Why have original ideas when you can spew old, disproven, rhetoric?

[thewayne]

"I think that could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved. It already happens of course with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat, and I think that's probably not in the best interests of men, women, or the mission."
— Rick Santorum on women in combat

The Israelis have an integrated army. I believe the Russians do. Many countries let women serve in combat roles. And we, 'the free-est country in the world', do not. Using Mr. Google Search Problem's logic, we'd have fire companies not responding to fires because the mixed gender crews would be having sex, likewise police response would be impared. Even Congress would have problems with Congressmen having sex with pages and interns. Oh, wait a minute. Disregard that last example.

Comments

[silveradept]

Wait, Mr. Google Problem doesn't believe that men have sexual relations with each other in combat situations? Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum doesn't believe in those things, in that he thinks introducing women to combat roles would cause this problem?

...well, we all knew hypocrisy was a very strong weakness of socially conservative republicans, but I do believe this one is retty high on the list, to both be erasing and campaigning against sexual behavior.

[thewayne.livejournal.com]

Well, according to some, the only acceptable sex position is missionary. I sometimes wonder how adventuresome some of these people are in their relationships.

[silveradept]

Very. And not in obvious ways, like having an affair with someone while you're currently married. Twice. Sometimes the most prudish-appearing people are the ones with the kinkiest sex lives. They just don't admit it.