Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NJ_gent
That being said, don't forget that the pregnant woman is no less at fault than the man who fathered the child

Yes, the man is less at fault.

The female engaged in conduct that prevents her from carring out her duties, and makes her non-deployable. Her getting pregnant does not make her male suitor any less deployable nor does it gain him an automatic rotation back to the States as it does her.

Of course, he should be responsible for the child. But what usually happens is the woman has an abortion shortly after rotation or getting out.

Woman have been getting pregnant to get out of assignments for a long time.

Understand I'm just addressing the subject at hand. I could care less how they choose to get out. Though I don't agree that they should be in frontline units.

45 posted on 06/25/2004 1:32:28 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (In God We Trust. All Others We Monitor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: VeniVidiVici
"The female engaged in conduct that prevents her from carring out her duties, and makes her non-deployable."

Sex doesn't prevent a woman from carrying out her duties any more than it does a man. Getting pregnant isn't a choice, it's the result of conduct contrary to the UCMJ, of which they're both subject, and which they both must violate in order for her to become pregnant. They both break the code, they should both face a military court.

"Woman have been getting pregnant to get out of assignments for a long time."

We have a volunteer military. Your statement paints a broad brush over the women of this country, making them out to be little more than adventurous vixens who escape real work by becoming baby-making whores. While there are certainly some women who likely have tried to get pregnant to get out of a job they no longer want to do, the fact remains that they're unable to do so without the help of an irresponsible male who's willing to violate the code he swore an oath to uphold.

By making the men out to be less culpable, you're also saying that they are incapable of personal responsibility. Understand, the issue I'm addressing is purely based on the violations of the UCMJ required to get into this situation of pregnancy-based rotations. I say, charge the woman with the relevant charges, then run a paternity test on the baby so you can charge the correct male who also violated the UCMJ. My concern is with enforcement of the UCMJ so that when the bullets and bombs start flying, we don't have our real troops' lives in hands of a bunch of irresponsible, oversexed idiots. The code exists for a reason, and that reason is to save lives. Those who break that code need to pay the price, whatever their gender.
51 posted on 06/25/2004 2:01:58 PM PDT by NJ_gent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson