See other Sports Articles
Title: Mothers Wearing Army Boots
Source:
Rockwell
URL Source: [None]
Published: Nov 1, 2006
Author: Larry L. Beane II
Post Date: 2006-11-01 09:54:50 by bluedogtxn
Keywords: None
Views: 606
Comments: 30
Mothers Wearing Army Boots by Larry L. Beane II by Larry L. Beane II DIGG THIS I was distressed to read a paragraph in the Reporter (the national newspaper of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod). In the October 2006 issue, page 2, in the article entitled: "Conference explores ways to help chaplains readjust after returning from combat zones," there is the following paragraph: "A female soldier is driving a supply truck at dusk in Iraq. A boy, perhaps 10, runs in front of the vehicle, but she has been trained not to stop. She hits him and keeps driving. Back home in the States she thinks about the Iraqi boy all the time. Especially when she looks at her own 10-year-old son." First of all, as a traditionalist Christian, I have to say that this is not the proper vocation for a woman. We strain the gnat by exempting women from combat duty, but swallow the camel by training them like men (and usually with men), dressing them in masculine fatigues and boots, outfitting them with weapons, putting them in trucks in combat zones, and expecting (even ordering) them to run over little children. This is not the biblical understanding of womanhood. God has designed the female body from the womb up. Even her arms bend differently than those of a man to accommodate her hips. Women are completely designed around the uterus. Their very bodies are temples where the miracle of life begins and is nurtured – the safest and most gentle environment for humanity on the planet. Women are equipped with breasts to feed and nourish babies once they have been delivered from the womb. Women are the cultivators of life, the primary teachers of the human race, the defenders of civilization. Theirs truly are the hands that rule the world by rocking the cradle. But how many mothers are away from the cradle, neglecting their roles as the teachers and civilizers of youth, doing something "more fulfilling" – such as driving supply trucks in Iraq? And what has happened since women in large numbers have abdicated their vocation as defenders of civilization? Well, we now live in a society that expects mothers to be soldiers and to kill children – and they do it. Their maternal instincts and godly vocation of nurturer do not override their orders to kill. Why? The article gets it right: they have been "trained." Women have been "trained" to be killers, to follow and obey unconscionable orders that ought to be refused. And of course, so have men. Most men no longer have examples of manly and honorable fathers and grandfathers, not having been taught by their mothers from the cradle to revere chivalry and decency, nor to defend life and to protect the weak. No, our mothers are too busy wearing army boots. Remember when that was an insult? Long gone are the days of George Washington, Robert E. Lee, and George S. Patton. Chivalry is dead in the American Empire. We've become a society of savages, of barbarians, a culture of death that can justify even the deliberate running over of a ten-year-old child by a mother of another ten-year-old that she has left behind. But at least she feels guilty. She has good reason to feel this way. She should have disobeyed this immoral standing order. Hopefully, she has confessed this as a sin and has been absolved – and hopefully her pastor didn't just shrug off her guilt and try to convince her that she did nothing wrong. A lot of people argue that the killing of civilians – even women and children – is simply necessary in order to win. Sometimes we have to bomb large civilian cities. Sometimes we have to torture prisoners. Sometimes we have to run over little boys. Of course, using this logic, absolutely anything can be justified. This is the natural end of a philosophy that "might makes right," that "winning is not everything, but the only thing," that "failure is not an option." In this worldview, honor takes a back seat to victory. Winning comes at all costs. There is no right and wrong in warfare – or in civilian life, for that matter. But there's also another old military bromide: "Death before dishonor." We seem to have forgotten that one. According to this most chivalrous motto, losing (or even dying) with honor is preferable to winning but having to commit atrocities in order to claim "victory." One of the contributions of the Christian Church to western civilization was the concept of the "just war." The idea that civilians, especially women and children, ought to be protected, that there are rules even for the waging of war – was a great leap for civilization. We can thank St. Augustine for his role in the practical application of Christianity even to warfare. I don't know for sure, but I suspect there was a time when the students at our service academies read and studied St. Augustine. I also suspect that they no longer do. Hence, horror stories like this. Honor has no place in a military power that justifies the murder of civilian children in the name of winning, nor does chivalry exist in a place where mothers are considered warriors and are encouraged to leave their own children in order to kill someone else's. November 1, 2006
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: bluedogtxn, Diana (#0)
great article. I especially like the line about how our mothers wear army boots.
I love the sight of Lewrockwell in the morning.
the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.
I believe training women to be killers and sending them into combat is an abomination against God and nature.
Long gone are the "good ole days"...
