. I only eat meat once pr twice a week myself. Fish and pasta the rest of the time.
“Knives, flame, all seems pretty manly to me.” – Tut tut Jack, that’s a little bit sexist isn’t it? ;-) We don’t know which gender played which role in regard to the earliest adoption of fire but most of history seems to indicate that it was women who did the knives and fire thing in regards to cooking.
“The fact that you don’t eat meat does not bring your manliness into question from my perspective Jack. I only eat meat once pr twice a week myself. Fish and pasta the rest of the time.”
Don’t lie, Reality. Real men eat bacon and steak every day and refuse to care about their health or anything else.
“Tut tut Jack, that’s a little bit sexist isn’t it? We don’t know which gender played which role in regard to the earliest adoption of fire but most of history seems to indicate that it was women who did the knives and fire thing in regards to cooking.”
Lol. I was mocking the weird idea of manliness everyone seems to have today. It’s all really arbitrary. Cooking is a woman’s job, except when Gordon Ramsey does it. *shrug* I honestly think these gender roles are toxic. Men commit suicide at almost three times the rate that women do, and commit homicide at something like six times the rate that women do. It couldn’t possibly be partially due to the the whole “boys don’t cry” crap that keeps men from seeking mental healthcare. Meanwhile, there are thousands of women who would love to be the breadwinner while their partners take care of the kids.
“Guess I left my testicles in a tank somewhere.”
No argument here Reality. You have shown us that you don’t have the balls to answer weather or not you think women should be forced to register for the draft. Ex-RINO might need to check where he lost his too.
Jack, men have always been great cooks and cooking is not effeminate. The complimentary differences between men and women are not as shallow as the stereotypes you like to reference.
Fine, truth. Then tell me what you think a man or woman is supposed to be and stop dancing around it.
“Real men eat bacon and steak every day and refuse to care about their health or anything else.” – then we need to coin a new adage – ‘real men die younger’. Your other points apply to this adage too Jack, as you have indicated.
Aw truthseeker, I just wanted to see your cute little brow all furrowed up with consternation :-)
I think that equality indicates that yes, women should also register for the draft.
Mind you, making changes within the military which affect freely enlisted people is probably a whole lot easier than achieving the legislative changes needed for women to be part of registration for any draft.
Liberal men are one reason the divorce rate is so high. No wonder their wives don’t stick around.
Nice work, Jack and Reality. You have officially defeated the straw man with your anecdotes about enjoying cooking. But cook on! That’s wonderful!
“Liberal men are one reason the divorce rate is so high. No wonder their wives don’t stick around. ”
Well that was unnecessary. You know I’m divorced, truth, but I can promise you my marriage didn’t suck because of anything to do with “manliness”. You are also an ass.
Why can’t you tell me what a real man is? Or a real woman? Since you obviously seem to know.
Got any, oh I don’t know, valid reasoning, data or evidence to support your supposition there truth?
I’m divorced too, but it was me that didn’t stick around. Does that make me the woman truth? Was my ex too liberal maybe?
I’m planning to make tuna and tomato risotto later this week but I’m not sure how much to reduce the white wine by before adding the rice.
“I’m planning to make tuna and tomato risotto later this week but I’m not sure how much to reduce the white wine by before adding the rice.”
Cook it down until you can slice the spatula and see a clean trail on the bottom of the pan for a moment, that’s usually when wine sauce is reduced enough.
“Fine, truth. Then tell me what you think a man or woman is supposed to be and stop dancing around it.”
I wasn’t dancing; I just like watching liberals squirm before handing them the answers. One common complimentary difference is that in general women are much more in touch with ‘feelings’ then men are.
“Was my ex too liberal maybe?”
More liberal then you Reality? Not likely but maybe.
“One common complimentary difference is that in general women are much more in touch with ‘feelings’ then men are.”
Again, men commit suicide almost three times as much as women do, and are much more homicidal. Are a lot more likely to commit and be victim to murder and aggravated assault. They are also much less likely to seek needed mental healthcare (since OCD and other disorders are more common in males than females as well, this isn’t good). I fail to see how it’s a good thing that men are encouraged to ignore their feelings as much as they do.
Thanks Jack :-)
“I just like watching liberals squirm before handing them the answers.”
1) you make us squirm? Only in incredulity at the sheer fantasy of what you say.
2) ‘answers’, now there’s a broad term when being used by you truth.
But never-the-less you do agree that it is true though that in general women are more in touch with ‘feelings’ then men are right?
“But never-the-less you do agree that it is true though that women are more in touch with ‘feelings’ then men are right?”
We agree that it’s more common that women are able to express their emotions yes. I’m just fairly convinced it’s an unhealthy and society-encouraged issue than it is something that’s a genetic difference.
I just want to get to the part you explain why my wife left me because I’m “liberal” (even though I left her).
