
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, May 8, 1990                   TAG: 9005080521
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A8   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Short

SHOULD LADIES SUE FOR RIGHT TO DIE IN COMBAT?

THIS POLEMIC is intended for women only, especially for those young ladies - and their mothers, and their grandmothers - who object to VMI's chauvinistic all-male admissions policy.

Where were the ladies when Congress gave us a military draft - a male-only military draft - and then specified that only men should enjoy the right to die in combat, if necessary? Such legislation, devised by mostly male legislators who were draft-exempt, was certainly sexist; it gave one sex, but not the other, the "right" to serve the state in time of war and even in time of "police actions."

To my knowledge, Ms. magazine and the National Organization for Women protested not at all. Even today, ladies enjoying the benefits of "free" educations at our tax-supported service academies cannot be forced into combat.

Instead of trashing VMI, ladies should trash Congress; for historically it has been Congress, certainly not VMI, that has been ultimately responsible for the sexual makeup of the armed forces, including the exclusion of women from combat. It has been Congress that gave us that ultimate all-male "club," the one at Arlington National Cemetery.

Perhaps instead of picking on VMI, ladies should institute a class-action suit against the federal government for past grievances - i.e. for not giving them the same martial rights enjoyed by men: the right to serve the state (whether one wants to or not) in time of war, including the ultimate right to die in the trenches, if necessary.

\ Z.V. HOOKER II\ SALEM

by CNB