Noah’s
Ark
I remember once when I was in a Coptic Church in
Egypt, that part of the church was built to look like Noah's Ark. The idea is
that the Church of Jesus Christ provides salvation. The way the Ark did. Come
into the Body of Christ to live. The Noah's Ark movie looks like it is going to
be good-but I read the Graphic Novel-it is good but it is based on the Book of
Enoch as well as Genesis-and it doesn't follow either text 100%-but I think the
writer/director is making this movie out of sincerity-not irreverence.
Noah’s
Ark Movie
I read the comic upon which the movie is based. This
is a neat graphic novel (basically a glorified comic book) about Noah. The
upcoming movie is based upon this comic book.
The author has taken a lot from the Aramaic Book of Enoch as well as
from the Book of Genesis. (The Epistle of Jude in the New Testament quotes from
Aramaic Enoch.) In it, he has the "Watchers" basically angels who
fell in an effort to "civilize" mankind, redeem themselves. In the
Book of Enoch, they are condemned to eternal damnation. I need to look and see
if Aronofsky made this up-or if it comes from Jewish Midrash. This also has an
environmentalist message. I think the story of Noah lends itself to such an
interpretation. Now, I do believe in conserving wildlife and our natural
resources. The problem with the story, is that Noah wrongly thinks that God
only spares he and his family in order to take care of the animals through the
flood. Noah struggles with the idea that man must die out-so that the earth can
return to a paradisical state. At the end of the story-Noah realizes mankind
should be saved. In this version, Ham turns against Noah because Noah basically
wants mankind to die out. So, its good-but it doesn't follow the Bible nor the
Book of Enoch faithfully. It isn't all inaccurate though. I thought it was
good-but it isn't strictly biblical. I think Aronofsky is sincere in this
story-I don't think he is trying to blaspheme. The movie may be different from
the comic-the film was screened to various audiences-and I think the studio
pressured Aronofsky to follow the Biblical account a little closer. I imagine
that there will be a theatrical release and then a directors cut on DVD. I did
like it-but I do have reservations.
Free Resources: http://www.damaris.org/noah
Vatican
Chief Justice: Obama’s Policies ‘Progressively More Hostile Toward Christian
Civilization’
By Michael Chapman - See more at:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/vatican-chief-justice-obama-s-policies-progressively-more-hostile#sthash.DgeTlOfo.dpuf
(CNSNews.com) -- President Barack Obama's
policies “have become progressively more hostile toward Christian
civilization,” Cardinal Raymond Burke, head of the highest court at the
Vatican, said in a recent interview. Cardinal Burke added that Obama wants to
restrict religious freedom and force the individuals, outside of his or her
place of worship, “to act against his rightly-formed conscience, even in the
most serious of moral questions.” In an interview first published in Polish in Polonia
Christiana magazine and republished exclusively in English at LifeSite
News,
Cardinal Burke, the former archbishop of St. Louis, was asked about President
Obama’s policies towards Christian civilization and if there are any “Catholic
reactions against this policy? If yes, what are they, [or] if not, why?”
Cardinal
Burke, who heads the Apostolic Signatura, the highest court at the Vatican,
said: “It is true that the policies of the president of the United States of
America have become progressively more hostile toward Christian civilization.
He appears to be a totally secularized man who aggressively promotes anti-life
and anti-family policies.” “Now he [Obama] wants to restrict the exercise of the freedom of
religion to freedom of worship; that is, he holds that one is free to act
according to his conscience within the confines of his place of worship but
that, once the person leaves the place of worship, the government can constrain
him to act against his rightly-formed conscience, even in the most serious of
moral questions,” said Cardinal Burke. He continued, “Such policies would have
been unimaginable in the United States even 40 years ago. It is true that many
faithful Catholics, with strong and clear leadership from their Bishops and
priests, are reacting against the ever-growing religious persecution in the
U.S.” “Sadly, one has the impression that a large part of the population is not
fully aware of what is taking place,” said the cardinal. “In a democracy, such
a lack of awareness is deadly. It leads to the loss of the freedom, which a
democratic government exists to protect. It is my hope that more and more of my
fellow citizens, as they realize what is happening, will insist on electing
leaders who respect the truth of the moral law as it is respected in the
founding principles of our nation.” As CNSNews.com has reported, the Catholic
bishops of the United States have stated that the Obamacare mandate requiring
individuals (and businesses) to carry health insurance that offers
contraceptives, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs without co-payments
is an “unjust and illegal mandate.” They have also declared
the mandate a “violation of personal civil rights,” and that it should be
“rescinded.”
