Shold the Navy allow women on subs?

[Salty]

Women may soon be allowed on subs


Salty


ps, You may make multiple choices on the poll

 

[preachinjesus]

Why knot?



pun intended

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Women may soon be allowed on subs


Salty


ps, You may make multiple choices on the poll

I have a problem with women in the military in general (OK, bring on the childish name calling) so no, I don't think they should be allowed on subs.

 

[pinoybaptist]

no, I think that women should allow men a little semblance of "privacy".:tongue3:
leave us a field where we can ooze with machismo...

 

[donnA]

I have a problem with women in the military in general (OK, bring on the childish name calling) so no, I don't think they should be allowed on subs.

I have a problem wih it too, it is outside the God given role of a woman. and I don't care who doesn't like it either.

 

[Revmitchell]

I have a problem wih it too, it is outside the God given role of a woman. and I don't care who doesn't like it either.

Amen..................

 

[Mexdeaf]

I was going to suggest that perhaps they should have "all-male" subs and "all-female" subs, but then I forgot that it is perfectly all right to have "all-black" or "all-female" or "all-minority-du-jour" organizations, but not all right to have "all-male" or "all-white" organizations.

(Please forgive the overuse of quotation marks this morning. I seem to be going through a phase or something.)

 

[preachinjesus]

I guess I'm looking for a reasonable argument why not (other than: I don't think women should serve in the military.)

What makes men uniquely suited for submarine warfare duty? How are women biologically disqualified from this? How would this create a problem in our naval fleets? Why is the status quo better?

BTW, while I fully accept a complimentarian view of gender roles in the home and church I don't believe we can push that into society.

 

[Amy.G]

I guess I'm looking for a reasonable argument why not (other than: I don't think women should serve in the military.)

Ok. Here's one reason. Humans, being what they are, will succumb to temptation.

If you put men and women together in isolation for months at a time, you can rest assured that they are going to "get together".

There will be more pregnancies and more affairs. This is just human nature.

 

[go2church]

Why not all male and all female subs, sounds like a good idea. Putting them on the same sub, sending them underwater for months at a time seems to me to be asking for trouble. Even the most dedicated sailor is still human.

 

[donnA]

Ok. Here's one reason. Humans, being what they are, will succumb to temptation.

If you put men and women together in isolation for months at a time, you can rest assured that they are going to "get together".

There will be more pregnancies and more affairs. This is just human nature.

I AGREE
I saw a report once, about navy ships with women on board. They had a lot of pregnancies, almost every woman on board was pregnant.

 

[Amy.G]

Why not all male and all female subs, sounds like a good idea. Putting them on the same sub, sending them underwater for months at a time seems to me to be asking for trouble. Even the most dedicated sailor is still human.

And how much more would it cost US tax payers to pay for the administration of that?

All so that women can be more like men.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Women have fought for a long time to be treated the same as men--so I say let them serve the same as men. Of course, that will cause temptation and women on subs will probably be begiving birth in subs. You put men and women together in close quarters for a long time, and something is bound to happen--it's human nature.

 

[BlessedWife]

I have a problem with women in the military in general (OK, bring on the childish name calling) so no, I don't think they should be allowed on subs.

Amen!

To answer the OP with a response other than, "women shouldn't be in the Service" (since it sadly doesn't matter at this point as they've been allowed to serve for decades now) - my issue is that submarines are not outfitted to create private accommodations for women and men. Many of the subs our NAVY uses today have been commissioned for many years. It would be costly to replace them. There is no privacy on a submarine. Whether or not a woman feels she can rank herself right up there with a man and shower and use the toilet in front of men without shame does not make it right. It goes against the Bible, which is my authority in regards to what is right or wrong. No political correctness here. No separating my "church views" and "secular views".

 

[John Toppass]

If the navy is trying to increase personnel numbers while out to sea, then women should be on submarines. If the navy is trying to run a tight, efficient command without unneeded detractions then women should not serve on submarines.

 

[Marcia]

Ok. Here's one reason. Humans, being what they are, will succumb to temptation.

If you put men and women together in isolation for months at a time, you can rest assured that they are going to "get together".

There will be more pregnancies and more affairs. This is just human nature.

I agree with this.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I have a problem wih it too, it is outside the God given role of a woman. and I don't care who doesn't like it either.

Which verse bans women from submarines? I guess I missed it. :sleeping_2:

 

[pinoybaptist]

Why not all male and all female subs, sounds like a good idea. Putting them on the same sub, sending them underwater for months at a time seems to me to be asking for trouble. Even the most dedicated sailor is still human.

But now we're running afoul of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy which might soon be "let everybody know".
And like Amy said, hey, we're only humans, and long days and nights and all that tension of not seeing the sun and the stars when doing long undersea runs can just work a lot of things on hormones and humanness (?).
Now, think of what that will do to a Christian who is a submarine personnel but still human ?

 

[Magnetic Poles]

I was going to suggest that perhaps they should have "all-male" subs and "all-female" subs, but then I forgot that it is perfectly all right to have "all-black" or "all-female" or "all-minority-du-jour" organizations, but not all right to have "all-male" or "all-white" organizations.

Sure it is. Ever heard of the Ku Klux Klan?

 

[Mexdeaf]

Sure it is. Ever heard of the Ku Klux Klan?

Not in years, but it have heard of the NAACP, Congressional Black Caucus, etc...