Sounding like a Chauvinist: What Are Women doing in Battle?

I don’t know what chauvinistic literature I was reading or who taught me how to think that way, but when I was a young boy starting in 5th grade I was quite consumed with many fantasies about giving up my life for that special woman (or girl, at the time). I would climb every mountain. I would cross any sea and fight off any monster so that I could save my beloved. Never once did I ever imagine that my girl would do that for me. And so yes, it is quite the fact that I am a true and completely helpless chauvinist (although my wife would probably argue that with me because she has to open her own doors) who has a very difficult time seeing women in combat roles in our military.

But women in combat roles is what is supposed to become the norm in the very near future if the plans of the Department of Defense hold.

The whole issue of women in combat is very interesting. Up until now, women have been prohibited from serving in “line of sight” battle situations.

What are we to think? Are we to think that women somehow do not possess the physical, emotional, or psychological attributes that men have and are therefore not suitable for combat situations? If so, should we be training our women to be more like men? Can that even work? Or are we to think that it is somehow morally wrong for women to serve in combat? Or is it just highly impractical to implement?

And what should we be thinking is the highest end? Are we going to honor the individual desires of the woman soldier to serve in combat areas? Or should we place a higher value on the good ends of military readiness? or is it simply anathema to even suggest that a woman would compromise military readiness? The case can be made that women might truly benefit military readiness!

After doing a bit of research I came across this very interesting paper which outlines the ethical and moral issues quite fairly and studiously.

For me? Firstly I have to say that I am thankful for the services of women in our military. They have obviously served faithfully and well in their various roles. But my gut reaction to it all is that with enemy fire coming in hot and heavy, if it were me in that foxhole, I am just not sure I would want the added complexity of having to deal with a person of the opposite sex next to me. Frankly, if I need to go to take a leak I don’t want to have to think of anything other than just taking a leak. Neither do I want to wonder if she likes me or not.

Further, aside from the practical issues, I am inclined to think that the principal of Biblical headship and the male role as protector, along with the fact that women are so beautifully gifted to bear children and be mothers, would generally make women in combat something which God never intended. (Of course it could be said that God never intended for men to go to war either!) But, ultimately, I just can’t figure out WHY a woman would ever WANT to shoot a gun to kill someone. I thought women were so much smarter then men! Why not just leave it to the men to shoot each other up?

Defending against a Tyrannical Government

I have heard a lot of folks talk about the importance of being able to freely possess firearms because we need to be able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government. I appreciate the idea that governments can turn on their own citizens. We all have our grievances against the government and we might often feel the government has turned against us. But what would be that particular point when we would pull out our firearms, take aim, and actually shoot? It seems to me that the risk of such a time is extremely small (here in the United States.)

And further, in our studies of Martin Luther King Jr. and the NON-VIOLENT Civil Rights Movement at The Lutheran Academy, I am reminded that there really ARE better ways to change the government and throw off oppression than shooting each other. All across the world we have seen

1) how awful it is when we use guns to change governments (it is pretty easy to see that the death and destruction in Syria and Iraq, for example, has hardly been the answer to either country’s tyrannical dictators.), and

2) how really VERY POSSIBLE it is to bring down governments without firing a shot (places such as South Africa and Egypt).  It is simply people power.  It is actually more powerful than the force of bullets.

Personally I am not worried in the least that the government of this nation (established now for well over two centuries, a government by and for the people) would turn on me and my family in a way that the force of arms would be called for. Maybe I am naive (usually I am, I do admit), but if there truly WAS such a dreaded tyrannical government that took power, the American people would simply ignore it, recognizing that it had no authority. Either that or it would be a true sign of Judgement Day – at the sight of which I would take heart!

Just say’in that I think THIS argument against gun control simply does NOT apply to our 21st century United States. You are welcome to disagree with me. I won’t shoot you.

The Peaceable House (Proposal)

Below is a white paper on how we might establish something of a modern day convent that will serve the needs of single Godly women in our congregation who currently struggle to make ends meet every day and are burdened with many worries. It also addresses the need for workers in our church! I am offering it up to our congregation for prayerful consideration! Any and all ideas for how we might improve on this idea will be welcome. As well, if you have concerns please voice them!