Christians in captivity
-- the agony of waiting
By Lela Gilbert, Published March 24, 2014, FoxNews.com
Patience is in short supply these days. Despite our instant communication capabilities, just about everyone is waiting for something. The phone doesn’t ring. The cable guy never shows up. A check is always “in the mail.” Last week I found my own patience stretched into a thin membrane by a pile of complaints – thankfully small ones. But mostly I was struck by the inevitable silence of waiting. When we’re hoping for answers, no news is far from good news. When we’re hoping for answers, no news is far from good news. And in fact, it was bad news that distracted me from my own woes as a headline scrolled down my iPhone. “Asia Bibi appeal hearing postponed
.” Asia Bibi is a
Pakistani Christian, and her name is familiar to those of us who follow
international human rights. Her story is almost unbelievable – and all too
true: “In June 2009, Asia was involved in an argument with a group of Muslim
women with whom she had been harvesting berries, after the other women became
angry at her for drinking the same water as them. She was subsequently accused
of insulting the Islamic Prophet Muhammad, a charge she denies, and was
arrested and imprisoned. In November 2010, a Sheikhupura judge sentenced her to
death. If executed, Asia would be the first woman in Pakistan to be lawfully
killed for blasphemy.”Many have spoken out on Asia Bibi’s behalf, including Pope Benedict. Two prominent Pakistanis, Shahbaz Bhatti, Minister for Christian minorities, and Salmaan Taseer, Governor of Punjab, were assassinated in 2011 for opposing Pakistan’s notorious blasphemy laws on her behalf.
Nonetheless, since 2009, this falsely accused woman has been on death row in a filthy prison cell, wondering if and when her death sentence will enforced. She longs for husband and five children. Day and night, in squalid surroundings, she fights off her fears, endures physical illness and prays. Unsure if she will live or die, Asia Bibi waits. Another story emerged last week from Iran, about US-citizen and former Muslim Pastor Saeed
Abedini, who is serving
an eight-year sentence because he “undermined the Iranian government by creating a network
of Christian house churches and ... attempting to sway Iranian youth away from
Islam." Despite urgent requests for
medical care – his body is internally wounded from abominable prison conditions
including beatings and torture – he was denied treatment. Eventually,
presumably under pressure from several international organizations’ outcry,
Abedini was taken to a medical center, unshackled and even permitted a brief
visit from a family member. What happened after that? Once the encouraging
proceedings passed, Abedini was still in pain, still bleeding from internal
injuries. He remains hospitalized but untreated. Like Asia Bibi, he is the
focus of much international prayer and non-governmental activism. Even the EU
has spoken up, as has President Obama. But Abedini is entirely unsure about the
future. Will he see his wife and two small children again? Will he live or die?
He has been behind bars since September 26, 2012.The family watches and keeps faith. Concerned people post and tweet and pray. And day in, day out, Saeed Abedini waits. Other captives are waiting, along with their loved ones, in Egypt. According to my friend and colleague, Coptic scholar Samuel Tadros, the big stories of church burnings and murdered Christians have diminished somewhat under Cairo’s new military regime. But less publicized evils remain. Most notably, kidnappings are rampant. On March 20, MidEast Christians News
reported that two young
women, 17 and 18, were abducted in separate incidents just days before. Coptic World observed, “Coptic
children or adults abducted at gunpoint and held (and sometimes killed or
forced to convert to Islam) by “unknown persons” in exchange for money—are on
the rise in Egypt…” Muslim kidnappings of Christians are also taking place in
Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and beyond. Captives are often raped, beaten, forcibly
married, starved and eventually, if financial terms aren’t met, murdered. Meanwhile,
the victims’ loved ones worry, weep and console each other. Of course, like all
believers they pray, recalling the ancient promise: But they that wait upon
the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles;
they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint (Is
40:31). So hoping against hope, they wait. Christians are the most
persecuted religious group in the world and abuses have surged exponentially in
recent years. At the same time, the United States government, once a global
champion of religious freedom, offers dwindling intervention. Reliance solely
on the nations of the world to act, diplomatically or politically – with rare
and notable exceptions – will likely result in the longest wait of all. And
waiting is agonizing.Lela Gilbert is author of "Saturday People, Sunday People: Israel through the Eyes of a Christian Sojourner" and co-author, with Nina Shea and Paul Marshall, of "Persecuted: The Global Assault on Christians." She is an adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute and lives in Jerusalem. For more, visit her website: www.lelagilbert.com. Follow her on Twitter@lelagilbert.
What is so Great about Saint Paul?
Christianity was, from its inception, multi-cultural
and multi-lingual. Many people, including professing Christians, have a problem
with the Apostle Paul. Some view him as the “real” founder of Christianity.
Some Christians claim to be followers of Jesus, but not Paul. If we look in the
New Testament, we see that almost half of it is by Paul or about him. Although
Paul has his detractors, Christianity wouldn’t exist as it is without Paul.
Paul made important positive contributions. It was Paul who made Christianity a
global movement rather than a sect of Judaism. It is likely Paul’s cultural
background that enabled him to accomplish certain things that the Twelve
Apostles couldn’t. Eleven of the Twelve Apostles were Galileans. Judas Iscariot
was most likely the only Apostle who hailed from Judea. The Jews of the Holy
Land were mainly Aramaic speakers. Greek was spoken by some. The culture of
Galilee and Judea was predominately Jewish. Paul was at least bi-lingual,
speaking Aramaic and Greek. (He most likely also spoke Hebrew and perhaps Latin
as well.) Paul was from Tarsus, an important Greek city. Paul was equally
comfortable in his Aramaic Jewish culture and his Greek Hellenistic culture.
This made Paul uniquely equipped to take the Gospel to the non-Jewish world,
perhaps in a way the Twelve Apostles were not. (It is possible that before his
Damascus Road experience, Paul was already involved in Jewish missions to
Gentiles.)
Lamin Sanneh is the author of Whose Religion is Christianity: The Gospel beyond the West. This is
an excellent book that every Christian should read. The first reason is that
this book tells the story of the “Next Christendom,” the future of the Church,
which is centered in the non-Western world. (The non-“white” majority “Next
Christendom” is a phrase coined by Phillip Jenkins.) Sanneh calls this the
phenomenon of World Christianity. (He doesn’t like to use the term “global” due
to its association with “globalism” and a Euro-centric form of Christianity.[1])
It is mentioned in the book how missionaries labored for one hundred years in
Africa, and saw very little results, and yet now Christianity is spreading
rapidly throughout Africa. This shouldn’t be seen as all that surprising. After
all, it also took Christianity over a hundred years to prevail over all Europe.
Sanneh believes that a breakthrough in missions was
through the use of the local languages and using the local words for “God.” He
also believes that since Christianity never really had an official language, it
was able to transcend culture.[2]
The Gospels represented a translation of the Gospel into another language, from
Christ’s Aramaic into Greek. Interestingly, in his focus on the importance of
translation, Sanneh doesn’t even mention the original Aramaic language of
Jesus. The ancient Aramaic texts we do have, are translations of Jesus’ words
from Greek back into Aramaic. To Sanneh translation is an important aspect of
Christianity.
Paul not only was able to translate the Gospel
message into Greek, his unique perspective to distinguish Jewish cultural
practices that were not part of the Gospel. Of course, Paul encountered
controversy, but he also embraced it, seeing that it was necessary for
progress. (There are traditions from the early Church of the Apostles going
into gentile lands. Some important traditions include Mark in Egypt, Thaddeus
in Mesopotamia, and Thomas in Egypt. If these traditions are true, they show
that Christianity was from its very beginning multi-cultural and
multi-lingual.)
