No more transgender in the military -- poll

[dogs4thewin]

And then the question becomes: What version of Christianity are we talking about? There are quite a few to choose from. Are we talking Catholic? Eastern Orthodox? Anglicanism? Protestant? And if the answer is Protestant, then which version of Protestantism are we talking about? Baptist? Methodist? Wesleyan? Lutheran? Presbyterian? Pentecostal? Non-Denominational? Seventh-Day Adventist? I'm not even going to attempt to list all of the other Christian denominations that are currently in the United States. Based on my 37 years of experience with the Christian faith, I'm not naive to think that all Christians from all these various Christian denominations will unanimously agree on which version of Protestantism to endorse as the right version of Christianity to follow and then enforce it. And what about Catholics and every other Christian sect that isn't Protestant? What about them? So yeah, trying to make America a Christian nation or worse, a Christian Theocracy, would be disastrous.

Well, some could argue that it could be a certain creed. Like how CF is set up, yet we have all kinds of Christians, but still that does not address the fact are secular government.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

There, as I see it are practical reasons that trans should not serve. Just like there are reasons that CERTAIN medical conditions ( although some that are banned I do not believe a HISTORY of certain conditions that currently are bars for enlistment should be, but there are some medical conditions that no matter how badly a person wants to serve is just not practical or have safety concerns. I do not believe that safety is an issue with trans serving.

There are people who have served honorably in the military without those who are working alongside them even realizing they are transgender. There are physical and intellectual tests for gaining entry into the military, and everyone should pass those levels of fitness. So long as they do, and they have the willingness to serve, and they remain in honorable standing for their conduct, I stand for them doing so on our behalf. I come from a military family, and both of my grandfathers are Purple Heart recipients; their sentiments match mine.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

so then the question becomes is transgender a mental issue/disorder.

That's not a question. A man who thinks he's a woman is bat guano insane. Period.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

Well, some could argue that it could be a certain creed. Like how CF is set up, yet we have all kinds of Christians, but still that does not address the fact are secular government.

But the problem with that is, Christians in charge some times change their mind about whose a Christian and who isn't, as in the situation that happened on CF a couple of years ago. But I won't say anything else about that for concern it might be considered an off limits topic. I like to err on the side of caution.

 

[dogs4thewin]

There are people who have served honorably in the military without those who are working alongside them even realizing they are transgender. There are physical and intellectual tests for gaining entry into the military, and everyone should pass those levels of fitness. So long as they do, and they have the willingness to serve, and they remain in honorable standing for their conduct, I stand for them doing so on our behalf. I come from a military family, and both of my grandfathers are Purple Heart recipients; their sentiments match mine.

Honest question how should they handle latrine/head and housing that and the hate of transgender ( if and when they are found out) are the reasons that I do not feel transgender should serve and also why I have no problem with other members of the LBGT community serving openly.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I am saying reversal of this policy would cut off recruits.

That's only slightly less vague, and doesn't make much sense either. Duh! The purpose of MEPS is to weed out applicants which are unfit for service. Far more people are denied enlistment for failing the drug screening, for example, so it's still not clear why you're bothered by this. Do you understand that military service is a privilege? Do you think its something that just anybody can do?

 

[dogs4thewin]

That's not a question. A man who thinks he's a woman is bat guano insane. Period.

Actually, it is there are lists of mental disorders it is up to experts to determine whether or not that is an issue.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Actually, it is there are lists of mental disorders it is up to experts to determine whether or not that is an issue.

1.) Actually, it's not. Mentally illness is defined by how it affects on a person's ability to effectively function in society, and that is determined, not by experts, but by society at large. In this case it's not something that really requires expert opinion. I don't need to be a doctor to understand that drinking Drano is bad for me, and I don't need to be a psychologist to understand that a man who thinks he's a woman is not right in the head.

2.) The President conferred with the experts in the armed forces, and they determined that it is. I personally can think several reasons why this would be the case.

 

[AV1611VET]

Anyone remember Clayton Hartwig?

 

[tulc]

Tell tulc I asked if he would like his loved ones to be on a bus going down a mountainside, whose driver just got judged for his lifestyle.

Also not a problem. Again, you either trust Him or you don't.
tulc(wonders if AV1611VET questions every bus driver before letting his family on a bus?)

 

[MoonlessNight]

There are people who have served honorably in the military without those who are working alongside them even realizing they are transgender. There are physical and intellectual tests for gaining entry into the military, and everyone should pass those levels of fitness. So long as they do, and they have the willingness to serve, and they remain in honorable standing for their conduct, I stand for them doing so on our behalf. I come from a military family, and both of my grandfathers are Purple Heart recipients; their sentiments match mine.

The military does not allow anyone who requires constant medical treatment to serve, because of practical reasons. For example, diabetics cannot be soldiers, since they would require insulin. That takes care of any transgendered recruit who requires hormone treatments or regular checkups. They aren't fit by any measure. That's without getting into psychological examinations, which lead to more problems even if you do not think that transgenderism itself is a mental illness (for example, the rate of suicide among the transgendered is worryingly high). Between the physical and mental issues, together with the low incidence of transgendered people generally, it is doubtful that the number of transgendered recruits would qualify for service would even reach the double digits.

History has shown us (in the military and elsewhere) what happens when a group has low enrollment because they cannot meet the standards: the standards are lowered. Sometimes this is done by giving extra aid to the desired individuals (for example, for a time female soldiers who wanted to qualify for the rangers were given leave from their normal duties, while their male comrades were not), or simply by lowering the standards for everyone until the people from the desired group can pass the standards in the desired numbers.

