Why Women’s Issues Are Men’s Issues Too

Townhall.com ^ | March 18, 2013 | Katie Kieffer

[Kaslin]

President Obama and Sandra Fluke both callthemselves lawyers and “reproductive rights activists” without giving you any indication that they understand the Constitution or basic biology.

I’m not a lawyer, but I understand the Constitution. I’m not a reproductive rights activist, but Iaced Biology 101. So I can tell you that Sandra and Barack are wrong when they classify women in combat and contraception as “women’s issues.”

Military combat and contraception coverage are not women’s issues. They are freedom issues and freedom is just as important to men as it is to women.

Liberals love dismissing “freedom issues” as “women’s issues” because then it’s like WNBA games—guys check out.

Women don’t go to war by themselves; women fight alongside men. So the question of whether the government can draft men orwomen is a “freedom issue,” not a “chromosomal issue.”

When a guy turns 18, he must sign up with the Selective Service. The only purpose of the Selective Service is to prepare for a potential draft.

Currently, women are not required to sign up for the Selective Service, but Congress will likely change that now that the Pentagon lifted its ban on women in combat.

Drafts and the Selective Service violate your First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of association. They also violate the Thirteenth Amendment, by making young people serfs of the government.

Philosopher Ayn Rand writes in the June 1966 edition of The Objectivist newsletter: “Statism needs war; a free country does not. Statism survives by looting; a free country survives by production. … Just as an individual has the right of self-defense, so has a free country if attacked. But this does not give its government [has] the right to draft men into military service—which is the most blatantly statist violation of a man’s right to his own life. …a volunteer army is the most efficient army, as many military authorities have testified. A free country has never lacked volunteers when attacked by a foreign aggressor.”

Anyone who volunteers for a combat role and meets the qualifications should be able to fight. But we should not violate the freedom of young men or women by forcing them to sign up for the Selective Service. That’s point number one.

Point number two is that forcing employers to cover contraception is also a freedom issue, not a women’s issue. Women don’t impregnate themselves. Plus, Obamacare’s contraception mandate violates both male and female free speech.

Ironically, Obamacare is sexist because it teaches guys to be playboys. Now, if a guy pressures a girl to have sex and she gets pregnant, he’s off the hook because he can say: “Not my problem, you should have been using Obama’s free birth control.”

I think liberals like Fluke are hurting women by pushing a one-sided message of sex that gives young women a false sense of security about jumping into bed with guys who have incurable diseases.

One in fourteenage girls has an STD. With so much focus on preventing pregnancy, teenage girls seem to forget about STDs. Birth control doesn’t prevent STDs. Even condoms and HPV vaccines are not 100 percent effective against STDs.

An unwanted pregnancy can end in adoption. But an STD can ruin a woman’s life forever.

Liberals will just say we need more government sex education. But, many types of STDs have increased even as the government has ramped up its prevention efforts. The federal government and politicians like Anthony Weiner have no business in sex education. That’s a role for parents and churches.

My overall point is that, as a conservative, you need to change the dialogue and stop letting the left classify “freedom issues” as “women’s issues.” Because when you allow liberals to define the terms, they win.

The way to promote women is not to compel women to sign up for the Selective Service or force employers to cover birth control. The way to promote women is to defend the Constitution and the freedom that men and women both enjoy.

[ansel12]

The left has already changed the argument from women in the military to women in combat units, the problems of females inadequacies in support units is off the table, it was allowed to just fade away and morph into the tip of the spear arguments.

[Pollster1]

Point number two is that forcing employers to cover contraception is also a freedom issue, not a women’s issue. Women don’t impregnate themselves. Plus, Obamacare’s contraception mandate violates both male and female free speech.

I'm confused on why this is a free speech issue. The ObamaCare contraception mandate is a clear violation of the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause, a clear violation of the 9th and 10th Amendment restrictions on federal power, and a clear violation of the Fifth Amendment's prohibition on taking private property for public use without just compensation. ObamaCare is the most massively unconstitutional law in our country's history, but I don't see the free speech violation in that abomination.

[Bryan]

The left has already changed the argument from women in the military to women in combat units, the problems of females inadequacies in support units is off the table, it was allowed to just fade away and morph into the tip of the spear arguments.

The problems of females inadequacies in support units was dealt with by changing a lot of "two man jobs" into "three person jobs." The manual now says that the sergeant needs to assign three soldiers to complete a task that once required only two. This accommodates female soldiers' inadequacies, but it comes during a 20-year period of repeated cutbacks in personnel. Just as we need more bang for the buck in our federal budget, we also need more work done (or fighting do9ne) per soldier, not less.

So now the tasks in front line rifle platoons will also be watered down. Setting up a machine gun will transform from a "two man job" to a "three person job." Corresponding losses in combat capability will be carefully ignored.