History will likely record our times as one of political confusion, forced social inclusion, moral delusion and commonsense occlusion at any cost---unless the history of our times is a victim of revision.
Secular progressivism is a deadly illusion---political correctness is choking our culture.
And speaking of forced inclusion:
Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced last Thursday that he has approved final plans to begin integrating women combat soldiers "right away."
Retired military officers and military experts are expressing alarm, while those at risk of loosing their military careers are nodding approval of the illusion.
Should mothers and daughters be placed in combat on the front lines?
Carter admits women and men have physical differences, but the United States military under this administration says they are looking at ways to mitigate those differences.
Inclusion is of greater value to these folks than national security?
Can they "mitigate" the obvious differences of Nature and Nature's Creator?
Mr. Carter says, "This will help ensure that women officers play a key leadership role, set the right example, and enhance teamwork wherever possible."
Women activists are upset because Carter isn't moving fast enough.
Activist Dani Moritz, writing for the "Muse," reflects the narrative of the far left in her article, "Women in Military:Why Can't We Serve On The Front Lines?"
She writes that although the Department has announced their new policies will open more than 14,000 military job opportunities to women. It "seems like a great step," she says---"except that more than 200,000 positions will remain exclusive to men."
So this disparity must be "mitigated."
She says, "The department recognizes there are practical barriers that require time to resolve to ensure the services maximize the safety and privacy of all service members while maintaining military readiness."
"But," she and those demanding "full equality" in the military say "others see things differently: [According to researchers] traditional attitudes make many people both uncomfortable with the idea of women fighting and unable to handle the image of mothers coming home in body bags."
This is true, traditional attitudes have not put mothers on the front lines to be brought home in a body bag.
Our forefathers knew this kind of "inclusion" was in fact an illusion.
Today's Marines know it as well.
They have published an in-depth article explaining. "Why Women Do Not Belong In The US Infantry."
After making their case in the US Marine Corps. Journal, they conclude with this:
Marine Corps infantry is not broken, so let’s not “fix” it. "Women should be incorporated into the infantry if they can provide additional support to the infantry mission, thus filling a gap in the needs of the Marine Corps. Until that gap is identified, I do not believe it is in the Nation’s interest to allow women in the infantry. Most importantly, the incorporation of women takes time away from training, jeopardizes readiness, and puts undue strains and requirements on the unit. National leadership should be more concerned with ensuring the Marine Corps infantry units are as strong as possible to fight our Nation’s battles, not with avoiding a difficult EO debate, promoting a particular political agenda, or maintaining a certain public image. Above all, preserving national security should be the driving factor of infantry policy change."
The Marine Corps. is indeed "not broken." They are the best in the world.
However, our relationship with traditional values rooted in Creation, and simple common sense is broken---and must be fixed.
Kingsley Browne, Professor at Wayne State University Law School, is considered an expert on such things.
US News and World Report published his article titled, "Putting Women In Combat Is A Disastrous Decision."
He makes the case that this is a politically motivated, not military readiness decision, concluding with this: "This is a a disastrous decision made by people (a re-elected president and outgoing secretary of defense) who will not have to bear its consequences. Instead they will be suffered by soldiers on the ground, and in some cases they are likely to be fatal."
When then Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta first announced in 2013 that the ban on women fighting on the front lines would be lifted by 2016, serious questions erupted.
We have touched on some of them above.
However, one question raised was this: "Does This Go Against God's Divine Order?"
The Christian Post sort of addressed the question. They asked, "Does this advancement in women's equality erase the line of God's divine order for males and females?"
Executive Director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, Ron Crews, told the Post that he believes this is not a matter of courage, desire or ability. "God created inside of man the honor to protect the women around them. Men in combat will have that innately inside them. This will cause a distraction in combat," he said.
At the time, Navy veteran Sabrina Bitmayl said the most substantial reason is the emotional genetics between men and women that will cause harm and distraction in combat."
She explained that in addition to the emotional factor, you have the sexual factor, giving some of her own experiences.
Bitmayl also said she "thinks there is too much equality."
"Why do women want to do it all and then complain when they have to?" she said. "Sometimes I think we need to take a step back and look at how things used to be with our grandparents and at the same time look at nature with animals and how God really intended for the roles of males and females."
In addressing this issue, Phyllis Schlafly asks, "Has our nation sunk so low that we are willing to send our daughters and young mothers into battle? Is chivalry completely dead?"
Schlafly says, "Weapons have changed, but the mission of the US Armed Services is the same. It is a mission for tough tenacious and courageous men who can endure the most primitive and uncivilized circumstances and pain in order to survive in combat against enemies who are just as tough, tenacious and courageous and often vicious and sadistic, too."
She says, "Every country that has experimented with women in combat has abandoned it," explaining the "notion she hears often repeated that Israel uses women in combat is a feminist myth."
She asks, "How did we get into our present situation, in which our military officers are issuing maternity uniforms, opening nurseries on army posts, and pretending that women can do anything that men can do, saying to find that answer "we must look at 2 feminist fantasies."
"The first is that there really is no difference between sexes (except those obvious ones we will not discuss) and that all those other differences, you think you see are not inherent, but are due merely to cultural stereotyping which can and must be erased by sex neutral education, laws and changed attitudes.
The second false dogma of the women's movement is that we must be neutral as between morality and immorality, as between the institution of the family and alternative lifestyles. As the national conference on International Women's Year at Houston back in 1977 proved, the feminists demand that government policy accord the same dignity to lesbians and prostitutes as to wives, to illegitimate births as to legitimate births, to abortions as to live births, and that we support immoral and anti-family practices with public funds."
The seeds planted in the sexual revolution of the 60s and 70s have rooted and are now producing results.
"Times have changed," shouts the progressive Left. But there is no change whatsoever in the obvious facts of human nature such as that men and women are different.
This truth understood through a biblical worldview is beautiful---completing for both man and woman.
The "changes" purported to have taken place in our culture by the secular progressive Left are a mere illusion. Men and women are not the same nor can equality be measured by pretending they are the same.
Women are so much more then men in so many ways.
Men are more than women in so many ways.
Each mutually complimentary to the other---it's called "marriage.".
Marriage is only between a man and a woman because men and women are inherently different--- God created them to be different.
Trying to blend the uniqueness of each is not progress, but an abandonment of the better way.
Paul said this to the Romans: "For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes are clearly seen."
What progressives call "progress" is merely the pursuit of a mirage that repeatedly appears just out of reach.
And it is the denial of reality.
There is a better way.
Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Faithful. Be Prayerful.