Obama
protects Saudi Arabia from embarrassment by keeping Textbook report secret
Sharona Schwarz the Blaze, March 26
As
President Barack Obama sets out for his visit to Saudi Arabia this week, a new
report suggests the State Department has intentionally been withholding a
comprehensive study on Saudi textbooks, because the books include offensive
material that dehumanizes Christians and Jews that if made public would
embarrass the kingdom. “The State Department appears to be withholding a
government-commissioned textbooks study on the subject,” said the report by the
DC-based research organization the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, “Textbook Diplomacy: Why the State Department Shelved a Study on
Incitement in Saudi Education Materials.” “Passages [in textbooks] continue
to dehumanize Jews and Christians, promote the murder of perceived deviants
such as homosexuals, and sanction violence against Muslims who do not follow
the Wahhabi brand of Islam that is sponsored by the Saudi state,” the
government-commissioned study found, according to the think tank report. David
Andrew Weinberg, who authored the Foundation for Defense of Democracies report,
wrote that in 2011 the State Department paid the non-profit
organization the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy (ICRD) $500,000
to conduct the study of Saudi government-published textbooks that are used
widely not only in the kingdom, but are also sent free of charge to Muslim
schools around the world, including in the U.S.
Lawmakers urge Obama to press Saudi king on human, religious rights during visit
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are pressing President
Obama to raise the issue of human and religious rights during his face-to-face
meeting Friday with Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah. The latest appeal came from Sen. Marco Rubio,
R-Fla., who wrote Obama a letter expressing concern over Saudi Arabia’s
“systematic, ongoing and egregious” infringements against what he called basic
religious freedoms. Rubio also urged the president to push for the release of
religious prisoners and to “end persecution of individuals charged with
apostasy, blasphemy and sorcery.” In May 2013, Saudi religious police announced
they had arrested more than 200 people during the prior year on charges of
sorcery, Rubio said. “High school textbooks in Saudi Arabia contain highly
inflammatory passages that dehumanize or call for violence against non-Wahhabi
religious groups such as Christians, Jews, Hindus, Shi’ites and Sufis,” the
senator added.
England Adopts Sharia
Law (See article by John Bingham
Top lawyers have written guidelines for British solicitors on drafting 'sharia-compliant' wills which can deny women an equal share of their inheritance and entirely exclude non-believers, it was revealed today. The Law Society, which represents solicitors in England and Wales, has written a guide on Sharia succession rules that will be used in British courts. It will mean that children born outside of marriage and adopted children could also be denied their fair share. The guide states: 'No distinction is made between children of different marriages, but illegitimate and adopted children are not Sharia heirs.
See Sam Webb, UK Daily Mail
Islamic World in Disarray
In Turkey, the people are
revolting against the Hard-Line Fundamentalist Government. At the same time
Saudi Arabia, on of the worlds most extremist governments, illegalized the
Muslim Brotherhood and recalled all of its fighters in Syria. I thought that
this was very odd, since the Muslim Brotherhood and Wahibi Islam are so similar-they
make natural allies-but this report explains it.
In the past month, Saudi Arabia criminalized
membership in the Muslim Brotherhood and classified it as a terrorist
organization on par with Al Qaeda.
Its Interior Ministry issued a new law imposing harsh
penalties on Saudis who join the fighting in Syria for fear that they might
return as hardened militants. And to punish neighboring Qatar for its support
of the Brotherhood, King Abdullah led the coordinated withdrawal from Qatar of
his own ambassador and the envoys from the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and
Egypt.
See New York Times-“Obama Seeks to Calm Saudi’s as
Paths split” March 27, 2014
Saudi
leaders are already vexed at Mr. Obama for failing to throw America’s military
might behind their proxy war with Tehran in Syria, where the Saudis are sending
money and weapons to back the Sunni-dominated rebels. And the Saudis were
flabbergasted last year when Mr. Obama reversed course at the last minute,
calling off missile strikes against the Assad government for its use of
chemical weapons.
The Saudis have sometimes financed jihadists abroad
when it served their interests, in Afghanistan during the 1980s, for example,
and in Syria now. But the Saudi royal family, which draws its legitimacy from
an ultraconservative Salafi branch of Islam, has long feared the Muslim
Brotherhood because of its rival blend of religion and politics and its
effectiveness at political organizing. Saudi officials often quote Prince Nayef
bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, the former long-serving interior minister: “All our
problems come from the Muslim Brotherhood,” he once declared, arguing that the
group “has destroyed the Arab world.”
But the country’s open support for the military ouster
of the Muslim Brotherhood has risks as well. The takeover and crackdown have
elicited stirrings of dissent from Saudi clerics sympathetic to the
Brotherhood. And around the region, Saudi Arabia is “losing friends left and
right,” said Frederic Wehrey, a scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace.
