• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Change the national anthem? Heck - they‘re banning runs!

  • Thread starter the patriot
  • Start date
T

the patriot

Guest
Hello,

This was just in about every daily newspaper accross the country. Various feminist groups wish to alter the national anthem from "all thy sons command" to "all of us" or something along those lines. This is my perception on the whole debate. Why not re-write the King James version of the Holy Bible to have Jesus Christ changed to a woman. That way church and state can be both gender inclusive!!!!

-the patriot- :cdn:
 
On the other hand, a more recent headline announced the public opinion polls indicated 77% of Canadians do NOT want the anthem re-written (or in other words, common sense may actually prevail ... ?)
 
No problem. If they want to change it to "All of us", I propose that we all complain that that phrase generalizes all groups of Canadians together, thereby de-emphasizing the unique qualities of (Insert whatever social group). As such, the new anthem will eventually have to list every possible permutation of social group(As each person is somewhat unique, I figure that we should err on the side of caution and simply just reel off everybody‘s name). With that done, Canada will no longer have an anthem, but simply a roll call of all Canadian citizens, bracketed by a relatively short bit of singing about how lovely this place is(At least it was until the entire population started spending every day trying to remember the name of all of thier countrymen.). This will have it‘s own unique problems, especially as it pertains to learning the 30 million odd names of every person in Canada, factoring in the birth/death/immigration issues(Which of course, then violates the rights of the dead Canadians, meaning that we‘ll have to learn the names of every Canadian...ever. In fact, since the law, as it pertains to the Charter, is specific that rights are conferred on all persons in Canada, we‘d probably have to list the names of people visiting Canada at the moment the song was being sung.). This would have some benefits, however. The role of the Canadian Census would be moot and could be scrapped, as the NHL would have to constantly enumerate and record the names of all Canadians in order to sing said anthem(Of course, if they started singing in July, they might be done just in time for Game 7 of the finals.).

Overall, my deepest wish is to be one of these people who champion causes like this. Imagine the biggest problem in your life being that you‘re not overly fond of one phrase in a song...

Giggling rant ends now.
 
Opinions: JACK SPENCER: A gentler, less-fit military

Nando Media
Scripps Howard News Service


(August 9, 2001 1:25 p.m. EDT) - Walk, don‘t run. That‘s an order for the service men and women of U.S. Southern Command headquarters in Miami. Their weekly fitness runs were terminated recently when a female officer claimed they were "demeaning."

According to media reports, the officer objected that the Friday jogs "subjected slow runners to ridicule from faster runners." And you thought war was hell.

To make matters worse, the officer‘s letter of complaint - discreetly sent to members of Congress as well as Pentagon brass - has sparked a full-bore investigation within the Defense Department. But as the department‘s inspector general investigates the weekly run and other complaints about the "command climate" at SOUTHCOM HQ, those concerned about America‘s military readiness can only shake their heads about what has happened to the warrior culture that once infused our armed forces.

As more and more of our troops fall into the hands of people more interested in social experimentation than national security, it‘s becoming apparent that military readiness has been sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. Most of the problem can be traced to the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services, a 50-year-old civilian board that, according to its charter, advises the secretary of defense "on the full range of matters relating to women in the services." Over the years, the board has morphed into a hotbed of feminism driven by the flawed theory that, were it not for artificial barriers to women, they would be interchangeable with men in all military tasks.

Hence today‘s "gender-integrated" basic training, tellingly summarized in Lee Bockhorn‘s review of Stephanie Gutmann‘s 2000 book, "The Kinder, Gentler Military." Bockhorn writes that boot camp has been transformed from a "tear-‘em-down-and-build-them-back up" experience to one devoted to boosting recruits‘ self-esteem.

Bockhorn points out that recruits used to have to earn the designation of soldier; now, they are considered such from day one. Obstacle courses are now called "confidence courses." Teamwork has been given a whole new meaning to mask the fact that some jobs - say, carrying a wounded 200-pound comrade back from the front or handling a fire hose on a burning ship‘s deck - require twice as many women as men. There are also ability groups, limits on drill sergeants‘ motivational techniques, and even training timeouts when the poor dears get too tired.

Time once devoted to physical training now gets wasted on sensitivity training. Recruits learn that looking at a female for more than three seconds constitutes sexual harassment. Performance standards have been "gender-normed" at the behest of the advisory board on women. Women get a three-minute grace period to complete their three-mile run. One can only hope that when an Army unit is needed to contain an enemy breakthrough a few miles away, it will be no big deal if the female contingent straggles into the fray a few minutes late.

And yet, even with the dumbing down of basic training, 47 percent of females in the military bail out before the end of their third year of service, compared to 28 percent for men. Perhaps that‘s because female soldiers resent how the women‘s board, in its zeal to make the military more female-friendly, advocates policies that lead to lower standards and declining military readiness.

President Bush was right to request more money to restore military readiness. Yet the problem demands more than additional funding. The president and Congress must roll back the policies of social experimentation that weaken our nation‘s ability to fight and win. Let the social scientists worry about verbal interaction among "ability groups." But let the administration and Congress put national security ahead of political correctness.

Jack Spencer is a policy analyst at the Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation, a public policy research institute.
 
maybe we should pack our bags and go the way of the next state. everything seems to be changing,its heart wrenching to here this kind of garbadge.dont know just dont know
 
maybe we should pack our bags and go the way of the next state. everything seems to be changing,its heart wrenching to here this kind of garbadge.dont know just dont know :fifty:
 
This would be funny if not for the obvious underlying tragedy. Well-meaning initiatives designed to improve the self-esteem of selected groups in society have overflowed unnecessarily with the unintended (I hope) result that excellence becomes shameful, not rewarding. Somewhere along the line people started confusing minimum standard required with maximum standard desired, and confusing the right to try with an imagined right to succeed.
 
Back
Top