Another step forward for the U.S. military.
#21
You folks know how I feel about Political Correctness and the slimeballs that push it.
Funny how men (<---note the qualifier) aren't crying about the fact that they can't have babies (to cite one example), but some women cry about not being in combat??
Pathetic doesn't even begin to describe them.
Funny how men (<---note the qualifier) aren't crying about the fact that they can't have babies (to cite one example), but some women cry about not being in combat??
Pathetic doesn't even begin to describe them.
Huh??? I didn't realize men bearing children was an option for them. That has to be the most convoluted argument ever.
BTW, anyone who wants to and can serve on the front lines has my blessing.
#22
Agendas are about maintaining power and control at any cost. There will never be a fair accounting.
#25
Yep. Right there is the fly in the ointment. Once in, then they can work to change the definition of "reasonable" to a fair thee well!
Just ask any competent lawyer.
#27
I'm probably getting way a head on this but I wonder how the Selective Service requirement will play into this equally?
A loaded bergen gets heavy after a while.
A loaded bergen gets heavy after a while.
Last edited by DYNASTY HVY; 01-25-2013 at 07:56 PM.
#29
Gotta love this quote
“[I]f we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?”
For a start how about using some common sense .
Did I read this correctly in that they still have to plan this out ?
#30
I saw a TV interview once of someone advocating relaxed standards for hiring firefighters. The reporter asked: "But don't they sometimes have do do things like chop open doors and walls?"
The response was: "We'll just give them an electric axe or something."
The response was: "We'll just give them an electric axe or something."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post