At the same
time, Nasrallah, of Hezballah-is in Syria fighting the rebels at the behest of
the Syrian govement. That leaves Lebanon bereft of his leadership for now-which
is a good thing.
Israel is losing its grip on evangelical Christians : Younger generation open to Palestinian side of conflict. By The Forward
and Nathan Guttman | Mar. 11, 2014 (See Haaretz Online)
Support for Israel is weakening among evangelical Christians, prompting a new struggle for the hearts and minds of younger members of America’s largest pro-Israel demographic group. While hard numbers are not available, evangelical leaders on both sides of the divide on Israel agree that members of the millennial generation do not share their parents’ passion for the Jewish state; many are seeking some form of evenhandedness when approaching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “What is happening is that the hard line of Christian Zionists was not successfully passed forward to the next generation, because it was based on theological themes that are now being questioned by younger evangelicals,” said David Gushee, professor of Christian ethics and director of the Center for Theology and Public Life at Mercer University in Atlanta. The grip of Christian Zionists over young evangelicals has been loosening for several years, according to observers within the community. But in recent weeks, the leading evangelical pro-Israel organization, Christians United for Israel, has set off alarm bells in articles and interviews decrying the inroads made by pro-Palestinian activists into the evangelical community. CUFI’s leaders are calling for a new strategy to block them. “The only way of solving a problem is when people know about it,” said CUFI’s executive director, David Brog, who has been leading the effort to win back millennial evangelicals. “This is the best way to rally our troops.” Brog penned a lengthy article, published in the spring edition of Middle East Quarterly, in which he detailed what he views as a growing phenomenon and the reasons behind it. Titled “The End of Evangelical Support for Israel?” the article laments that “questioning Christian support for the Jewish state is fast becoming a key way for millennials to demonstrate Christian compassion and bona fides.” Brog argues that younger evangelicals are now “in play” and their support for Israel can no longer be taken for granted. This conclusion is based primarily on gut feelings and anecdotal data. In June 2011, the Pew Research Center conducted a survey among evangelical leaders convened in Cape Town, South Africa, for the third Lausanne Congress of World Evangelization. The findings indicated lower support for Israel than previously believed. A majority of American evangelical leaders (49%) expressed neutrality when asked if they sympathize more with Israelis or with Palestinians. Thirty percent expressed support for Israelis, 13% for the Palestinians.
The survey polled only leaders who participated in this international conference and did not offer insight into the views of rank-and-file evangelicals. But it highlighted the fact that only a minority within the evangelical leadership today hold strong pro-Israel views when it comes to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and attendant conflict with the Palestinians.
Still, Christian Zionism is by far the largest organized voice on Middle East issues among evangelicals. CUFI, led by the Rev. John Hagee, founder of Cornerstone Church, in San Antonio, has 1.6 million registered supporters and a staff of 25 full-time employees. With an operating budget of more than $7 million, CUFI organizes dozens of pro-Israel events throughout the country and an annual Washington conference that brings together evangelical activists and politicians.
CUFI’s leaders are now trying to mobilize funders and supporters to confront the shift among younger members of their community. The challenge they face is made up of individuals, campus activists and professors, small organizations and even documentary films that depict Israel as encroaching on Christian freedom of faith in the Holy Land.
On university campuses, pro-Palestinian Christians have seen some success in the face of CUFI’s more established 120-chapter campus operation. Activists in Illinois’s Wheaton College, a leading Christian school, protested a planned CUFI event on campus in 2009; in Tulsa, Okla., Oral Roberts University has appointed a harsh critic of Israel to its board of trustees, and at Bethel University, in Minnesota, President Jay Barnes visited Israel and the Palestinian territories on a trip that changed participants’ views on the conflict. Barnes’s wife, Barbara Barnes, published a poem after the trip, in which she wrote: “Apartheid has become a way of life. I believe God mourns.”
American evangelicals sympathetic to the Palestinians are also bringing co-religionists to Israel and the West Bank for tours and conferences. This week, Bethlehem Bible College and the Bethlehem-based Holy Land Trust are hosting their third “Christ at the Checkpoint” conference. Speakers at the gathering, which presents a Palestinian perspective on Israel’s occupation of the West Bank for Christians, include Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish, the Gaza physician who worked closely with both Arabs and Israeli Jews until his three daughters were killed in their home by Israeli tank fire during the 2008 Gaza military campaign; William Wilson, the president of Oral Roberts University; and Gary Burge, a theology professor at Wheaton College and author of the book, “Whose Promise? What Christians Are Not Being Told About Israel and the Palestinians.”