What is clear is that the military loses next to nothing by forbidding the perhaps 7 or 8 qualified transgendered recruits to join, but stands to lose a great deal by lowering their standards.

 

[newlightseven]

Okay, this is why people have to READ THEIR BIBLE. If they did they would know that MANY of these so called, 'transgender' people are really eunuch's. These self righteous people are persecuting people who did what the bible said to do. If you do such a thing naturally it will effect your body and emotions. Then they will want to drag up every old law about not dressing up in women's clothing yet will say nothing about being in their home when their wife is on her period, nor wearing different fabrics and the like. As the bible says, God justifies the ungodly. If a transgender has lean down their life for us there is no greater love according to the bible so you can't now go back and say they aren't allowed because they already gave up everything.

 

[Yarddog]

Anyone remember Clayton Hartwig?

Yes, but not sure how it equates to this thread.

 

[jazzflower92]

1.) Actually, it's not. Mentally illness is defined by how it affects on a person's ability to effectively function in society, and that is determined, not by experts, but by society at large. In this case it's not something that really requires expert opinion. I don't need to be a doctor to understand that drinking Drano is bad for me, and I don't need to be a psychologist to understand that a man who thinks he's a woman is not right in the head.

2.) The President conferred with the experts in the armed forces, and they determined that it is. I personally can think several reasons why this would be the case.

As said before, they were surprised as everyone he was doing this. In other words, he didn't consult them as people have been saying.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

The military does not allow anyone who requires constant medical treatment to serve, because of practical reasons. For example, diabetics cannot be soldiers, since they would require insulin. That takes care of any transgendered recruit who requires hormone treatments or regular checkups. They aren't fit by any measure.

Damaged or deformed genitals will frequently disqualify recruits for military service. Even if sex-change operations were not specifically listed as medically disqualifying, (they are) other disqualifiers include "Absence of both testicles, either congenital, or acquired, or unexplained absence of a ball" and "Penis, amputation of, if the resulting stump is insufficient to permit normal micturition." Consistent application of those standards would necessarily require exclusion of men who had had such operations.

 

[jazzflower92]

Damaged or deformed genitals will frequently disqualify recruits for military service. Even if sex-change operations were not specifically listed as medically disqualifying, (they are) other disqualifiers include "Absence of both testicles, either congenital, or acquired, or unexplained absence of a ball" and "Penis, amputation of, if the resulting stump is insufficient to permit normal micturition." Consistent application of those standards would necessarily require exclusion of men who had had such operations.

Pentagon takes no steps to enforce Trump's transgender ban

All those so-called experts only seem to be in his tweets, with everyone pointing out they don't want to enforce this.

 

[RDKirk]

Main thing I'm concerned about is whether the person is "fully deployable," with any problems that make a soldier not "fully deployable" being fairly minor and short-termed.

I was a military leader before and during the "don't ask/don't tell" period, and I never cared who my troops were having sex with, as long as it didn't interfere with the mission.

I wouldn't care, either, whether the troop in uniform on my team had been born a different sex than he or she appeared to be, standing there in uniform. As long as during the time he or she is in uniform, his or her head is on straight about who he or she is. IOW, "gender dysphoria"--for that matter, dysphoria of any kind--needs to be resolved one way or the other. I have escorted troops to the mental health clinic before who suffered from other kinds of dysphoria.

However, the term "transgender" is used very broadly by those who defend it, and in all this discussion I never know for sure what "stage" of transgender the speaker has in mind. I get the feeling that vagueness is intentional, the way some people slyly substitute "euthanasia" in discussions of "assisted suicide" when the two terms are very, very different.

 

[SBC]

Deuteronomy 22:5 says, "A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this."

That was direction given Hebrews nearly 5,000 years ago, teaching them who had been chosen and agreed to be set apart from the world.

I am a gentile, and was never subject to such Hebrew Law.
My setting apart for the Lord, was extended to Gentiles much later.

What applies to me is:

Matt.6

1. [25] Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?

God is not concerned what clothes you put on; but rather, that you do put on clothes; and you spend more attention on what is on your insides.

I would then lean more toward concern what is on the INSIDE of a person, than, the outside.

I do take issue with a transgender's implication, God got it wrong when He formed their body in the womb.

Besides the military providing military necessities, the military caters to the personal needs of men and the personal needs of women. And those personal needs are catered to by natural gender, to which I agree the individual service men and service women should be assured their personal space so provided, is with their own natural gender.

Not only is transgenderism an abomination to God, it also shouldn't be tolerated by the US military. Our troops need money to pay for equipment in order to win wars. Military funding shouldn't be wasted on weirdos who want to mutilate their genitals to feel like the "right" gender.

I would say the public at large is what provides the financial support for the military, and should have a say in that which they are compelled to provide financial support.

Sort of like; I would agree a woman who elects to have an abortion is her choice; but no, I do not want to be compelled to support her decision morally or financially.

God Bless,
SBC

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

All those so-called experts only seem to be in his tweets, with everyone pointing out they don't want to enforce this.

The president as commander in chief, understands what the military leadership wants better than you do...

...and the reason why the ban hasn't been enforced is because Trump hasn't issued it; he has merely stated his intention to do so.

 

[AV1611VET]

 

[Eric Reed]

Fine with that up on the mountaintop.
M-Bob

Actually, there were never any "transgenders" in the military in the first place. Why? Well, its real simple: there never has been and there never will be a human "transgender." No human has ever moved from one bonafide gender to another bonafide gender.

Very glad my vote was not wasted in getting Trump into office. I can only cringe of the thought how far transgenderism would have progressed in the military under Clinton.