But Jack, the stats that you point to about homicide and suicide seem to support the idea that men are less in touch with their feelings, and it doesn’t seem that anyone is saying it is necessarily a good thing, just a tendency. If some men could see that their problems were at least partly due to their emotions, they would be less likely to attempt to solve them in those ways and instead seek mental health treatment. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if we recognized this gender difference, men might get the help they need more readily.
Jack,
With regard to divorce I wasn’t talking about you specifically and I meant no offense. I was just pointing out that in many ways men and women are complimentary in nature and ignoring that is likely to cause friction in their relationship.
“But Jack, the stats that you point to about homicide and suicide seem to support the idea that men are less in touch with their feelings, and it doesn’t seem that anyone is saying it is necessarily a good thing, just a tendency. If some men could see that their problems were at least partly due to their emotions, they would be less likely to attempt to solve them in those ways and instead seek mental health treatment. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if we recognized this gender difference, men might get the help they need more readily.”
Well, I’m not convinced it’s a natural tendency. I am sure that most men in the US could point out a time when they were told that “boys don’t cry” or “boys don’t talk like that” in regards to emotions when they were very young. I actually remembering really clearly when my mom broke my arm when I was like four, I think, and my dad telling me that only girls would cry about something like that. Most guys I know remember being young and being told that you don’t talk out your problems, you don’t cry, that “real men” don’t do that. So, I don’t see that it’s necessarily some inborn tendency as much as encouraged from a young age. No matter whether it’s natural or not, it needs to be less encouraged, as statistics show it’s not healthy to suppress your emotions and refuse to get needed help.
“you do agree that it is true though that in general women are more in touch with ‘feelings’ then men are right?” – no.
and
“homicide and suicide seem to support the idea that men are less in touch with their feelings” – no.
Men aren’t less ‘in touch’ with their feelings. They just talk about them less and seek help less often because it isn’t considered ‘manly’ to do so. Luckily a good friend of mine and I have both ‘been there’ and both had the balls – yes, balls – to speak to each other extensively, and support each other, when our situations arose. The outcomes were much better than they may have been otherwise.
“I just want to get to the part you explain why my wife left me because I’m “liberal” (even though I left her)” – we’re in the same club Jack!
Jack, I would argue that it is natural and hormonal.
You’d be miles ahead of me when it come to cooking vegies Jack, but my girlfirend’s favorite dish is when I simply cook up a range of vegies in stock until they are almost at the stage where they could be mashed. I then drain them and stir in a dollop of cream and some mixed herbs. The trick is to cut some of the pumpkin large enough to remain visible and ‘forkable’ and some of it small enough to break apart and add sweetness to the mix. And don’t forget the peas!
“With regard to divorce I wasn’t talking about you specifically and I meant no offense. I was just pointing out that in many ways men and women are complimentary in nature and ignoring that is likely to cause friction in their relationship.”
K. You’re basically arguing that men and women should try to force themselves into arbitrary gender roles, regardless of their real personalities, because you think that men and women should be a certain way? I can’t exactly get what you are arguing here.
“Jack, I would argue that it is natural and hormonal.”
Okay, so we disagree. I hope we don’t agree that regardless of whether this emotion-suppressing tendency is natural or nurture-caused, that it’s not particularly healthy and shouldn’t be encouraged?
How else are men and women different in your view?
“You’d be miles ahead of me when it come to cooking vegies Jack”
I should hope so, otherwise my meals would be extremely boring. ;)
“but my girlfirend’s favorite dish is when I simply cook up a range of vegies in stock until they are almost at the stage where they could be mashed. I then drain them and stir in a dollop of cream and some mixed herbs. The trick is to cut some of the pumpkin large enough to remain visible and ‘forkable’ and some of it small enough to break apart and add sweetness to the mix. And don’t forget the peas!”
That actually sounds really good. You could also make it a sweet type of desert the same type of way, instead of adding herbs, add a bit of honey, some butter, and cinnamon along with your cream. I like to make veggie desserts (usually squash type of veggies work the best, butternut and pumpkin are the best mix) like that. My kids love it.
Just a heads up Jack I am signing out for the night. I have to be up for work in three hours to beat the commute cause we have snow here. Three hours is just enough sleep where when I get up I feel like I slept at all. Peace and love.
Have a good night truth.
Peaches and pistachio gelato Jack.
Now, where’d I leave that steak and the pan. ‘night!
When political correctness is your driving motivation, you aren’t even trying to build the best military to do the best job. If people want to play social experiment games, they should do it in the comfort of non-military environments. By its very nature and role, the military needs to be the strongest and the best to prevail and protect its community. Anything less is planning to lose to whatever enemy is just a little less stupid and weak than you.
Anne Coulter apparently wrote, “If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”
On February 3 at 2:18 pm, Jack Borsch wrote, “I wonder if Coulter thinks that her write to vote should be taken away as well. Or is it only liberal women who shouldn’t be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights?”
No, hers, too. Her writing has a lot more power than her vote. Taking away her vote would be indisputable proof of that. She’s a lot more concerned about losing her freedom of speech–with good reason.
