Like virtually all other
major institutions in America today, the armed forces are operating
under the tyrannical fist of political correctness, where truth is
sacrificed to ideology.
Oblivious to important mental and physical differences between
men and women, the ACLU is suing the Department of Defense to lift
all combat exemptions for women.
Not putting women into combat deprives them of their
constitutional rights, the ACLU is arguing on behalf of four
servicewomen in a complaint filed Tuesday in a federal court in San
"It's harming women in the field now," Elizabeth Gill, a staff
attorney with ACLU Northern California, told US News. "Significant numbers of women
have fought alongside their male counterparts in the conflicts in
Iraq and Afghanistan and, in fact, are fighting in combat
Talk about harm. Women are coming home maimed or in body bags. A
saner course would be to suggest that the military rethink its
decisions to put women closer to combat.
In the ACLU's parallel universe, women are just as aggressive,
strong, fast and warlike as men. You know, like in the National
Football League, where female linebackers strike terror in the
hearts of Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers.
Much of the pressure for this march towards barbarism is coming
from career feminist military personnel, who argue that lack of
combat experience hurts their chances for advancement. In other
words, because a few women want to climb the ladder of rank, all
women in the military should be put at risk for combat duty whether
they want it or not.
Hundreds of thousands of women have served and do serve
honorably in the military and perform crucial jobs. They deserve
every American's gratitude and respect. Some have been killed or
wounded while serving bravely in very difficult conditions.
The military has kept women out of direct ground combat for a
moral reason - deliberately putting women in harm's way is not
right - and practical reasons - women are not as physically strong
and they have an impact on the men around them. In a civilized
society, men are raised to protect women. Now, some of America's
elite warrior units actually train men to be indifferent to women's
screams. That's what passes for "progress" in a "progressive"
It's not primarily about individual capability but military
necessity. Anything that detracts from the military's mission to
win wars and bring troops back alive is not worth it, no matter how
In a summary of 30 years of research on women's
suitability for combat and heavy work duty, Prof. William J. Gregor
of the School of Advanced Military Studies at Fort Leavenworth,
Kansas, concludes, "Few if any women possess the physical capacity
to perform in combat or heavy military occupational specialties and
none will outperform well-trained men. Training women with men to
the same physical occupational standards dramatically increases the
skeletal-muscular injury rate among women."
Recently, the U.S. Marines opened their Infantry Officer Course
"Only two of about 80 eligible female Marines have volunteered
for the course - a grueling, three-month advanced regimen conducted
at Quantico, Va., that was opened to women to research their
performance," the Washington Times reported. "Of the two female volunteers, one
washed out on the first day, along with 26 of the107 men, and the
other dropped out two weeks later for medical reasons, a Marine
Corps spokesman said."
Like it or not, women are far more likely to be injured than
men, even in basic training. They are 100 percent more likely to
Under feminist pressure, the military academies have relaxed
their physical requirements, despite denials from leaders who are
also having to deal with inconvenient love trysts between Cprl.
Fred and Sgt. Tom.
Like virtually all other major institutions in America today,
the armed forces are operating under the tyrannical fist of
political correctness, where truth is sacrificed to ideology.
Back in October 1992, when the Bush Administration's Justice
Department went to war with the Virginia Military Institute over
VMI's exclusion of women, the PC veil was lifted for a moment.
Col. Patrick Toffler, head of West Point's Office of
Institutional Research, testified as to whether the U.S. Military
Academy had lowered its training standards to accommodate female
cadets. After much resistance, Toffler admitted under
cross-examination that women were taught self-defense while men
were taught boxing and wrestling. Pull-ups, peer ratings, rifle
runs and certain obstacle course elements were scrapped.
The point here is not so much about physical allowances made for
women but about the military's denial of the truth. Smart
military men and women learn to pretend or kiss their careers
In 2007, Gen. Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
answered honestly and affirmatively as to whether he thought
homosexuality was immoral and incompatible with military
service. Shortly thereafter, George W. Bush's Secretary of
Defense, Robert Gates, announced that he would recommend that Pace
not be reappointed. Sexual politics trumped honesty, which is why
we're even talking about ending the common-sense combat exemption
Even conservative lawmakers seem too terrified to ask such
What happens to women who are captured? Should we care?
If women achieve equal opportunity (and exposure) on the
battlefield, do they have an equal ability to survive?
Why is there an alarming increase in sexual assaults against
women in the armed services?
Do people realize that their daughters will almost certainly be
subject to any future draft if combat exemptions are lifted?
Is it really no more harmful for servicewomen who are mothers to
be separated from their infants than when fathers are sent
overseas? Should we care?
The Left wins by default when political correctness strangles
In the ACLU lawsuit, the four plaintiffs are joined by the
Servicewomen's Action Network (SWAN).
"This is ironic, since SWAN is the same group pushing the
Department of Defense to stop sexual assaults in the military,"
notes Elaine Donnelly, president of the pro-exemption Center for Military Readiness.
"The organization is against violence against women, unless it
happens at the hands of the enemy."
Robert Knight, a regular contributor to OneNewNow, is a
senior fellow for The American Civil Rights Union and a
columnist for The Washington Times.
This column is printed with permission. Opinions expressed in 'Perspectives' columns published by OneNewsNow.com are the sole responsibility of the article's author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of the staff or management of, or advertisers who support the American Family News Network, OneNewsNow.com, our parent organization or its other affiliates.