|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've always found Gallagher to be a consistent, conservative/traditional woman. She's very interested in maintaining men's traditional sex role, but to reap the benefits of what the women's movement has accomplished over the past 30 years.
One of her most disturbing articles was a tirade on how teenage boys are "slackers" and were going to educational camps over the summer rather than working jobs. The primary purpose of encouraging boys to work was so that they could pay for dates with girls, she went on to argue. I was really offended with the way she essentially was treating boys as wallets, probably trying to "train" them for when they get older...
Her article was on Uexpress but now the link doesn't work. Oh...I just found it:
http://www.uexpress.com/maggiegallagher/viewmg.cfm ?uc_full_date=20000619&uc_comic=mg&uc_daction=X
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While I have mixed feelings on Gallagher's treatment of men in this article, I would say that there is absolutely NO reason for the government to take BOTH parents from any child. In fact, it's something I feel so strongly about that I'd like to see legislation that states that the government, in cases where both parents are eligible to be called to duty, be required to make a determination which job is most in demand and be required to release the other from duty. This ought to be permanent in cases where the parent called loses their life or is permanently disabled. The government already has provisions that keep brothers from serving in the same unit, a la "Saving Private Ryan," so this is not without precedent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you, Frank. But those policies should treat mother and father equally. The military should test the fitness of each parent before determining which one should be drafted. Yes, most likely it will still be the father who is shuffled off to die, but at least the process will be fair.
Now, of course, if we got rid of the draft altogether NO parent would have to be sacrificed against his or her will.... ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even without the draft, no child should be left without a parent. Parents who join the military join with the knowledge that both can be called, but they (possibly foolishly) believe that it's unlikely that both will be called concurrently. Even so, the government should avoid the creation of orphans. In most cases the draft applies to young men before they become parents. This is a separate issue. When the military calls up the reserves or the National Guard, they call on experienced personnel, older and much more likely to be parents.
We could outlaw the draft tomorrow and still not solve this problem. Note that it became most apparent in a volunteer case, Desert Storm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some women join the military to get away from the kids and the responsiblity that entails. I wonder how many women joined up right after they discovered the welfare system was no longer going to be their sugar daddy and reward them for popping out kids.
Sorry to sound cynical, but I saw it happen when I lived in Detroit.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
