were punished, the man a little morernharshh’.rn'[‘he article in the Post also reportedrnthat 38 pregnancies have occurred on thernEisenhower since leaving our shores arn ear ago. I low man- of these babies havernthe same father we do not know, but accordingrnto the Center for Military Readiness,rnwhich keeps track of these gestatingrnproblems, the Nav^ evacuated five pregnantrnwomen from the ship in January.rnAnd 24 other women, the CMR reports,rnleft the ship before it vent to sea last fall.rn”I’hings are not going much better forrnthe Arnu’, which is also under feministrnsiege. In bcbruary, CMR revealed that arnnew Army policy for troops in Maiti recjuiredrnfighting men and women to sharernquarters. Not surprisingly, an Armyrnman’s wife jjiilled back the covers on therncoed tents in a letter to CMR presidentrnKlainc Donncllv, a member of the defunctrnPresidential Commission on thernAssignment of omen m the ArmedrnForces. When Donncllv released thernletter to Congress and the WashingtonrnTimes, the Armv prepared to battle iraternwics and husbands who do not like thernidea of a spouse sleeping in the samernroom with a member of the opposite sex.rnThe distraught woman’s letter madernseveral points, including the obvious obserrnation that rcc[uiring men and womenrnto share quarters would lead to falserncharges of sexual harassment and possiblrneen sexual misconduct. But morernimportant to this Arm wife was thernquestion of how long an normal man orrnwoman in such an cnxironment couldrnresist the powerful temptation to commitrnadultcrv. “The basic fact that humansrnha’c been made with strong sexualrndesires cannot be overlooked. Mow longrncan we rcasonabh’ expect men and womenrnnot to act on those desires?” she a.skedrnin her letter. “Our militarv spouses givernour countr sacrificial gifts bv willinglvrnbeing separated from their mates and actirncl supporting their mission, hi return,rnwe must honor this gift bv not unnecessarilvrntempting their spouses orrnordering them to live in a manner thatrnthe cannot morallv approve of. . . . Thernshock of m spouse sleeping in the samernroom with the opposite sex morallv outragedrnmc.”rnBut those misgivings got short shriftrnfrom svmpathetie planners in the unisexrnArmv. “T’hev’re soldiers,” a spokesmanrnbarked with the authority of a guard dogrnfrom the National Organization forrnWomen. “Ihcrc’s no distinction betweenrnmale and female.” There wasn’trnany distinction on the Eisenhower either,rnwhere Navy policy allowed two crewrnmembers to betray their spouses. Adultery,rnpregnancy, and other misconductrnaside, there’s another little problem withrnsending a few women into lonely, harshrnconditions with a few thousand men. Tornthe now run-of-the-mill talcs of illicitrnsex, now add the stories of the businesswomenrnwho made a fortune on lonelyrnboys in the Persian Gulf or on Navyrnvessels.rn”I’itillating as it is, sexual misconductrnis just one problem associated with a militaryrnoverdosing on estrogen. As the AirrnForce limes reported last November, arnstudy on the nature and amount of women’srnmedical care showed that half of 222rnwomen surveyed sought treatment forrnsexually transmitted diseases. The women,rnwho were crew members of the submarinerntender Frank Cable, sought medicalrntreatment 16 times more often thanrnmen, mostly for orthopaedic problems.rnBut these figures shouldn’t be surprising.rnWhen the Presidential Commissionrnon the Assignment of Women in thernArmed Forces gathered testimony fromrnmedical experts, it learned that womenrnwere more susceptible to stress fracturesrnand other medical problems duringrnstrenuous and even routine training andrnoperations because, well, they’re women.rnPredictably, President Clinton and thernPentagon threw the commission’s data,rnall of which showed women were eitherrnunsuitable for or incapable of fighting,rninto the Potomac. Prepare, thev said, forrnan Armv and Navy with generals and admiralsrnnamed I lillary and Chelsea leadingrnmen into combat.rnhi any event, the battle to put womenrnin combat has led to more than pregnancies,rnporno tapes, and penicillin shots.rnIt’s also led to a reign of terror againstrnmen who think it is not only un-Americanrnbut also un-Christian to send womenrninto combat. Navy Lieutenant CommanderrnKenneth A. Carkhuff, a 1982rngraduate of the United States NavalrnAcademy whose fitness reports havernbeen nothing less than exemplary, gotrnthe administrative equivalent of a keelhaulingrnfor expressing just such an opinion.rnOn August 24, 1994, Carkhuff wasrncommanding a helicopter unit on a drugrninterdiction operation off the coast ofrnHaiti. Two women were under his command,rnwhich prompted Carkhuff tornspeak his mind. I le told his commandingrnofficer he thought it was morally unacceptablernto send women into combatrnand that doing so would conflict withrnhis religious beliefs, a radical view inrnthe 1990’s. He expressed his concernsrnin a private conversation and never saidrnhe would disobey an order to send womenrninto combat, but noted that as arnChristian he was obliged to say somethingrnabout the matter, hnmediately,rnCarkhuff’s commander removed himrnfrom his unit and filed an averse fitnessrnreport that said Carkhuff’s “stated beliefsrnare not compatible with further militaryrnservice.” He also tried forcing himrnout of the Navy. The ease is pending.rnMilitary protocol required Carkhuff’srncommanding officer to remove himrnfrom the mission because he clearly statedrnhe could not fully support it. But thernmove to discharge Carkhuff from thernNavy was neither required nor militaryrnprotocol. It was arbitrary punishment forrnexpressing a strongly held belief. Therncliche for this is political correctness. Ofrncourse, one must ask how any Christianrnsoldier, as Carkhuff claims he is, couldrnobey any order he considered immoral.rnStill, his lesson is instructive: if you are arnreal man, do not join the military.rnR. Cort Kirkwood is managing editor ofrnthe Arlington Courier and McLeanrnProvidence Journal, weekly newspapersrnin Virginia. He wrote the “AlternativernViews” section of the final report of thernPresidential Commission on the Assignmentrnof Women in the Armed Forces.rnJOURNAUSMrnDrivingrnMike Roykornby Terry PizybylskirnIn my essay “Triberalism” in last October’srnissue of Chronicles, which detailedrnthe hijacking of the Chicago Tribunernin recent years by in-your-facernhomosexuals and other assorted leftwingrncounterculture misfits, I noted thatrnthere was still at least one ‘Tribune writerrnwho had the courage to thumb his nosernat his paper’s new policy equating arnSEPTEMBER 1995/47rnrnrn