- Columns - Current and Archives
- Looking Back by Jack Lebo - February 2012 >
- Murphy's Law - July 2013>
- Murphy's Law - May 2013
- Murphy's Law - April 2013
- Murphy's Law - March 2013
- Murphy's Law - February 2013
- Murphy's Law - January 2013
- Murphy's Law - December 2012
- Murphy's Law - November 2012
- Murphy's Law - October 2012
- Murphy's Law - September 2012
- Murphy's Law - August 2012
- Murphy's Law - July 2012
- Murphy's Law - June 2012
- Murphy's Law - May 2012
- Murphy's Law - April 2012
- Murphy's Law - March 2012
- Murphy's Law - February 2012
- Murphy's Law - January 2012
- Murphy's Law - December 2011
- Murphy's Law - November 2011
- Murphy's Law - October 2011
- Murphy's Law - September 2011
- Murphy's Law - August 2011
- Murphy's Law - July 2011
- Murphy's Law - June 2011
- Murphy's Law - May 2011
- Your Money Matters by Thomas Sottile - February 2013>
- Taking Care by Lisa Petsche - May 2013>
- Taking Care - April 2013
- Taking Care - March 2013
- Taking Care - February 2013
- Taking Care - January 2013
- Taking Care - December 2012
- Taking Care - November 2012
- Taking Care - October 2012
- Taking Care - September 2012
- Taking Care - August 2012
- Taking Care - July 2012
- Taking Care - June 2012
- Taking Care - May 2012
- Travel Articles
- There's Much To Like About Tybee Island, Georgia
- PA’s Little Town Of Bethlehem Has Giant History, Pleasant Surprises
- Savannah Style: History, Food, Architecture And Even Ghosts
- Vacationing Beats Back Winter
- Visiting The Inn At Pocono Manor
- Delights of Northern Ireland
- Tuscana Resort near Orlando
- Belfast To Commemorate Titanic
- Protect Your Home While Vacationing
- Nearby Hampton Roads, Virginia
- New 'Heritage' Travel Division Formed
- Lifestyle Articles
- PAE-300 ‘Personal Audio Enhancer’ Brings New Sounds And Clarity To Television
- Seniors Desire To Stay In Home Has Led To Innovative Housing
- ‘Pleasantly Plump’ May Not Pose Serious Health Problems After All
- Spring Hills Brings Home Care, Assisted Living to S. Jersey
- Sense Of Family Obligation Remains Strong
- Becoming Bilingual Thought To Delay Onset Of Cognitive Impairment
- Comprehensive Study Provides Foundation For ‘New American Diet’
- Is Alzheimer's A Myth?
- Living Alone, Without Loneliness
- Chocolate In Moderation
- Expert: Forgiveness, Gratitude Are Essential For Healthy Aging
- Expert: No Limit To Length Of Life
- Media-Based Pennsylvania Veterans Museum Is Historic Treasure
- Joint Task: Take Action To Combat Knee Pain
- Want Better Performance From Portfolio? Watch Congress
- Conscientiousness Key To Longevity
- Men, Women 'Retire' Differently
- Sleep Problems And Cognitive Issues
- Newsworthy
- Binge Drinking Is A National Problem — Even With Senior Citizens
- Study Warns Of High Cardiovascular Disease Risks Of Eating Yolks
- Study: 'Old' People Smell Better
- Depression, Anxiety Are Key Factors In Impact Of Parkinson’s Disease
- Study: Don’t Worry, Be Happy For Better Cardiovascular Health
- ‘Chore Connection’ Provides Unique Services, Volunteer Opportunities
- Study Reinforces Benefits Of Regular Colonoscopies
- Study: 'Senior Moments' Begin Earlier
- Three New Studies Suggest Aspirin May Prevent Some Cancers
- No Sure Bet: Seniors Must Recognize Potential Gambling Problems
- Coping With Grief
- New Recommendation Creates Debate Over Prostate Screening
- High Salt, Low Potassium Diet Linked To Increased Death Risk
- Medical Director At HCR ManorCare Receives APPLE Award
- RomneyCare Awful Lot Like Obamacare
- Grandkids Safer With Gram/Pop At Wheel
- AARP: Recession Hits Seniors Hard
- Antidepressants Can Increase Danger of Falling
- Poll: Low Marks For U.S. Healthcare
- More Good News For Coffee Drinkers
- Book Reviews
- We The People
- The Immortal Life Of Henrietta Lacks
- The Love Of My Youth
- The American Way Of Eating
- ‘Rin Tin Tin’
- Pity The Billionaire
- Classic: Uncle Tom's Cabin
- A Stocking Full Of New Christmas Novels
- When China Rules The World
- The Submission - Amy Waldman
- My Soul's Been Psychedelicized
- Reckless Endangerment
- O'Nan's 'Emily Alone'
- Baseball In The Garden Of Eden
- Leisure / Entertainment
- Music - Donald Fagen's 'Eminent Hipster,' Jimi Hendrix Release
- Music - Two CD-Set Features Elvis In Hawaii; Eric Burdon Has New Release
- Music - Billy Joel's 'Love Songs' Set For Release
- Music - Paul Anka Shows Off His Versatility With Compilation CD Of ‘Duets’
- Music - Elvis, Otis Redding Fans Treated To Compilation Sets
- Music - Even At Age 80, Willie Nelson Flaunts Staying Power With Duets Album
- Music - New 63-CD Set Spans Much Of Johnny Cash's Career