I just wish my gender as a whole was more informed and rational when making their voting decisions. That doesn’t mean I wish we couldn’t vote, although I do admit the offer of electing competent officials in exchange for my voting rights seems an alluring prospect.
I sympathize with Coulter, yet disagree with her proposition.
As far as the “feelings” and “injury” type-stuff, I guess I’m just weird, because regardless of being male or female, my siblings and I all partook in teasing the sissy of our bunch whenever butthurt or injury took place and tears were shed, and great pains were made to avoid it whenever possible. Hurt? Play through. Watching a sad movie? You’d better not cry. Or else! We were always equal opportunity harassers. XD
“the military needs to be the strongest and the best to prevail and protect its community” – so are you saying that women are incapable of being a part of that?
“We were always equal opportunity harassers. ” – and I’m pleased to say that you still are :-)
Are you saying that making changes in the military to appease people’s personal ambitions going to make the military stronger? Do you want to be protected by the strongest or not?
Do you want soldiers who are warriors or soldiers who want to use the military to collect medals and promotions? If my butt is the one being protected, I’d like warriors, thank you very much. Reverse discrimination isn’t the opposite of sexism, you know. I have not heard ONE SINGLE pundit argue that allowing women on the front lines is necessary to IMPROVE the STRENGTH of the armed forces. All of the articles and interviewees are saying is that it is a means for women to get more combat experience so they can get PROMOTIONS.
Lowering standards so that weaker people can lead the charge in 4..3..2..1..
The fatal flaw in your argument ninek, is that no one has said that standards will be lowered. The same requirements will still need to be met, it’s just that women will also be permitted to attempt to meet them alongside men.
As long as it doesn’t detract from the strength then women should be given equal opportunity to apply if thats what it takes to have equal career prospects.
“Lowering standards so that weaker people can lead the charge in 4..3..2..1..” – argh, the irony, it burns.
“I didn’t have to worry about my daughters (both in college now) being taken advantage of because I didn’t raise morons.”
Only morons get raped. Got it.
I don’t think she said anything about rape, CT. Boys can get themselves into just as much trouble as females.
“and I’m pleased to say that you still are ”
What do you mean by that?
I hate to say, but I just up-voted one of Reality’s comments. Blargh. -_-
Simply that you are still an equal opportunity harasser xalisae, as it should be :-)
Well, I like to think I’m nothing if not fair and reasonable.
Yes, I know you do ;-)
Between Kindergarten Cop, Private Benjamin, and bacon, this thread basically just described my perfect day.
No, seriously, I just did a quick flashback and I ate bacon each of the last three days, today included, and – here’s the part that makes me ultra proud-ashamed – at different meals each day. Bacon hamburger for dinner, bacon with breakfast, bacon on the BLA(vocado)T at lunch. In my defense, I routinely have all-veggie meals or days or even weeks. But man. Bacon. It’s one of my four food groups, along with arugula, brussels sprouts, and french fries. Beets and beer get honorary mentions.
“All of the articles and interviewees are saying is that it is a means for women to get more combat experience so they can get PROMOTIONS.”
What don’t you seem to understand? If women can meet the requirements, then why not let them go for it? Do you hate your gender SO MUCH that you can’t acknowledge the existence of strong, powerful, militaristic women?
Funny – I never associated gays or women with wars. Does their presence in the combat zones mean there will be no more wars?
Geeze! And now I upvote Megan’s comment. What’s -with- me today?!
Beets and beer get honorary mentions.\
Beets. Beer. Battlestar Galactica.
Alexandra, nothing wrong with bacon three days in a row, just so long as it doesn’t happen too often. Like I keep trying to tell ninek, everything in moderation.
Never have liked brussels sprouts, yuk! French fries are a once a month indulgance. Not a beer drinker either.
Do you have dressing on your arugula?
Maybe once they get promoted far enough up the ranks Barb.
Maybe its ‘what’s up with’ us rather than you xalisae?
“If women can meet the requirements, then why not let them go for it?”
OK Blue Velvet, If you took all the strongest men in the world and had them compete against THE strongest woman in the world so that she could try and live her dream; how many men would beat her before she was finally was able to beat one of them? 10? 100? 1000? 10,000? And how many men would be able to beat the 100th strongest woman? 100? 1000? 10,000? 100,000?
Beets. Beer. Battlestar Galactica.
x,
Strawberry licorice, muenster cheese, and Battlestar Galactica.
Combat zones aren’t greek wrestling arenas truth!
Nor sumo.
It ain’t arm wrestling.
There is a lot more at play than simply physical strength. Things like stamina, wits, acumen, reactions, weapons handling ability.
Also, the minimum male requirements would still be within reach of quite a few women. I don’t know when the last time any of you guys were on an army base, but it hasn’t been that long for me, and I don’t remember many Adonis platoons running around…
Ahhh, Adonis platoons, those were the days…..sigh
Maybe we will see some Sarmatian platoons.
