Why should this even be debated?
Of course women should be allowed to be president. Now if you want to argue whether Condoleeza Rice, Hillary Clinton, or Janet Reno should be president, that'd be a good debate. You could argue their qualifications and electability.
Otherwise, yes, there are talented, strong leaders out there who happen to be women.
2006-09-11 07:31:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by J G 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
We are less competitive, more socially-driven. And after the Iraq war going to poorly, a female with a level head would be a fresh change.
Talk about equal rights for women and men. Women are just as capable as men, and how can the opposing party say all women presidents would be bad, if America has never had one?
Try looking at the TERRIBLE job some male presidents have done in our country.
Use the chancellor of Germany as an example. Look up the improvements she has made since in office.
Also compare the opposing side's views to those of Conservative and terroristic rules (as in Saudi Arabia) which forbid women from driving cars and going to school without their husbands or father's permission. Is America really that tyrannical? That we would prevent a woman from following her dreams?
America - land of the free.
Civil Rights Amendments, including giving the women the right to vote, granting equal share in the fate of our country. Because of that, they should be given equal opportunities as men.
Be sure to point out that men and women are different, certainly, but it does not mean that one is better or can be president or effectively than the other.
Hope this helps
2006-09-11 14:36:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by oh really 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not so much that the country needs a female president, as much as it needs a competent person in office. I'm not saying Bush is incompetent, that's another rant. But to say someone should be elected based only on their gender, race, pedigree is a bad move. However if you take people that have solid records in public office, and have a platform that you support that just happen to be women: such as Elizabeth Doyle, Hilarly Clinton, Barbara Boxer, Olympia Snowe, just to name a few, then I think they should be given a chance in presidential office.
Being president is not a prize that you win in a Cracker Jack Box, it's a hard job, and what America needs is someone who can perform that job correctly and understands the potential consequences of the decisions they make. So I say to you not that a woman should become president because women are better at one particular job, I say that if a person can lead us boldly, guide us wisely, and give us confidence in our future then I don't care if that person is a man or woman, white, black, blue, or green I want that person to the leader of my nation.
2006-09-11 14:52:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by jadeaaustin 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
A woman can multitask and not only hold down a full-time job outside the home, but she also hold the equivalent of TWO full-time jobs AT home!
They are the breadwinners, the treasurers, Secretary of Interior, Secretary of War between her children, and also an Ambassador to all other mothers in the world. It's a wonder why women haven't been president of the US all along!
2006-09-11 14:35:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by j_conway83 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
the question I have is what are good reason for NOT having a female president?
the only reasons that I can think of are;
is that there are many men who just do not think a women can lead the country.
Or how would the world look at us, where many countries do let women have a say.
hope this helps
2006-09-11 14:36:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
How about the fact that a woman is not only a Human being but an American Citizen just lake men are. There are women in congress, the senate, and the supreme court, so why not the presedency. The thing is not wether or not they should be allowed to run, but wether or not people will vote for them.
2006-09-11 14:31:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Fiesty Redhead 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think that a woman should be elected president solely on the basis of being a woman. I think the best candidate should win whether it is a man or a woman.
2006-09-11 15:58:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Women are genetically nuturers. They are caretakers from birth. That, and we just plain 'ol need to do something different! It's a shame we didn't get Ross Perot in. Shake it up a bit, ya know??
Britian has been successful under a queen's reign....except for that whole tea tax thing
2006-09-11 14:33:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Steve G 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
There's no reason for a female president over a male president. It's not as if they are any better. People don't want female presidents because the females they know are all impulsive and largely stupid.
2006-09-11 14:31:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Sorry, can't think of any reason specific to a female that makes her inherently more fit for the job.
2006-09-11 14:31:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by obviously_you'renotagolfer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