- Music - Preservation Jazz Hall Band Celebrates Anniversary
- Music - New Releases Spotlight Garfunkel, Los Lobos
- Music - Television Pioneer Ernie Kovacs Featured In Two New DVD Releases
- Music - Simon’s ‘Graceland’ Album Celebrated With Anniversary Release
- Music - New Releases of Hathaway, Heart Music
- Music - Willie Nelson Still Producing New Music
- Music - New Release of Elvis' Work
- Music - 'The Sound Of Philadelphia'
- Music - Dave Brubeck, Hank Williams Reissues
- Music - Janis Joplin Showcased On 2 New CD Releases
- Music - Paul Simon, Jimi Hendrix Reissues
- Legal Articles
- Adult Children May Be Left To Pay Nursing Home Costs Of Indigent Parents
- Make A Resolution That Provides Long-Term Security
- Dialogue Helps Control And Direct Legal, Financial & Medical Matters
- Life Changes Can Require Revisions, Updates To Estate Plan
- Wills Create Solid Foundation For Effective Estate Planning
- Keep Or Shred? Know What To Do With Personal, Financial Records
- Recent Court Ruling Makes It ‘Open Season’ On Adult Children In PA
- Assuring For Care Of Your Pet
- Reader Resources
- Links To Government and Social Services
- Senior Discounts / bradsdeals.com
- For Advertisers / 2013
- To Subscribe
- Contact Us
- Submitting Letters To The Editor
Murphy’s Law, written by Barbara Murphy, appears monthly in The Golden Times. The column represents the opinion of the author and is not necessarily the opinion of the publisher.
Landmark Directives, But Women
In Combat Must Have Limitations
The government has just issued two landmark directives which will effect our pocketbooks and our cultural values.
The first, mandating athletic programs for disabled children, will likely mean higher property taxes. The second, mandating that women be permitted to serve in combat, could do as much to hurt children as the sports ruling will do to help them.
I applaud the U.S. Education Department’s sports decision, even though as a homeowner, I will probably pay higher school taxes for the rule’s implementation. Under the new guidelines, school districts must include disabled students in sports programs or provide equal alternative options.
As Philip Elliott of The Associated Press (AP) pointed out, the new ruling “could bring sweeping changes in school budgets and locker rooms for years to come.” Schools would be required, he said, to make “reasonable modifications” for disabled students or create programs that parallel athletic programs that have comparable standing to mainstream programs.
Though Mr. Elliott didn’t mention it, the new sports ruling will also very likely compel schools to hire more coaches, those skilled in working with the disabled.
In announcing the new guidelines, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said: “Sports can provide invaluable lessons in discipline, selflessness, passion and courage and this guidance will help schools ensure that students with disabilities have an equal benefit from the life lessons they can learn on the playing field or on the court.”
I agree with Secretary Duncan. I also agree with Terri Lakowski, who told the AP: “This is a wonderful moment for students with disabilities. This will do for disabled students what Title IX did for women.” (Title IX mandated sports equality for girls and women.) Terri Lakowski has led a coalition pushing for the change for the past 10 years.
One note of concern — according to the AP there is no deadline for the schools to comply with the new disabilities directive. Nevertheless, activists — and I — cheered the changes.
It’s a different story regarding U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s decision that woman may serve in combat.
With the changing nature of warfare due largely to new technology, the truth is that service women have been serving in combat for the past decade, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have served with valor and they have given their lives. As of Jan. 24, according to The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 152 women have died and an additional 958 have been wounded in these wars. Their bravery is unquestionable and I, along with the rest of the nation, am eternally grateful for it.
However, I don’t want women dying in combat unless they are childless or unless they have a civilian husband capable of rearing any minor children who survive them. I have heard or read nothing suggesting that Secretary Panetta’s new ruling contains such a provision. Children seem to have been entirely forgotten in the roar of approval — and disapproval — of the new ruling.
It seems service women are almost universally in favor of the change. They point out that, in effect, they are already serving in combat but that their official classification as non-combatants keeps many of them from getting the promotions and higher pay which they deserve.
Carolyn King, who said she served in the Air Force, told The Los Angeles Times that the decision left her “ecstatic — it no longer makes us second class citizens.”
However, Bing West — a Vietnam veteran and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Reagan Administration — said he thought the service chiefs “capitulated to a politically inspired idea, probably fearing consequences more dire if they had stood their ground.”
Many opponents of the decision said it would be difficult if not impossible to integrate women into front-line fighting units or special forces because women simply lack the physical strength for these jobs. However, even if kept out of front-line units or special forces, women are exposed to death and killed in other types of combat. If they leave parentless children behind, the deaths of these female warriors is doubly tragic.
We don’t put children first in this society and we must if we are to become a truly civilized people. The new rule is wrong and the old practice of inadvertently or stealthily slipping women into combat roles must be stopped.
Women now in military service inevitably cite patriotism as their motive for joining up. But many channels can be found for the exercise of this laudable motive. Everyone owes a duty to a country like America but they have a higher duty to ensure the welfare of their children.
*
Barbara Murphy, 80, writes about controversial issues each month.
In Combat Must Have Limitations
The government has just issued two landmark directives which will effect our pocketbooks and our cultural values.
The first, mandating athletic programs for disabled children, will likely mean higher property taxes. The second, mandating that women be permitted to serve in combat, could do as much to hurt children as the sports ruling will do to help them.
I applaud the U.S. Education Department’s sports decision, even though as a homeowner, I will probably pay higher school taxes for the rule’s implementation. Under the new guidelines, school districts must include disabled students in sports programs or provide equal alternative options.
As Philip Elliott of The Associated Press (AP) pointed out, the new ruling “could bring sweeping changes in school budgets and locker rooms for years to come.” Schools would be required, he said, to make “reasonable modifications” for disabled students or create programs that parallel athletic programs that have comparable standing to mainstream programs.
Though Mr. Elliott didn’t mention it, the new sports ruling will also very likely compel schools to hire more coaches, those skilled in working with the disabled.
In announcing the new guidelines, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said: “Sports can provide invaluable lessons in discipline, selflessness, passion and courage and this guidance will help schools ensure that students with disabilities have an equal benefit from the life lessons they can learn on the playing field or on the court.”
I agree with Secretary Duncan. I also agree with Terri Lakowski, who told the AP: “This is a wonderful moment for students with disabilities. This will do for disabled students what Title IX did for women.” (Title IX mandated sports equality for girls and women.) Terri Lakowski has led a coalition pushing for the change for the past 10 years.
One note of concern — according to the AP there is no deadline for the schools to comply with the new disabilities directive. Nevertheless, activists — and I — cheered the changes.
It’s a different story regarding U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s decision that woman may serve in combat.
With the changing nature of warfare due largely to new technology, the truth is that service women have been serving in combat for the past decade, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have served with valor and they have given their lives. As of Jan. 24, according to The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 152 women have died and an additional 958 have been wounded in these wars. Their bravery is unquestionable and I, along with the rest of the nation, am eternally grateful for it.
However, I don’t want women dying in combat unless they are childless or unless they have a civilian husband capable of rearing any minor children who survive them. I have heard or read nothing suggesting that Secretary Panetta’s new ruling contains such a provision. Children seem to have been entirely forgotten in the roar of approval — and disapproval — of the new ruling.
It seems service women are almost universally in favor of the change. They point out that, in effect, they are already serving in combat but that their official classification as non-combatants keeps many of them from getting the promotions and higher pay which they deserve.
Carolyn King, who said she served in the Air Force, told The Los Angeles Times that the decision left her “ecstatic — it no longer makes us second class citizens.”
However, Bing West — a Vietnam veteran and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Reagan Administration — said he thought the service chiefs “capitulated to a politically inspired idea, probably fearing consequences more dire if they had stood their ground.”
Many opponents of the decision said it would be difficult if not impossible to integrate women into front-line fighting units or special forces because women simply lack the physical strength for these jobs. However, even if kept out of front-line units or special forces, women are exposed to death and killed in other types of combat. If they leave parentless children behind, the deaths of these female warriors is doubly tragic.
We don’t put children first in this society and we must if we are to become a truly civilized people. The new rule is wrong and the old practice of inadvertently or stealthily slipping women into combat roles must be stopped.
Women now in military service inevitably cite patriotism as their motive for joining up. But many channels can be found for the exercise of this laudable motive. Everyone owes a duty to a country like America but they have a higher duty to ensure the welfare of their children.
*
Barbara Murphy, 80, writes about controversial issues each month.