“I don’t think she said anything about rape, CT. Boys can get themselves into just as much trouble as females.”
No doubt. But her comment followed Truthseeker and Jack’s discussion of whether or not parents worry more about girls or boys and why. truth said he worries more about his girls b/c of sexual assault. Jack said he worries equally b/c boys are victims of in other ways (and also sexual assault) and Joan piped in with, “I don’t worry at all b/c I didn’t raise girls who are morons.” Even if she was speaking broadly to encompass all kinds of trouble (and maybe she was), she clearly said that only a girl who was a moron could be taken advantage of/get themselves into trouble in whatever way including sexually.
“if thats what it takes to have equal career prospects.”
and again with no consideration for what’s best for our defense not best for the individual’s career aspirations. Do some folks hate their country so much they’d put individual ambition ahead of troop safety?
and again, there are standards which need to be met. The defense forces will not be weakened, women will simply have the opportunity to try to reach the required standards.
“Funny – I never associated gays or women with wars. Does their presence in the combat zones mean there will be no more wars?”
If you’ve never associated gays with war, as in you don’t think gay men have ever been great warriors or fought alongside their heterosexual counterparts, then you just haven’t read much about the history of warfare. Women have been a lot less martial, but that doesn’t mean that some physically capable women won’t make a good addition to the troops.
“and again with no consideration for what’s best for our defense not best for the individual’s career aspirations. Do some folks hate their country so much they’d put individual ambition ahead of troop safety? ”
It’s seriously not that difficult to understand our position. If a woman can meet the physical standards in place, then those women who passed can be in combat. Women who can’t pass can’t be in combat, along with dudes who aren’t physically capable. Seriously, I’m a guy and probably couldn’t meet a few of the physical standards. I’m in great shape but I’m a skinny dude and have a bad wrist, there are women who could easily outclass me. I don’t see why a smaller guy like me should have a shot at something probably beyond his capabilities while a female who is well-suited shouldn’t have a chance. It’s just silly.
Reality, I know you are all for fairness and male female ‘equality’ in everything but discussions need to be built upon the truth. Things like you being willing to admit that women don’t have anywhere near the stamina of men. It is not a chauvinistic thing, it is physiological and factual. The fastest marathon time ever for a woman is 2 hours and 15 minutes and 25 seconds. Do you have any idea how many thousands of men have run faster than that? And if you go to the 100 fastest women’s marathon time ever there would be 100,000 men who have run faster than that. How about you admit that so we can rationally move forward in the conversation?
What does any of that have to do with anything truth? No one is saying that women in general can run as fast or lift as much as the average guy. But some can, and those women who can meet the requirements should have a chance to join combat units, or another physical job. It doesn’t mean all or even most women will qualify, just that those who do should have a chance. I seriously don’t know how you don’t understand that.
“Things like you being willing to admit that women don’t have anywhere near the stamina of men.” – oh dear, I think I’ll leave that one for the ladies here to respond to truth.
Do you know what the physiological reasons are why women don’t achieve the same marathon times as men?
As I stated earlier “Things like stamina, wits, acumen, reactions, weapons handling ability” – that’s more than one facet of comparable ability.
I just decided all males should be banned from English departments because women in general have better language skills. O.O
Jack, if English departments were on the front lines using their grammar to win wars you might have a point.
“It doesn’t mean all or even most women will qualify, just that those who do should have a chance. I seriously don’t know how you don’t understand that.”
Jack, like ninek said, the front lines of war is not a place for experimentation. And, it will lead to a draft for women which I am opposed to on several grounds. If somebody tried to draft my daughter the war would start on my doorstep.
“Do you know what the physiological reasons are why women don’t achieve the same marathon times as men?”
God created women with a higher fat reserves. Useful for carrying babies. And God created men with larger thicker bones to support their larger thicker muscles. Useful for protecting their women and children.
I can’t believe this conversation continues…
Look Truth – nobody is forcing women to be in the armed services. If they want to, and they qualify, why are you so high and mighty to say that they can’t beause they are women? And if we can put together a great fighting force with only men eligible, think what we could do with women as well? If they don’t qualify, they don’t qualify.
Look – give it a rest. If a woman wants to serve, they want to serve. I don’t think you’re some closeted sexist that thinks women should just stay home and cook and clean. If you are, just say it. If you aren’t, then how about you explain why a country trying to put together its best force possible would automatically exclude 50% of the population?
“Jack, if English departments were on the front lines using their grammar to win wars you might have a point.”
Lol.
“Jack, like ninek said, the front lines of war is not a place for experimentation. And, it will lead to a draft for women which I am opposed to on several grounds. If somebody tried to draft my daughter the war would start on my doorstep.”
While you wave bye to your sons (if you have any)? “So long, my boy, hope you don’t get your head blown off. I’m glad it’s not your sister.”
I don’t agree with drafts on principle. But I don’t see myself being ecstatic to send my boy off while I fight and scream about my daughter being drafted.
Anyway. This is just getting ridiculous. It’s not “experimentation” to allow a qualified female join a combat unit. It’s really not, it’s just allowing a qualified person to join.
I just decided no men should be counselors, or human resource directors, or anything of that nature, because women generally have superior social skills.
“If somebody tried to draft my daughter the war would start on my doorstep” – so basically it boils down to the fact that you just don’t believe in gender equality. What if your daughter wanted to join the military? Or at least was happy to register?
“God created women with a higher fat reserves. Useful for carrying babies. And God created men with larger thicker bones to support their larger thicker muscles.” – for a start, no god did anything. So women are designed simply as breeding vessels to you? Is that it?
“While you wave bye to your sons (if you have any)? “So long, my boy, hope you don’t get your head blown off. I’m glad it’s not your sister.””
My son would be glad his sister didn’t have to go to war.
So you really think your son’s life is worth less than your daughters? I’m seriously not trying to harp on you but I find this all very disturbing.
Jack, you completely misunderstand this if that is what you are taking away from my posts. I can tell you assuredly that I believe my son’s life is worth no less than my daughter’s life.
“Look Truth – nobody is forcing women to be in the armed services.”
Ex-RINO,
First off, I have come to understand that you have shown no ability to enter into any kind of honest debate. You still argue flat out lies like the one that people who like the health care they had pre-Obamacare can keep the same policy they always had. Why should anybody believe a word that comes out of your mouth. You can spin your bs to somebody else but you can’t seriously expect me to believe that the next step for you and the rest of the neutered males won’t be to make women register for the draft.
No I don’t expect women to ‘just’ stay home and cook but I do believe a woman who sacrifices a career and chooses to be a homemaker as her vocation is contributing as much or more to better society then any other person.
So you and Jack can send your daughters to fight and tell them you are so proud of them for protecting you from the bad guys. Me and my sons were not raised to have women do our fighting for us. Contrary to your gender-quivalent mind where men consider themselves to be no different then women; in my house chivalry is alive and well and we don’t send our daughters to war.
“I just decided no men should be counselors, or human resource directors, or anything of that nature, because women generally have superior social skills.”
Jack, if counselors, or human resource directors were on the front lines using their social skills to win wars you might have a point.
“I do believe a woman who sacrifices a career and chooses to be a homemaker as her vocation is contributing as much or more to better society then any other person.” – nothing else need be said really.
“Jack, you completely misunderstand this if that is what you are taking away from my posts. I can tell you assuredly that I believe my son’s life is worth no less than my daughter’s life. ”
I don’t know how else to take the fact you seem to be fine with the fact that your son could be sent off to a dangerous situation, but god forbid the same be done to your daughter.
“You can spin your bs to somebody else but you can’t seriously expect me to believe that the next step for you and the rest of the neutered males won’t be to make women register for the draft.”
You should just call him a mangina, it’s a much more succinct insult for men who don’t agree with conservative gender stereotypes keeping women out of traditionally male institutions.
“So you and Jack can send your daughters to fight and tell them you are so proud of them for protecting you from the bad guys. Me and my sons were not raised to have women do our fighting for us. Contrary to your gender-quivalent mind where men consider themselves to be no different then women; in my house chivalry is alive and well and we don’t send our daughters to war.”
You’re infuriating. No one has said men are no different from women. And no one is hiding behind anyone’s skirts.
I find the concept of chivalry in general pretty sexist against men and women.
““I do believe a woman who sacrifices a career and chooses to be a homemaker as her vocation is contributing as much or more to better society then any other person.” – nothing else need be said really.”
Well, I think choosing to stay home should be an equal option and is as important as anything else someone might choose to do. I stayed home with my kids for a time, it was great. It shouldn’t be mandatory for women though, or encouraged to the point where women who work are shamed.
“You should just call him a mangina, it’s a much more succinct insult for men who don’t agree with conservative gender stereotypes keeping women out of traditionally male institutions.”
No Jack, in this case I was actually not referring to any gender bias. I was referring to the fact that, unlike you, Ex-RINO is incapable of admitting even obvious truths when they are contrary to his agenda. For example he would argue that anybody who had health care policies prior to Obamacare can keep that same policy if they like it. That is just a flat-out lie that Obama told in order to sell Obamacare to people and that Ex-RINO has the unmitigated audacity to try and continue to sell today.
“should be an equal option and is as important as anything else someone might choose to do” – absolutely Jack, couldn’t agree more. It’s just not so much more important like truth sees it.
Reality, if your wife was making a choice between aborting your child so she could work and make some extra money or choosing to give birth and staying home to raise your children which you encourage her to do?
Let me jump in here, Truth-seeker. And then I will jump out again; I want to spend my time elsewhere.
Ex-GOP wrote on February 5 at 9:43 pm, “I can’t believe this conversation continues.”
Then stop continuing it.
Ex-GOP continued, “Look Truth – nobody is forcing women to be in the armed services.”
