The Right Opinion

When a Man Drafts a Woman

Tony Perkins · Feb. 9, 2016

If you thought the Super Bowl was rough, you should have seen the contest the night before. Plenty of GOP presidential candidates took a bruising during Saturday’s Manchester debate, the eighth of the Republican race. Voters who were looking for some clear points of distinction between the front-runners got their wish, thanks to Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).

The Florida leader, who is fighting for a share of the evangelical support, didn’t do himself any favors with his answers on the military draft. After some strong moments defending life (“I would rather lose an election than be wrong on the issue of life”) and marriage (“I don’t believe that believing in traditional marriage the way I do makes you a bigot or a hater”), Rubio stunned conservatives by announcing that he’s in favor of the president’s push to draft women. Asked if “young women [should] be required to sign up for selective service in case of a national emergency,” Rubio’s response astonished conservatives like Erick Erickson and National Review’s Rich Lowry. “I support that,” Rubio replied. Since women can serve in combat roles under the new Obama policy, Rubio thinks America should take the extreme step of forcing them there. “I do believe that selective service should be opened up for men and for women in case a draft is ever instituted.”

Like Governors Jeb Bush (R-Fla.) and Chris Christie (R-N.J.), Rubio has no problem with ordering our daughters to the front lines — a fundamental departure from the Western worldview shaped largely by Christianity, which recognizes the unique roles of the sexes. Equal in value, Owen Strachan wrote, but different in function. “Men don’t ask women to protect them,” he went on. “Period. This isn’t about politics; this is about the essence of manhood, honor, God.” As a dad, I would support my daughters if they decided to join the military on their own terms. But I would never allow the government to force my daughter — or anyone else’s — to take up arms against her will. That’s not only unbiblical, it’s un-American. Which is why I would aid them in resisting such an unnatural law.

Like us, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was flabbergasted that so many Republican candidates have acquiesced to the social engineering imposed upon our military by President Obama.

“It was striking that three different people on that stage came out in support of drafting women into combat in the military,” he said in townhall meeting [Sunday]. “I didn’t have an opportunity to respond to that particular question. But I have to admit as I was sitting there listening to that conversation, my reaction was, ‘Are you guys nuts?’ Listen we have had enough with political correctness, especially in the military. Political correctness is dangerous, and the idea that we would draft our daughters to forcibly bring them into the military and put them in combat, I think is wrong. It is immoral. And if I’m president, we ain’t doing it.”

Here’s the underlying problem the GOP candidates are exposing in their rush to embrace a female draft: they’re making it clear that they lack the motivation and courage necessary to undo the damage done to the military under Obama. After seven years of sexual experimentation with the ranks, the next president is already inheriting a mess of morale and dysfunction. Under normal circumstances, we may be able to get away with electing a typical Republican who merely slows down the military’s demise. But these are not normal circumstances. The very survival our republic is in question. And we must have a bold leader who is not afraid to swim against the political currents.

Originally published here.

A Bumper Crop of Car Decals

Police in one North Carolina county got a different kind of offering from Fairview Baptist Church: car decals. The stickers are part of a nationwide push to put “In God We Trust” on the fleets of law enforcers. From Florida and Texas to the Carolinas and Virginia, policemen are combatting the negativity about law enforcement by proudly posting “In God We Trust” on their fleets. No one knows quite how it started, but local communities have been pitching in and paying for the decals on tens of thousands of cars.

Rutherford County Sheriff Chris Francis is the latest to join in, saying he was grateful that the church gave local law enforcers “an opportunity to show our patriotism.” “I want to make sure that my deputy sheriffs know what ‘In God We Trust’ means,” he told reporters. “And how blessed we are to be citizens in America, to live in Western North Carolina and to be able to support our nation’s motto.” If there’s criticism of the cars' new look, he doesn’t mind. “I’m sure that there will be many positive remarks,” Francis said. “But I’m sure that with every decision I make I won’t make everyone happy.” Still, he lamented, “I wish that more localities would show their patriotism, show what they believe in,” Francis said. “I think our nation would be in a different place if they would.”

Just as he said so, Virginia Sheriff J.D. Diggs announced that York County is adding the motto to all of his patrol cars — one of the many places where the idea has caught fire. “The legislatures and courts approve,” he pointed out, “and God is most certainly approving of this.” It may seem like a small thing, but this is a great way for churches to have an influence on their community. If more pastors came alongside local leaders and encouraged them, there’s no limit to the impact they could have. The more people who see the connection between God and government, the better!

Originally published here.

San Francisco’s Giants of Censorship

If abortion groups didn’t do anything wrong, why are they suing to keep David Daleiden’s videos under wraps? It certainly seems odd that groups like the National Abortion Federation keep fighting to keep Center for Medical Progress’s (CMP) from releasing any material if its leaders were as innocent as they claim to be. And yet, the Left’s counterpunch goes on in California, where a San Francisco District Court has just ordered CMP to stand down on any transcripts, footage, or material it gathered at the abortion group’s convention. In an accusatory tone, Judge William Orrick’s agenda is clear: “[CMP’s projects] thus far have not been pieces of journalistic integrity, but misleadingly edited videos and unfounded assertions.”

If I didn’t know any better, I’d think this was Cecile Richards talking! Orrick’s talking points sound identical to Planned Parenthood itself, which insists it hasn’t broken the law — despite its own employees suggesting just the opposite to an undercover Daleiden. If Planned Parenthood and NAF aren’t guilty of trafficking baby body parts, why not let the information prove it? Instead, the abortion industry is celebrating the censorship of CMP, which begs the question: what exactly are they hiding? Orrick’s injunction isn’t just another setback to Daleiden, who was indicted by a federal jury last month in Texas — it’s a setback to the truth.


Originally published here.

Click here to show comments