And there are plenty of people who have argued to allow women to serve in combat units. If a woman, who becomes a man, could prove that "he" is able to do the job (especially since "he" would now not have any of the issues of distracting the other men, nor biological issues of being a woman), then let him.
Everyone still has to follow the rules and regulations of the military. Most of those are there for good reasons. Wearing a uniform most certainly has good reasons.
If someone wants to try to do 5000 pushups, have at it. That is a personal choice. A DI would never, for instance, be forced to make homosexuals hit on other guys or even look at other guys in the unit.
Equal treatment and tolerance in the military should not override the safety of the member and/or good order and discipline of the military. There are reasons that many of those that you mentioned would certainly be detrimental to that good order or discipline or to the safety of a member.
"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt
Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.
Bottom line is the military should not be used for social experimentation be it with women or gays...That is not what it was established for...It is there to protect this country and fight our wars...no other reason.....Liberals and gays get off their backs and let them do their job......
"God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."
Just you tell our public service masters, going overboard as ever they do. In England, navy sailors are forced to roleplay as homosexuals, as I linked-to on the first page or so. And recently, firemen in the north of England were SUSPENDED and DISCIPLINED for refusing to take part in a 'voluntary' pride march. There are even 'pink' flags flown from police stations and special detachments of soldiers sent to headline the parades of preening weirdos.We are entirely and completely past the "social experiment" part.
When our bosses, as Navy says, stop being so obsessed as to hinder normal operations then perhaps attitudes against Liberal meddlers will soften.
Last edited by Republic_Of_Public; 11-17-10 at 06:58 PM.
NB: I'm sure this belated reply is for this topic, in regards to strange boys being allowed to attend school in skirts whilst other kids are threatened with punishment for daring to question it. (Or even point and laugh.)
At the bottom line they share certain fundamentals, such as the age old roles of male hunter-gatherer and female mother and homemaker. In modern societies the lines have become less distinct and things have moved around, but nature has ensured even tribes and societies mutually exclusive shared these basic instincts.And ideas of gender roles are nowhere NEAR static across different cultures.
As I say, certainly if the kid has some undiagnosed something. If that undiagnosed something manifests itself in strange ways then it would be parental negligence not to have it checked out before going any further.Does it matter?
Unlike the school, which wants to do that very thing with the schoolkids who'd quite naturally raise their eyebrows at the very least.I have my own value system, I just dont impose it on those around me.
More gender reassigning, just because 'liberals' hate normality: Schools told to encourage boys to play netball and dance to 'balance gender' | Mail Online
Women are feminine and clothes have developed to match - right through the ages. That's pretty much normal.Define for me what normal is.
The 'sexual revolution', based on that theory that nothing is real, is in pure pure action: Teacher Debbie Lloyd-Jones who 'showered with girl pupils' banned for 4 years | Mail Online
Also, 'what is normal' can lead to this: Revolving door justice: 3 in 4 offenders return to life of crime after punishment | Mail Online
Good. Perverts can prey on the vulnerable. End of....this is the last time I'm going to repeat that.
Mine aren't obviously respected very much. I take it liberal-friendly opinions are tolerated more than others....differences of opinion.
....in 50 years we went from beating blacks in the streets to a black president, I'd say there's cause to be optimistic.
Interestingly, he's half-white. but good old Obammers will beat himself up over that race crime until he dies. Indeed, I hear he's been off to India, putting foreign workers above those of his own. 'Too white' I guess.
See, he's got the modern 21st Century credentials required (including being a cranky racist communist and having an unrepentent illegal immigrant aunt):
From Dreams of My Father: “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.”
From Dreams of My Father: “I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.”
From Dreams of My Father: “There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.”
From Dreams of My Father: “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”
From Dreams of My Father: “I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.”
From Audacity of Hope: “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”
And it looks like the Sun King's not so fantastic anyway: Mid-term elections 2010: Black Tuesday for Obama as historic backlash looms | Mail Online
MID-TERM ELECTIONS 2010: Democrats lose the House in Republican tsunami | Mail Online
OBAMMO AND GLOBAL MUSLIMS: http://www.reuters.com/article*/idUSTRE69R5VV20101028
Even the half-pale Sun King himself calls people 'enemies' for not being left wing berks: YouTube - Boehner Calls Out Obama for Describing Political Opponents as "Enemies"
Obama? I'd not hold him in too high esteem! Try the likes of Martin Luther King Jr, at least on teh face of it a more convincing role model for equal rights!
Last edited by Republic_Of_Public; 11-17-10 at 07:13 PM.
Well, you know how it is. You need to be 'tolerant' of all views and opinions, except those of the strange and peculiar ordinary people!Then again it's progressive England, so it doesn't surprise me.
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump