Let's Talk About It
Political correctness -- CON
By Bill Kersting
Near as I can tell, the term "political correctness" is likely to be named the most overused term of the year. Not that the term is necessarily a bad thing, but how often it is applied and to what, do pose all kinds of problems, in my book. If you ask me, it qualifies as an oxymoron. Saying something or some term is "politically correct" is akin to writing about or discussing things such as a cheerful pessimist, a devout atheist, a friendly takeover, or a jumbo shrimp. Some would say the whole matter is much ado about nothing. I tend to agree, but being on one side of the fence or the other, regarding political correctness, is a big deal to many in our society. Unfortunately, we've reached a point in our discourse that some believe "If you don't think or speak as I do, you are a bigot and a vile individual."
On the one hand is the camp that is convinced that "PC" is the ruin of our country, as in George Orwell's novel, 1984. Orwell's "newspeak" strikingly resembles the PC we see all about us these days. Examples such as a small town in Iowa torn apart by one or the other citizen offended by a cross on the courthouse lawn. Or grade school children not being allowed to portray the Peanuts character Linus reading from the Gospel of Luke at a rendition of "A Charlie Brown Christmas" (wouldn't want to offend anyone who is upset by the reading of the true account of Christmas). Then there is the sad situation of our military chaplains being forced to perform gay marriages, even if it goes against their personal religious beliefs. Don't forget California's newly enacted legislation that allows transgendered students to use whatever bathrooms and gym facilities they would like. I guess it is anatomy be damned.
On the other side of the coin are genuinely concerned folks who sincerely hope we don't drop the political correctness concept and revert to the days when knuckle draggers in our society referred to those with Down syndrome as "retards," or called people with mobility issues "cripples," or berated those with mental illness as "crazies." You get the idea. There certainly is a difference between referring to people in derogatory terms and having to be so concerned with every word we utter, lest we offend some one on the planet. Name calling, racial slurs and putdowns are not the stuff that characterizes polite discourse.
Myself, I feel we have overdone the PC bit when we dedicate our efforts to renaming sports teams such as the Atlanta Braves, the Cleveland Indians, the Kansas City Chiefs and the Washington Redskins. I have no problem if a person wants to wear a cross around their neck in public. It is their right; why do I need to inject myself into their lifestyle. Likewise, sappy sayings about grandparents proudly displayed on sweatshirts are just fine with me. The more creative, the better. But I do have a problem when it comes to donating/receiving blood. I'll take mine from the folks who have attested that they have never had sex with homosexual men. I know, I know, people lie about everything. How could I ever be sure that the blood I receive is not from a homosexual man who engages in sex with other males -- last year, last week, or anytime. I can't. But if given a choice, and I believe it is my choice to express a preference, I hope my wishes will be honored.
Women in combat -- CON
By Jerry Crew
Bill Kersting, in his article several weeks ago about females and military service, supports women in combat roles. I strongly disagree because complete integration equals defeat! God created men and women equally but differently! And, despite the assertions of the politically correct, males are physically stronger, faster, more aggressive with more endurance. And, UNLESS you're a black widow spider male, will prevail in combat!
Although I spent 13 years in the Air Force flying as a navigator/bombardier in B-47s and B-52s and a reconnaissance systems officer in the back seat of the SR-71 Blackbird, I'm no expert on warfare, but I do know the purpose of the military is to kill the enemy and "break things!" Women hinder this mission because they are a distraction for biological and other reasons.
Ash Carter, the newest secretary of defense, along with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other military leaders are leading the effort to include women in the most specialized programs of the military. It was announced, with great hoopla, two women have made it into the Army Ranger program. However, despite denials from the Army, the question remains -- were standards lowered? It is difficult to believe they weren't! Thankfully, at least for now, the Navy SEALs have announced they will NOT lower the standards for women!
Why has this happened? The president has the constitutional authority to appoint and promote ALL officers with a "star" in their insignia supposedly based on performance. However, ALL Obama appointees and promotions, without exception, are political! All the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other military leaders are merely "bobble head" dolls nodding their heads in assent to every whim of this president who is clueless about the purpose of a military.
General Petraeus was once known as Obama's general, but even he could only take so much! He was appointed head of the CIA after his assignment as commander of all forces in the Middle East where he rapidly learned the extent of the disdain for the military and the illegal use of intelligence gathering for political purposes by this administration. He was forced to resign before he could quit!
Sadly, this is further proof our commander in chief is using women in combat as another tool in his attempt to "apologize" to the world for being the strongest nation on God's green earth. What better way to carry out his perverted mission than destroy the military -- the ONLY reason we are No. 1!