Are you calling me a nazi because I don't think women are cut out for war?? From the beginning of time men have fought wars. It's not in the female psyche to torture, gouge out people's eyes and stick penises in dead mouths, it just isn't. Take it up with nature, not me. By the way, why the cheap nazi shot?
Oh lord Diana, that was not my intent at all, just the opposite. There was a time not that long ago when it was without thought who 'fought the wars'. I've always favored that portrait of the German mother with child. Perhaps I shouldn't have posted it in this regard. My apology if I offended.
These days posting anything remotely German, especially pictures that look like nazi posters (and there were many such posters posted all over during nazi rule) is like calling someone a nazi, a Jew-hater, which is the worst, most inflammatory and downright dangerous thing a person can be called these days. In early Soviet rule they put such people to death, even on the flimsiest of suspicions, or because of a rumor from an angry person who wanted revenge. Hitler had a fascination with motherhood and the role of women, however logic tells us just because he felt that way does not mean after thousands of years of that kind of thinking all over the world, that now women have to behave like men, especially for most women who have difficulty behaving like men because they aren't men. You just have to be careful with anything that implies antisemitism, though we're probably on some list already just for posting here (the flimsiest of suspicions), even so it's just not good.
I understand your concerns and I'll try to remember your personal fears from now on. That said, you might consider not posting on opinion/news forums as your thoughts today could become 'crimes' tomorrow. Myself, I've decided long ago...let the chips fall as they may. I'm not about to shut-up nor censor my thoughts because of some "list" or cabal that thinks they can intimidate. I respect your own 'personal fears' however. Again, I'm sorry I provoked you.
Come on, personal fears?? You know very well the climate in this country and in Europe where people now go to jail for thought crimes, and you know history too.
That's okey, apology accepted. I just wondered what on earth you were doing as that seemed so unlike you.
Then "jail it shall be" to shut me up...(should they take me alive).
I just got through reading some books on what life what like under Hitler, it was very similar to Soviet life, both had very strict thought police, and there are too many signs the same is about to happen here. From time to time certain evil leaders spring up, get a lust for power that turns very dark and millions of people end up dead.
And in every one of those instances the populace submitted to that evil leadership with little fight. You can go ahead and walk in line to the "cattle-car" if you choose. I shall not...
If you had posted that picture in the same context to anyone else, they would have said something similar to what I said too.
Except Scrapper 2.
You started it and now you put me down.
I've tried with you so now I say to you..."Piss Off"! BTW, I'm forwarding copy to "Abe Foxman" so look under your bed before you tuck in for the night. Are there no clinics, are there no sanitariums? What the hell happened to the "safety net"???
Nice goin' there Brian. What a guy.
Turns out that ole Brian is just a dem shill, not an American looking out for this country. More aptly his nic name should be...Brian Shill...the nice Jewish boy.
I agree. It's a sign of a civilization that is in decay, just as the objectification of women is also. It's all dehumanizing.
Booga booga!
As a kid I can remember hearing that Israel allowed women not only in the military, but also to serve in combat. Having been raised on John Wayne/Audie Murphy movies this came as a shock. Not long ago Ken Melhman, the Chairman of the Republican National Committee said, "We're all Israelis now." How right he was.
A classmate of mine in school was the daughter of an Israeli captain, her mother. Yes, the interrogation "techniques", the imprisonment of detainees w/o trial, the lies, and last but not least women in combat. If we're the leaders of the free world, why are we following the example of a 3rd rate bully in the ME?
In most cases a bully is able to take care of his own assults. In the case of Israel, they are a puny arrogant bully that dares slaughter and maim because they they have a bigger idiot that is willing to do their dirty work.
Didn't they soon learn that having women in combat roles was not such a good idea? I believe that they discontinued that dopey practice some time back.
Because the Lobby has our politicians in its back pocket and we're powerless, despite all the hoopla about elections. When incumbents are re-elected by a more than 95% (+/-) clip and then allowed to gerrymander their districts for further protection, it’s game, set and match. The cherry on the cake is e- voting. IMVHO, anyone wasting their time on this scam process is in need of further education.
Jethro... When the electorate believes or makes believe there are TWO viable parties the outcome is 95 per cent assured. Follow the mouthings of the dem and pub shills here on 4um, the elite have to be rubbing their hands in glee at the stupidity of the sheep.
