|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday September 11, @10:18PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
About the only thing I could imagine that would bring about that change would be a civil disobedience event of such a massive wide scale, that it couln't be refused. Hmmm, wonder what that might be?....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Males should not consent to be governed by nor defend those who demand and obtain privilege in many forms (including exclusion from military conscription) based upon unjust and oppressive "democractic" principles ."Constitutional Republican" principles dictate that electoral representation should be premised on individual rights and responsibilities rather than group and/or individual privilege. Without courageous, patriotic, and stout MALES VOLUNTARILY willing to defend a country, no amount of military spending nor amount of military hardware will prove an effective defense. However, this Judge reinforces and promulgates those same deleterious and unjust "democratic" Governmental policies which destroy the willingness, character, patriotism, and stoutness of MALES to defend the USA. The feminists and female elitists, who make up the "privileged electoral majority", seek to destroy these same essential qualities in males also. The same will, of course, have a significantly deleterious affect on national defense as fewer males will be willing and or able to defend the USA. I served with the US Army;2/8th Inf.;4th Inf. Div.;Republic of Vietnam 1969-1970
C.V. Compton Shaw
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday September 12, @10:51AM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"The feminists and female elitists, who make up the "privileged electoral majority", seek to destroy these same essential qualities in males"
I wouldn't be in 100% agreement on that point. I do not accept that feminists are seeking to destroy those qualities. When a military role is degrading, feminists are quick to argue that men are ideally suited to such a role. Walking through a mine infested Vietnamese jungle where you are target practise for invisible Vietcong snipers would be , in the eyes of feminists, a role for men only. In the feminist-controlled media, feminists eagerly support the idea that men should be willing to sacrifice themselves on behalf of women. It is part of the feminist agenda to uphold this aspect of the traditional male role.
I would agree that feminism will ultimately destroy mens' willingness to act as sacrificial lambs, but it is not the intention of feminists that this should happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday September 12, @12:02PM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"feminists eagerly support the idea that men should be willing to sacrifice themselves on behalf of women. It is part of the feminist agenda to uphold this aspect of the traditional male role."
They think we owe them something. 1. For them just being women and us men, and 2. because they biasely say we have it so easy.
"We owe each other nothing, for what I seem to owe you, I owe at most to myself"
Max Striner
P. George
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One point that should be brought up in revoking the male only draft is that if a draft started back up like in the 1950's and 60's men would be at a social disadvantage in gaining meaningful employment in the civilian sector.
Due to longstanding affirmative action hiring and promotion programs women have a definite edge in getting the high paying long lasting jobs.
If a man were to get drafted and got out of the service after doing his god given duty all he would get would be about 5 extra points on a two bit civil service job application. And even these jobs are skewed at getting more women into civil service.
Also, he would have lost at least two years seniority of his most productive work years.
The male only draft should go the way of the dodo. Men in today's present feminist controlled society get the short end of the stick TWICE!; getting shot at (under forced servitude; I think it was once called slavery) and getting screwed over in the job market in terms of actually being hired and loss of a couple of years of marketable youth.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