And nobody forces women to get abortions, either? Have you ever heard of societal pressure or peer pressure? Exactly the kind of pressure you’re attempting to exert on Truth-seeker right now?
Ex-GOP continued, “If they want to, and they qualify, why are you so high and mighty to say that they can’t because they are women?”
I’m not. God is. Elohim means the “Mighty One.” He made Adam like Himself–Adam is called the son of God in Luke 3:38–and told him to rule. Also to reproduce, which Adam could not do without a helper. Adam called the helper whom God made from him Eve which mean “life.” That’s her role, generally speaking. A man is willing to die for his family; a woman is willing to live for them.
Ex-GOP continued, “And if we can put together a great fighting force with only men eligible, think what we could do with women as well?”
Have sex with them? But ship captains in the old days refused to take their wives aboard. And some of them dearly loved their wives (each one his own, of course).
Ex-GOP wrote, “If they don’t qualify, they don’t qualify.”
That’s right; they don’t. That’s what I’m saying.
Ex-GOP continued, “Look – give it a rest.”
Speak for yourself.
Ex-GOP continued, “If a woman wants to serve, they want to serve.”
You sound like Barak (and Barack Obama, too). To shame him, Deborah said that a woman (Jael) would get the glory for the victory.
But my wife does serve–food. It’s as good as or better than anything described in the comments above.
Ex-GOP continued, “I don’t think you’re some closeted sexist that thinks women should just stay home and cook and clean.”
Specifically speaking of my wife, she should. And she’s happy to do so. Women of her nationality, because of poverty, consider such relatively easy service a luxury.
Sexism I have redefined to mean as the pursuit of sex with anyone, anytime, anywhere, anyhow, etc. No, I’m not a sexist.
Ex-GOP continued, “If you are, just say it.”
Does this comment satisfy you? (I realize I’m not Truth-seeker. But he and I seem to think alike in some ways.)
Ex-GOP continued, “If you aren’t, then how about you explain why a country trying to put together its best force possible would automatically exclude 50% of the population?”
Maybe because it’s not in their best interest? Maybe because men and women are different, and it’s the role of men to rule, defend, and fight? Have you ever had a dog or cat? Of what sex and why?
I don’t have a wife truth :-)
You can redefine things all you want Jon. You can invoke your god for your choices. You might choose to treat your wife in a subservient manner. But none of that justifies denying militarr – or any other – equality to women who qualify or meet the requirements.
” Ex-GOP continued, “And if we can put together a great fighting force with only men eligible, think what we could do with women as well?”
Have sex with them? But ship captains in the old days refused to take their wives aboard. And some of them dearly loved their wives (each one his own, of course).”
Wow. I don’t know if you know, but women don’t exist simply for sex partners for men.
Well Jack, it fits with truth’s belief that women are first and foremost breeding vessels.
Reality, women are the perfect complimentary partners for men. The Having children is just one component of that. Husbands and wives share life with one another in every way and with common purpose. The animosity you imagine does not exist when the couple decides to work in compliment to one another. It is a shame but you may never understand or experience the joy cause your biased against men and women accepting traditional roles (as God intended and with God’s help) will keep you from ever even trying to live such a blessed lifestyle.
Well, truth, people who aren’t cut out for whatever traditional role you think they should aren’t going to live a blessed lifestyle if you try to force it on them. People don’t fit into neat little boxes like that.
“The animosity you imagine” – I alluded to no such thing, why do you make stuff up?
“cause your biased against men and women accepting traditional roles” – not at all, if that’s what they choose. Even did so successfully at one stage myself. You’re biased against people who don’t accept what you see as ‘traditional’ roles (however far back in history you might wish to take that concept).
“(as God intended and with God’s help)” – impossible and implausible :-)
“will keep you from ever even trying to live such a blessed lifestyle” – been there, done that.
Reality you say it is impossible and implausible and then say you you have been there, done that. The bending of the liberal mind is fascinating.
He’s talking about God in that instance, truth, not “traditional” gender roles.
Jack, I understand that it is not possible for everybody. The marriage I am talking about takes a man and a woman together in their vow to God that they will always love one another and asking God to bless their union.
What Jack said truth. I was only referring to the ‘god’ bit, which you may have noticed if you’d focussed on what I wrote rather than what you wanted to read ;-)
“in their vow to God that they will always love one another and asking God to bless their union.” - again, pointless.
Okay truth. Those who wish to enter into that type of relationship, good for them. If you all will stop trying to force people into those roles and those relationships, we’ll probably all get along. :)
then you are agreeing that you were wrong when you responded to my post by stating that you had ‘been there done that’. Just what were you trying to say?
“If you all will stop trying to force people into those roles and those relationships, we’ll probably all get along.”
Jack, I am all about getting along now you tell me how it is going to work when I see my role as a traditional one of protecting my daughter from danger and see my role as fighting for her while the ‘gender-quivalent’ masses (I made that word up) try and force her into selective service?