PREFACE: We have come to a difficult time in our nation. Even as rich and blessed as we are (taken as a whole) there are many problems and difficulties. The primary tragedy is that, as a nation, we are falling away from the worship of, and devotion to, the Lord. The congregation of God’s people are continually distracted by the world and its cares. We forget that we are called, gathered, and enlightened by the Holy Spirit to walk in His ways and be the Light of the world. When tragedy strikes we look around surprised, and in shock we wonder why we are so troubled. Of course we should not be so confused. But instead we should be convicted of our sins by God’s law, and embrace His unlimited Grace and the fact that he loves us yet and desires much better for us. He continually holds out his Word and invites us to trust Him in every aspect of our lives. This is easy to say. It is much more difficult to accomplish. It takes MUCH faith!

And what are just some of the principles of Christian life together that the Lord invites us to trust Him in?

+ Charity. True charity. Self sacrificial charity which can come only from the heart of God. Charity that does not demand anything in return.

+ Community. True Community. Honest and purposeful community (recognizing that we are created to BE in community!) Self sacrificial community that can come only from the heart of God.

+ Humility. True humility. Humility that is based on the fact that we are ALL exceptionally poor and miserable sinners. Humility that engenders gentleness and kindness toward others, as well as the ability to take direction and constructive criticism from others.

+ Love. True Love. Love that comes from the heart of God. The kind of Love that covers over a multitude of sins. The kind of Love that concerns itself with others.

+ Forgiveness. True Forgiveness. Forgiveness that comes straight from the cross of Christ – the kind of forgiveness that overcomes hate and every evil and proves the forgiveness that we receive from the Lord.

+ The Word. True Words from God that are meditated on day and night. This Word gives us wisdom for life in this world – and makes us wise for salvation!


Currently we have two problems in our church community which are quite dire:

+ A certain kind of poverty that is often unaddressed by our government programs that makes certain of our members unable to, by themselves, adequately address their every-day needs.

+ Even as the world around us crumbles under the weight of its sin, there is a terrible lack of dedicated servants of the Lord that would help address the great needs of our church and community.


The Peaceable House would be established so that those Godly women among our congregation might find a home together. In this home they would combine their resources and help each other so that they might lead more healthy and fulfilling lives, as well as enabling them to be devoted in serving the Lord in the church and the community. This would be something akin to a modern day convent: a purposeful life together in the Lord and for His glory.

Some further notes:

+ Unlike monastic life, there would be no life long vows. However, the residents of The Peaceable House would agree, as long as they were residents of the home, to abide by the rules of the house:

+ Spiritual Disciplines: daily devotions and prayers together to begin and end each day. As well, attendance at all congregational worship services is expected.

+ Sharing of the household tasks and the caring for each other: Every resident will have gifts to share in the upkeep of the house. Some will be more capable than others at times, but everyone should be diligent to the best of their abilities in their agreed upon duties.

+ Works of Charity: Each resident will be diligent in their works of charity in the church and community each day (except for two days off a week and other requested vacation time with family, etc.). Each resident would receive the office of “Deaconess” in the church and be considered staff members of the congregation.

+ Financial Responsibilities: Each resident will undergo a complete financial assessment and will come to an agreement per their contribution to the rent and general upkeep of the household. From the combined resources of the residents the rent will be paid and the groceries bought and the utilities paid. The residents would also have the opportunity to share a vehicle together.

Although it is expected that the residents of the house might work together peaceably, spiritual authority and dispute resolution mechanisms are to be maintained by the Peace Lutheran Church Elders and the Pastor (who might assign someone else – perhaps a spiritual woman of the congregation who is not a resident of the house – to work in their stead.)

If there is a continued and disruptive failure of a resident to abide by the disciplines of The Peaceable House, it might be necessary for the Church Elders to make a decision as to whether that individual can remain a resident of the house, or not.


Peace Lutheran Church would buy and manage the upkeep of an appropriate house in the vicinity of the church. The church would receive back rent from the residents to pay the mortgage and hire a groundskeeper. In the event that there would not be a sufficient number of residents to sustain the house, the church could possibly decide to close down The Peaceable House and rent it out otherwise, or simply sell the property.