I do see some comments they make and I'm left scratching my head. As I said the other day, our side suffers b/c people come online at different times. Let them go out next Tues. and particpate in the sham. Chavez would run a cleaner election, IMO.
i'm with you, Brian. Diana, i didn't take the picture Brian posted to you as adversarial at all. on the contrary, i took it as a gesture of agreement with your post.
great article. ".....What kind of nation sends women into combat? "The ridiculous spectacle of rescued POW Pfc. Jessica Lynch, the feisty, ballyhooed warrior of the Army’s 507th Maintenance Company, which was butchered early on in Iraq, occasioned the usual war whoops. Yet no one asked a simple question: What in heaven's name was a hundred-pound girl, barely out of pigtails and high school, doing in a combat zone?" In answer to the question in above article's title… Soviet women in combat The first modern nation to extensively utilize women in combat was the Soviet Union during World War II, when an nearly 60,000 of them fought in the Red armed forces (above, left). As a Communist country, the idea of women soldiers was consistent with Marxist-Leninist ideology, which heaped contempt on traditional morality. These enemies of God considered (as do their contemporary counterparts) the de-feminization of woman essential to achieving the radical quality of the sexes espoused by Karl Marx and other Communists writers. Since the 1960s, many of their anti-Christian social goals have found their way into the social fabric of the United States: Legalized abortion, day care centers (which help destroy the family unit by pushing women out of their homes and into the workforce) and "no fault" divorce all were first tried by a modern nation when Soviet social engineers deemed them useful in communizing Russia. (See "Toward the Total State" for quotes from a modern Marxist acknowledging these as victories.) Today they have be successfully advanced and perpetuated, in the name of feminism, by those promoting a closet Marxist agenda, from Betty Friedan (right, author of the poisonous Feminine Mystique and co-founder of the National Organization for Women) to Hillary "It takes a village" Clinton. (See, for example, "Hillary's global village" and "Parenthood or the village?") Putting women in combat is simply another aspect of the same evil, an evil which, if not checked, will further prepare for the dissolution of the American Republic and our country's entrance into a Soviet-style global tyranny." http://www.realne ws247.com/spec_rpt_women_in_combat.htm http://www.realnews247.com/what_kind_of_nation_sends_women_into_combat.htm http://www.realnews247.c om/women_in_combat_2.htm "Coincidently", look at where the ADL has their three main offices: Israel, Russia, and the US. It's all part of the hate-filled agenda to defile [Micah 4:11] and destroy America. When those women figure out the truth, they might not have any compunction turning on those who put them in the position of killing children. Might not have any sympathy for the perps' children, either.
#2. To: Red Jones (#1)
great article. I especially like the line about how our mothers wear army boots.
#3. To: bluedogtxn, Red Jones, tom007, christine, robin, All (#0)
God has designed the female body from the womb up. Even her arms bend differently than those of a man to accommodate her hips. Women are completely designed around the uterus. Their very bodies are temples where the miracle of life begins and is nurtured – the safest and most gentle environment for humanity on the planet. Women are equipped with breasts to feed and nourish babies once they have been delivered from the womb. Women are the cultivators of life, the primary teachers of the human race, the defenders of civilization. Theirs truly are the hands that rule the world by rocking the cradle.
#4. To: Diana (#3)
#5. To: Brian S (#4)
#6. To: Diana (#5)
#7. To: Brian S (#6)
#8. To: Diana (#7)
#9. To: Brian S (#8)
#10. To: Brian S (#8)
Again, I'm sorry I provoked you.
#11. To: Diana (#9)
#12. To: Brian S (#11)
(Edited)
#13. To: Diana (#12)
From time to time certain evil leaders spring up, get a lust for power that turns very dark and millions of people end up dead.
#14. To: Brian S (#13)
(Edited)
#15. To: Brian S, Scrapper 2 (#13)
#16. To: Brian S (#13)
#17. To: Diana (#16)
(Edited)
#18. To: Brian S (#17)
#19. To: Diana (#18)
(Edited)
Nice goin' there Brian. What a guy.
#20. To: Diana (#3)
#21. To: Brian S (#17)
#22. To: bluedogtxn, all (#0)
#23. To: Jethro Tull (#22)
"We're all Israelis now." How right he was.
#24. To: robin (#23)
3rd rate bully in the ME?
#25. To: Jethro Tull. everyone here (#22)
As a kid I can remember hearing that Israel allowed women not only in the military, but also to serve in combat.
#26. To: robin (#23)
If we're the leaders of the free world, why are we following the example of a 3rd rate bully in the ME?
#27. To: Jethro Tull (#26)
When incumbents are re-elected by a more than 95%
#28. To: Cynicom (#27)
Follow the mouthings of the dem and pub shills here on 4um, the elite have to be rubbing their hands in glee at the stupidity of the sheep.
#29. To: Brian S, Diana (#8)
Myself, I've decided long ago...let the chips fall as they may. I'm not about to shut-up nor censor my thoughts because of some "list" or cabal that thinks they can intimidate.
#30. To: bluedogtxn, Diana (#0)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest