Re: The Feminization of the Medal of Honor

The real fun part is that Patton never said it.  
 
That quote was from the movie but it has never been formally attributed to the
real Patton.  It is a well known misattribution.
 
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Johne Cook
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 12:09 PM
To: DADL (off topic)
Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] The Feminization of the Medal of Honor
 
 
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:55 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Gen. George Patton once famously said, “The object of war is not to die for your
country but to make the other guy die for his.”

That's not exactly what he said. If he's going to be quoted, he should be quoted
in full. Here's what he said:
"Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his
country. You won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
http://www.turtletrader.com/patton.html
 
When we think of heroism in battle, we used the think of our boys storming the
beaches of Normandy under withering fire, climbing the cliffs of Pointe do Hoc
while enemy soldiers fired straight down on them, and tossing grenades into pill
boxes to take out gun emplacements.  
That kind of heroism has apparently become passe when it comes to awarding the
Medal of Honor. We now award it only for preventing casualties, not for
inflicting them.
 
So the question is this: when are we going to start awarding the Medal of Honor
once again for soldiers who kill people and break things so our families can
sleep safely at night?
 
I would suggest our culture has become so feminized that we have become
squeamish at the thought of the valor that is expressed in killing enemy
soldiers through acts of bravery. We know instinctively that we should honor
courage, but shy away from honoring courage if it results in the taking of life
rather than in just the saving of life. So we find it safe to honor those who
throw themselves on a grenade to save their buddies.
 
Jesus, in words often cited in ceremonies such as the one which will take place
this afternoon, said, “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lays down
his life for his friends” (John 15:13). So it is entirely right that we honor
this kind of bravery and self-sacrifice, which is surely an imitation of the
Lord of Lord and King of Kings.
 
However, Jesus’ act of self-sacrifice would ultimately have been meaningless –
yes, meaningless – if he had not inflicted a mortal wound on the enemy while
giving up his own life.
 
The significance of the cross is not just that Jesus laid down his life for us,
but that he defeated the enemy of our souls in the process. It was on the cross
that he crushed the head of the serpent. It was on the cross that “he disarmed
the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them
in it” (Colossians 2:15).

This strikes me as a reach at best. Is the enemy of our souls Satan or  sin? By
covering sin with his blood, he also defeated his enemy, but I rather think he
was more concerned with dying for our sins than dying to defeat Satan.

How about we applaud heroism wherever we find it and stop making this a medal
beholden to agenda or political correctness?

Johne Cook
| http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot