DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Transsexuals Barred From Serving in Military

Per President Trump's Twitter: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump


I will defer to our Commander-in-Chief and the Generals who advised him. I suspect some of the military experts on this board will have a different opinion.

Whatever the Military needs to do in order to protect America and limit Casualties is fine with me.

Social experiments do not belong anywhere near the Military unless they can accept it without risk to our war fighting ability.

Their call.

Bigot In Chief.

If the main issue these dudes have is the cost of surgery, then get rid of the policy.

But to ban transsexuals from the military altogether is sad.

Guess all Americans aren't created equal after all.

I spent about two seconds thinking about this because I just don't care, but he did not ban LGBTQ, just transexuals... Has to be about the surgery costs or bathrooms. The GOP is really hung up over this.

But I do have a serious question; is a post-operation transexual still a transexual?

Wouldn't that be harder? Allowing them to serve but limiting their benefits? As in, the legal battles that would take place would be more expensive than just banning them outright.

Not saying I agree with the ban, just wondering about the legality of treating certain individuals one way while treating others another. Both reek to high heaven, which do you allow to stink up the place?

Think about this:
Kids (18) can fight,
Men can fight,
Women can fight,
Gays can fight,
All religions and non-religious people can fight,
All races can fight,
Dogs can fight...

But transexuals can not fight.~smh

I guess it depends on whether you want to get into the army or out of the army.



That halter is to die for.

j/c

I was always told that once you enter the armed forces you became government property. That at that point, every decision made was up to the military. If that's correct, why are people trying to compare it to civilian rights?

...in a volunteer military.


"thank you for your service."

Tucker Carlson called out a writer who advised his readers to shun their gay Republican friends, but then refused to explain the piece on the show.

In a column titled "What To Do When Your Friend's a Gay Republican," Michael Musto wrote in Out magazine: "Similarly, if a real-life friend -- someone who knows my plight, my accomplishments, and my oppressions -- decides to trumpet in my face the alleged glories of the Republican party, I simply have to show them the hand and the door. Friendship over."

Well, so much for Liberal tolerance.

Who's checking?

As a general rule, I won't judge people based on sexual preferences or gender.

I guess I do see that it might cause a problem for some in the military but I don't want to speak for them. They, I'm sure, know better than I ever will.

So being a guy that hasn't served, I think its not my place to judge.

is it limiting their benefits, though? it's an optional surgery that doesn't really have any medical benefits except helping someone's self esteem.

I guess that not all people accept how they are created.

Relax bro..........just joking.

I'm gonna stay outta this one.

How is it limiting their benefits? It's a totally elective surgery like hair replacement or a boob job.. it serves no medical purpose other than to make you feel better about yourself.

Any person who meets the requirements should be able to join the military but the military should not EVER be responsible to pay for purely elective/cosmetic surgery...

I used the term "benefits" loosely.

Also, I would bet that the operations that they're referring to aren't considered elective as of now because the military has been footing the bill for them and the trans group don't consider them elective and would fight that in court if it changes.

Meaning, if it was truly an elective surgery, this wouldn't be a concern because we wouldn't have been paying for it already, so there's no need to change the rules to disallow the surgery or ban them outright. Right? Maybe I confused myself with that statement.

That would make me feel better because I sure didn't understand it.

Transgenders no longer meet those requirements. End of discussion.

So you're suggesting that Liberals (or anyone for that matter) should be tolerant with people who are intolerant?

No. I am suggesting that Liberals talk a good game but are no different than those they criticize.

Okay, I assume we're already paying for these surgeries because why else would there be a need to ban trans people from the military. Therefore, the surgery is somehow avoiding the elective status, right?

So, the military has two choices:

- Make it truly elective, which might bring on lawsuits since they have been paying for it already and muck up the other elective surgeries they're trying to avoid paying for.
- Ban trans people to avoid changing the policy and save money. Also, they get to clean house of trans people, which we know they want to do anyway.

Press Conference today...

Banning Transgenders is a Military decision.

Has to do with readiness and cohesion.

Military spends more in Viagra treatments than they would in transition procedures. Google it.

That's what I was thinking. If you want to get rid of the medical cost, then ban the cost.

I would say that should be banned too. Ban the costs not the people.

"Let's meet face to face and you tell me I'm not worthy," Kristin Beck, a 20-year veteran of the Navy SEALs.



Umm... No thanks.

So do you know if they give the transgendering guy (guy-to-girl) a uh...

I'd like to see Beck naked.

I'm just curious how...

How close they get. If Beck has to forewarn her future boyfriends of what they're going to encounter in the bedroom.

And how about the nerve/pleasure aspect?

Can Beck have orgasms? That's like one of life's greatest pleasures. Do you give that up?

Why would you want to see that? Some things should just not be seen. But if you have to, there is google.

Fair question.

I'm not 100% sure. Certainly not for any sort of carnal reason.

Maybe it's to see:

1) What someone who desires to transgender is willing to endure?
2) The latest in plastic surgery capabilities?

You know what. Now that I think about it, I'm really not that interested.

From what I have read of the procedure and the aftermath, I could only describe it as horrifying. It is not something I would wish on anybody, but it is a free country, and if an adult wants to pay for it on their own dime... so be it.

I'm skeptical of it being a good idea in the military, and apparently our President and some high ranking Generals agree. While we're on the topic: to push the procedure on kids is nothing short of evil. Don't believe me? Read up on the details. Maybe start with dilation, or post-op attempted suicide rate.

Having served (during peace time) I question the ability for a person who is going through repeated surgeries and recoveries to be able to serve effectively.

Also, don't think I should be paying taxes for you to transition from one gender to the other.

If you want to serve, but not cost the military time and money transitioning then I think you should be allowed to serve.

Trying now to GAF about this issue ... nope, still don't care.

What to say.....I'll leave it at that.

If the military will pay for transition surgery, there will be an influx of folks joining just to have their surgery paid for. To think otherwise is foolish.

Like the millions who signed up just to get free college.

Come on, man! You're equating a sex change to a person wanting to educate himself? Booooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Education is part of the Thankyou for your service.
Did you know in Socialist Venezuela the reward for extreme bravery is toilet paper? Well it is.

Go ahead and disregard the science. Social progress will march on without you. Just like same-sex marriage marches on without others, too.

What science? And how is transitioning from one gender to the other comparable to getting an education?

Outstanding - you found an example of one Liberal's apparent intolerance and you labeled all liberals as the same.

Hard - no, impossible - to argue with that logic.

By the same logic - since most white supremacists are Trump supporters - all Trump supporters are white supremacists .... correct? Brilliant.