Gees truth! OK, let me take you through this bit by bit.
You wrote a sentence which stated “It is a shame but you may never understand or experience the joy cause your biased against men and women accepting traditional roles (as God intended and with God’s help) will keep you from ever even trying to live such a blessed lifestyle”
Take out the god bit you had in brackets (which I labelled as impossible and implausible because there is no god) and we now have “It is a shame but you may never understand or experience the joy cause your biased against men and women accepting traditional roles will keep you from ever even trying to live such a blessed lifestyle”
So basically you’re saying I’ll never know.
To this my response was firstly ‘ “cause your biased against men and women accepting traditional roles” – not at all, if that’s what they choose. Even did so successfully at one stage myself. You’re biased against people who don’t accept what you see as ‘traditional’ roles (however far back in history you might wish to take that concept).”
OK?
Now, after the ‘there is no god bit I said ‘ “will keep you from ever even trying to live such a blessed lifestyle” – been there, done that.’
So, just to clarify for you.
I was married, for many years.
My wife did the ‘traditional’ stay at home role to raise our son and keep home and hearth hale and hearty.
So I do know. And I’m not biased against it. Rather it is that you are biased against those who don’t choose such a way.
Do you get it now?
Reality, The deck is stacked against marriages surviving and I am sorry for your divorce. IMO it takes faith to survive.
truth –
Looks like everyone else is handling the conversation quite fine regarding who can serve our country.
In regards to healthcare, I’ve offered it once and you turned it down. I’m more than willing to debate you on healthcare. I only ask for two things – one, that we go to a thread that is mostly abandoned so we don’t have the load times and we don’t have to jump to a second page (like this one is about to get to) – and second, that we trade off every few questions.
You know my issues with you and debating – first, you don’t have a basic grasp of health care issues (as shown with your struggles of understanding the difference between medicare and medicaid, and continuing to ask me about the government hiring doctors to cover shortages). Also, you tend to pull obscure, untruthful information from sites, and when confronted, you simply try to ask a different question and go in a different direction without wrapping up the previous thought.
Once again, the offer is out there.
“The deck is stacked against marriages surviving” – I disagree, and the sooner there is marriage equality the stronger the institution will become.
“and I am sorry for your divorce.” – why? I’m not.
“IMO it takes faith to survive” – yes, you’re probably right. After all, people who believe in god never get divorced do they :-)
“IMO it takes faith to survive” – yes, you’re probably right. After all, people who believe in god never get divorced do they.
Belief in God is not the same as placing your faith/trust in God. Even the Devil believes in God but the Devil does not have faith in God.
Ex-RINO, historically you have no capacity to admit to anything that you think could put your position in jeopardy. Not even simple things like the fact that it was a lie that people who liked there current health care policies would be able to keep them under Obamacare or that the price of a health care policy would go down under Obamacare. NOBODY can keep the policies they had because everybody has to change their policies to comply with all the new regulations and the average policy under Obamacare is now estimated to cost about $20,000 a year annually!!!! If we can’t even start with you being able to admit to honest facts as a basis to build on then what is the point?
Are you implying that true, faithful, God-fearing Christians never make mistakes and marry a terrible person, never get into abusive relationships, or otherwise have to end their marriages for whatever reason, truth? I thought that abuse or cheating were valid, biblical reasons to end a marriage. <—- not being flippant or a jerk here, I am honestly curious. I thought that even the Catholic church offered annulments in some cases. And I’ve only met a couple Christians who claim there are no reasons for divorce, ever, if you are a faithful Christian.
“Belief in God is not the same as placing your faith/trust in God.” – then what’s the point, unless you are one of satan’s spawn.
“the Devil does not have faith in God” – are you sure about that?
“Jack, I am all about getting along now you tell me how it is going to work when I see my role as a traditional one of protecting my daughter from danger and see my role as fighting for her while the ‘gender-quivalent’ masses (I made that word up) try and force her into selective service? ”
I have said at least twice on this thread I’m anti-Selective services, and the majority of people in the US are anti-draft as well. I think it’s far more likely the draft gets 100% abolished than women get forced into it, honestly. But anyway, even if women had to register for Selective Services, that doesn’t mean your girls will get sent off to war. Conscientious objectors are a thing (even us disposable males can be that ;)) and if your daughter was conscripted and wasn’t able to get an exemption, she could serve in some other way. Maybe in the military healthcare or something like that.
No I am not implying that Jack. There are two people involved in the marriage and if either of them are unfaithful then the faithful one could still end up in a failed marriage. As far as divorce goes I will refer you to a passage where the Pharisees try and trick Jesus into saying divorce is ok. Jesus acknowledges that Old Testament law allowed for divorce in cases of infidelity but Jesus also says that it was not that way in the beginning and the only reason it was permitted is because of the hardness of people’s hearts. The church gives way too much lee-way on divorce and annulments. Also, in this passage Jesus defines marriage as intended by God is between a male and a female.
