But in today’s progressive world, wanting to do something is
enough to upend centuries of tradition and religious teachings. Teachings that
separated the sexes as a moral imperative. Again, something Western culture has
completely abandoned as an ideal. The current cultural attitude harkens back to
the sexual revolution of the 1960s, whose mantra was, “If it feels good, do
it.” And if more than one person is involved and they are consenting adults,
why stop it?
Morality, Shmorality.
There is another aspect of sexual morality that feminism
ignores: the physical attraction that can lead to sexual relationships.
Physical attraction is actually a good thing. It can and often does eventually
lead to marriage and having a family. But it is ignored in the face of the
feminist ideal of equality between the sexes. So if it is a matter of giving a
woman a role equal to a man’s, there can be no such thing as an obstacle like
sexual morality being allowed to get in the way.
If I had to define the biggest clash between Western culture
and religion, it would be which side of that divide one stands on. If one
favors the right of women to participate equally with men, then the morality of
separating the sexes is shunted aside, and religion must suffer the
consequences.
When women are given that equal benefit in the military and
placed in close quarters with men, feminists will argue that men must simply
control any lust that overtakes them. That is, of course, true halachically.
But it I also true is that religious law - Halacha requires us not to place
ourselves in that kind of situation in the first place.
There is no reason for women to serve in the army other than
in ancillary positions. There is for example - no tactical need for a woman to
be placed in a tank with three men for days at a time. Four men could do the
job. The only reason to do so is to satisfy feminist equality. But doing that
undermines the religious sensitivities of religious soldiers.
It would be one thing if the army had no choice. If, for
some reason, they had to have a woman in a tank with three men for tactical
reasons, that would be a different matter. But this is about the most absurd
assertion anyone could make. When the IDF does that is is almost certainly done
to satisfy feminist agendas.
Denying women service of that type in the army would indeed
be seen as a setback for feminism. Which is why Israel’s pro-feminist Israeli
courts keep ruling in favor of legislation that gives women equal status with
men in all cases. But when it comes to IDF service, femismim ought to not take
precedence. The IDF is there to protect the Israeli people. And because of
religious sensibilities it should be men doing it. Even if woman are
physically and mentally capable of doing it. Not everything that can be done,
should be done. Especially if doing it violates the rights of others…
To continue reading - and/or to comment on this post -
click on this link: substack.
You must subscribe to receive new posts. It's easy and it's free.