The conference’s 12-point “manifesto” strongly condemns “all forms of violence” and warns against the “stereotyping of all faith forms that betray God’s commandment to love our neighbors and enemies.” It also rejects “any exclusive claim to the land of the Bible in the name of God” and states that “racial ethnicity alone does not guarantee the benefits of the Abrahamic Covenant.”
For some on Christian college campuses, the appeal of pro-Palestinian views may be part of a general trend among young evangelicals to question the conservative ways of their parents’ generation. Some students are pursuing a theological understanding of their religion that is more progressive on social issues. Polls conducted in recent years indicate that young white evangelicals are less conservative on issues of same-sex marriage, abortion and contraception. They are also less aligned with the Republican Party. This same trend of political diversification may be taking place on international issues.
CUFI’s concern, as voiced by Brog in his article, is about the younger generation of evangelical leaders; unlike such figures as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, they are not vocal about the issue of Israel. He describes the new generation of evangelical opinion makers as a “largely well-coiffed and fashionably dressed bunch dedicated to marketing Christianity to a skeptical generation by making it cool, compassionate, and less overtly political.”
One of the organizations gaining the most attention on this issue is the Telos Group, a Washington-based not-for-profit set up five years ago that describes itself as “pro-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, pro-American, and pro-peace.” In an interview on Glenn Beck’s “TheBlaze TV,” Brog singled out Telos, saying: “This is not your parents’ anti-Israel group. These guys are savvy, these guys are smart.”
Telos, which focuses a significant part of its work on faith communities, has to date taken 43 groups on tours of Israel and the Palestinian territories. President and co-founder Gregory Khalil said the group intentionally engages with a variety of Israelis and Palestinians on their trips. “I actually think David Brog could learn a lot about Israel if he would join one of our trips,” Khalil said, arguing that Brog mischaracterized the work of Telos.
But while the budding debate in the evangelical world over Israel is real, its proportions may be overstated. “We’re a tiny organization,” Khalil said of his group, which has only two staff members. Other publications and groups cited by CUFI as pro-Palestinian are also much smaller than CUFI’s own pro-Israel operation.
CUFI is not waiting for them to grow larger. In January, at a Jewish fundraising event, the group presented its plan to take two groups a year of young evangelical opinion leaders to Israel. “We need to use the same tool to fight back,” CUFI declared in its pitch for Jewish donor support. The group is also launching speaking tours on campuses, and intends to invest in videos and social media activity that will monitor Christian influencers and “confront them when they cross the line.”
The glaring precedent that pro-Israel evangelicals cite to justify their approach is the path taken by the mainline Protestant churches. In the past, many were sympathetic to Israel, or at worst neutral. But some have since become a stronghold of pro-Palestinian views in the American Christian world. A few groups, such as the Presbyterians, have been leading the way in calls for divestment and boycott against Israel.
But Gushee argued that evangelicals are unlikely to take this path. The mainline Protestant churches today may be aggressively anti-Israel, he said, but the shift among evangelicals “is not from pro-Israel to anti-Israel, but from pro-Israel to a more balanced approach.”
For more stories, go to www.forward.com. Sign up for the Forward’s daily newsletter at http://forward.com/newsletter/signup/
Horrible! Bodies of Aborted
Babies are incinerated in England to provide heat for buildings!
Aborted babies incinerated
to heat UK hospitals: The
remains of more than 15,000 babies were incinerated as 'clinical waste' by
hospitals in Britain with some used in 'waste to energy' plants
Women in Combat
So, the Marines are going to make their combat teams
25% female as a social experiment to see what would happen if you mix men and
women in combat. Instead of playing games with our service-members lives-why
don't we do the social experiment on real games-to see what would happen. The government
should mandate that all NFL, NBA and Major League Baseball teams, be 25%
female-and see how well they perform on the field. This way, no one will
die-and you will get an idea of what it would be like to have women in
combat-when the stakes are much higher. an addendum: The 25% female team has to
go against at 100% male team. I wonder who would win.
No comments:
Post a Comment