In debate over women in combat, truth is the casualty

Thursday, December 6, 2012
Robert Knight - Guest Columnist

Knight, Robert (ACRU)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 Francisco.

"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 situations."

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" military.

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 fashionable.

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 to women.

"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 become pregnant.

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 goodbye.

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 for women.

Even conservative lawmakers seem too terrified to ask such questions as:

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 honest inquiry.

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 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,, our parent organization or its other affiliates.

Consider Supporting Us?

The staff at strives daily to bring you news from a biblical perspective. If you benefit from this platform and want others to know about it please consider a generous gift today.

We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the article - NOT another reader's comments. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved. More details




What's your feeling about the James Comey/Loretta Lynch/Hillary Clinton/email server scandal?





  Survivors of Maryland office shooting in critical condition
  Dem divisions in California complicate party hopes for gains
  Senate Republicans cruise toward passage of budget plan
Al-Qaida set to gain as Islamic State disintegrates
Under fire, Trump defends call to soldier's grieving family


Crusading lawyer takes action to disbar Comey
George Soros transfers $18B to his liberal philanthropic foundation
'Justice League' now in peril amid Ben Affleck groping allegations
Gowdy: Comey needs to be in the hot seat again over Clinton
Obama WH knew about Russian bribery plot before uranium deal


Cartoon of the Day