The Pharisees approached and asked, “Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?” They were testing him. He said to them in reply, “What did Moses command you?” They replied, “Moses permitted him to write a bill of divorce and dismiss her.” But Jesus told them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment.
But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother (and be joined to his wife), and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”
In the house the disciples again questioned him about this. He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
Okay this all doesn’t make sense to me. Did God not realize when he created people (creating them knowing they would sin, mind you), that sometimes good, faithful people would be married to terrible human beings, through no fault of their own? Why would he punish someone who married badly the first time but wanted a second chance at a good Christian marriage?
It just seems like this overly strict “divorce is bad” dogma leads to horrific situations like my mom refusing to leave her POS pedophile husband, because it would be a sin and she was stuck with him for life. My mom was only sixteen when she got married, I really don’t see how it would be sinful to obtain a divorce in that situation and remarry. I can’t believe that a loving God would punish someone and say someone was sinning for leaving a bad person and getting remarried to a decent human being.
truth –
Your call. I threw it out there.
Jack, imo your mother should have left her husband as a matter of safety. God does not always give the faithful what they ask for or what they expect. It would not have been a sin for your mother to leave. The remarriage part is a hard pill to swallow. I have a sister who went through two failed marriages and the third is like a match made in heaven where they adopted two children and I struggle myself with those same questions.
Looking at it from my own personal perspective I would not characterize the inability to remarry as punishment from God though. It is me who spoke to God and vowed to God that I would live my life caring for my wife and never remarry. If I lost my wife I would accept it and respect my vow because I made it to God when I asked him to bless our union and watch over us. I wouldn’t presume to second guess the way things went from there. And the way the Church gives annulments and allows remarriage is that they say the marriage never really occurred if your sister did not understand what she was doing and enter into the marriage ‘knowingly’. I also wouldn’t presume to know what was in a persons heart and the vows they made to God at the time of marriage so it is possible that your mother could remarry and it would seem totally fine in my eyes. But my eyes and what I see are not what would make it ok or not ok. Your mother’s eyes and what she sees are what matters.
“and if your daughter was conscripted and wasn’t able to get an exemption, she could serve in some other way. Maybe in the military healthcare or something like that. ”
Jack, I appreciate you trying to put a positive spin on what could be but that is not the way the system works. If someone is conscripted they are just a cog in the machine and don’t get any say in where they go. The government owns you and the system sends you where ever the hell they want. The reality is you either go where they tell you or go to jail.
“the Devil does not have faith in God” – are you sure about that”
As sure as I can be. People who have faith in God submit themselves to God’s will and do not rebel against God.
“Jack, imo your mother should have left her husband as a matter of safety. God does not always give the faithful what they ask for or what they expect. It would not have been a sin for your mother to leave.”
See, that’s what I always thought even as a kid. She always said crap like “a woman’s place is to obey and honor her husband” and no matter what she wasn’t allowed to leave. Regardless of the fact that I think it’s horribly morally wrong for anyone to allow their children to be abused (or abuse them herself, which she did), I don’t even think it’s biblically supported that people should have to stay in those situations. I seriously don’t see the Jesus of the Bible being all “Hellz yeah! You stay with that raping and beating husband!”. Bible Jesus was a pretty cool dude in my opinion, I couldn’t square the “never ever leave your marriage” philosophy with other facets of Christian belief.
As for the rest of your comment, it’s your interpretation that a marriage isn’t valid in God’s eyes if not entered as a knowing vow to God? So, for example, an atheist who has one failed marriage wasn’t ever technically married in the eyes of God, so they could remarry in the Church and that would be their first marriage according to your beliefs?
“Jack, I appreciate you trying to put a positive spin on what could be but that is not the way the system works. If someone is conscripted they are just a cog in the machine and don’t get any say in where they go. The government owns you and the system sends you where ever the hell they want. The reality is you either go where they tell you or go to jail.”
Well, I don’t think that the higher ups in the military are completely stupid. Those who don’t want to fight aren’t going to make the best soldiers. At the homeless shelter I’ve talked to Vietnam vets that were drafted even though they were anti-war, their superiors put them in supportive positions such as healthcare or supplies, stuff like that where they didn’t have to kill anyone and were at least slightly removed from the fighting. I’ve known a couple people who got deferrals for being conscientious objectors. Anyway, I do truly believe it’s all moot anyway, because I think that there’s enough backlash against the thought of an actual draft that it will be abolished or become obsolete eventually.
You get the gist but to clarify the way I see it personally. It is not the marriage in the church that would make it the first marriage; it would be the vow to God. I eloped with my wife and got married before a Justice of the Peace. The night before we eloped I made my vow to God so I feel like I married before the state acknowledged it. And I did then follow-up with a marriage in the church but in my eyes I was married even before that cause it was when me and my wife spoke to God together and made our vows to God; that is when I feel like we got married.
Okay that makes sense truth. Thanks for explaining, I was just curious.