Government, Leave My Granddaughters Alone

             Government, Leave My Granddaughters Alone

                                                                 Published in Marietta Daily Journal Feb. 14, 2016

            Levie (that’s a long “e”) is 19, and Nancy Cate will be 6 this month.  They are my oldest and youngest granddaughters.   Levie is a sophomore at Young Harris College; Nancy Cate is homeschooled by her mother, my younger daughter. 

            Of course these granddaughters are beautiful.  Smart, too.  Their parents are rearing them wisely.  Their fathers, my only two sons-in-law, are incredibly hard workers.  Levie’s father, a landscaper, is a giver, an encourager, and a lover of people.  Nancy Cate’s father is a native of Mumbai (Bombay), India.  A restaurant owner, he values and practices free enterprise.  So I’m not worried about my granddaughters’ home life.  Government policy that affects them is what’s on my mind.

            Levie has two sisters, and Nancy Cate has one.  My oldest son also has a daughter.  I don’t know if my son and two sons-in-law will agree with what I’m about to say about their daughters.  It doesn’t really matter.  I can still declare what I think the government should never require, or in this case, never allow them to do.

            Ok, I don’t want my 6 granddaughters in combat, and I don’t want the government to require them to register for the selective service.  But Defense Secretary Ash Carter thinks women in combat is just dandy.   Allowing it, he asserts, will promote equality.  It will allow half the nation’s population to seek a path to high military posts.  Secretary Carter’s recent order allows women to serve in the most physical of jobs, including special operations such as the Army Delta units and the Navy Seals.

            Ah, this wonderful equality.  Even in foxholes it must be an issue.  Forget about winning wars.  Forget about any differences between males and females that could negatively affect a war’s outcome. Can anyone envision a Patton or a McArthur yielding to the “evolving” values of a society that doesn’t understand what the military is for, and believes the military should be part and parcel of the progressive transformation of the nation?

            If  Pentagon Chief Carter is an egalitarian, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus is a bigger one.  According to Aaron MacLean, a former Marine Corps infantry officer and editor of the Washington Free Beacon, Marines “are seething over their treatment at the hands of a civilian appointee whose military experience consists of two years in the Navy.”

            MacLean’s beef is that Mabus is being vindictive because of the Marine Corps’ resistance to the integration of women into ground combat.  That resistance took the form of a report which concluded that allowing women to compete for ground combat jobs “would make the Marine Corps a less-efficient fighting machine.”  Appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee to present the report, Marine Commandant Gen. Robert Neller added, “ All-male units are able to better march long distances carrying heavy loads and are able to fire weapons more accurately after marching over distance.”   Imagine the grief Gen. Neller received for saying that.

            Much of that grief came from Secretary Mabus.  Going beyond Defense Secretary Carter’s order to open ground combat units to women, Mabus issued a memo requiring the Marines to make recruit training open to women as well.  Call it co-ed boot camp.  And re-name it Parris Island Finishing School (or San Diego Finishing School for west coast recruits).

            Even though Commandant Neller opposed women in combat, he still told the Senate Committee he favored requiring women to register for the selective service at age 18.

            Back to my granddaughter, Levie.  She is a mountain climber par excellence.  She is a good soccer player.  She is strong.  But the fact that females can be physically strong doesn’t mean that putting 18-year-old (or 35-year-old) male and female recruits side by side is a good idea, whether in training or in combat.  Physiological differences and sexual dynamics render such an idea or action absolutely foolish.

            Why won’t more generals stand firm in opposing such foolishness?  Why are they fearful?  And where oh where were our traditional values Republicans when our new Defense Secretary and our Obama appointee Navy Secretary were using the military to advance social goals?  Isn’t it the Republican Party that most values the military and claims to guard it?  One Republican did stand up to Mabus: Rep. Duncan Hunter of California. 

            Mark my word.  Before the transformationalists leave office, we will hear that the military must make accommodations for the transgendered.  Meanwhile, I’m looking for more generals and Republicans who will help me look out for my granddaughters and who will argue that equality and sensitivity are not very wise pre-occupations on the battlefield.

Roger Hines

2/10/16