No transgender in the Military....

[Wishbone]

I am going to say this... I am not against anyone serving, as long as they are in to SERVE, not to gain access to services they can't afford in the civilian sector. I honestly don't see a trans, or gay, or whatever... being any less able to defend this country, as long as that's their intent. Here's the rub... A God-awful lot of people join simply to get free education benefits. They get their degree then get out. I have a BIG problem with that. But how to do even begin to weed them out.

Do like private companies do that fork over training and education money.

If you take it you are committed for a specified period of time and if you leave too soon, you pay it ALL back. Every dime.

 

[GURPS]

A God-awful lot of people join simply to get free education benefits. They get their degree then get out. I have a BIG problem with that.

come one Psy ..... Education has LONG been an enlistment carrot


I do not think the Military would get half the recruits they do now, if the Education Incentives were cut

 

[hotbikermama40]

Don't forget the hillbilly president Sappy is so ####ing fond of wrote his infamous letter to Col Eugene Holmes detailing how he and so many of the "fine people" around him loathe the military.

Wasn't he an antiwar activist, too?

 

[PsyOps]

Do like private companies do that fork over training and education money.

If you take it you are committed for a specified period of time and if you leave too soon, you pay it ALL back. Every dime.

Private companies can spend their own money in any way they want. The government is spending OUR money, all of us who pay taxes. And I'm not saying I'm against the military providing that education benefit for serving; I'm just saying I have a problem with people that join solely for the sake of getting the free education money. I've seen it over and over, most times than I can count, folks coming in getting their degree, then getting out. There is not commitment anyone has to promise beyond their enlistment for getting a free education.

 

[PsyOps]

come one Psy ..... Education has LONG been an enlistment carrot


I do not think the Military would get half the recruits they do now, if the Education Incentives were cut

I'm not suggesting anything get cut. I'm not saying I'm against the education benefits. I'm saying I have a problem with people joining just to get those FREE benefits. They're intent was never to serve. I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone enlist, bitch and moan when they were given a deployment or TDY, or shift that would disrupt their education schedule; screaming how unfair it is to be deprived of their education bennies. THAT'S not why they're there. They're there to serve at the behest of their commanders and the mission FIRST.

In that context, I do not want a bunch of transgenders joining solely for the purpose of getting free sex change surgery. The military is our defense system, not a stopover for people that want something for free, then get out.

 

[GURPS]

I'm just saying I have a problem with people that join solely for the sake of getting the free education money. I've seen it over and over, most times than I can count, folks coming in getting their degree, then getting out. There is not commitment anyone has to promise beyond their enlistment for getting a free education.

dude really .....

my enlistment I give Uncle Sam 4 yrs, get a salary and education benefits and a $ 5k Singing Bonus at the end of basic training

agreed to UP Front .... I Serve 4 yrs
If I re-up Great, if not I fulfill MY contract 4 yrs

[side bar]

I took exception to all whiners on the News during the Desert Shield build up
- but I signed up for the College Fund, not to be deployed
- all the women running out getting pregnant so they would not be deployed [another argument for mandatory enlistment length birth control]

I'm saying I have a problem with people joining just to get those FREE benefits. They're intent was never to serve. I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone enlist, bitch and moan when they were given a deployment or TDY, or shift that would disrupt their education schedule; screaming how unfair it is to be deprived of their education bennies. THAT'S not why they're there.

The Penny Drops ....
ok I was talking about POST Service Education ...... fair enough I see your point, yes, I agree - thats BS STFU and do your JOB

 

[PsyOps]

I took exception to all whiners on the News during the Desert Shield build up
- but I signed up for the College Fund, not to be deployed

Then you joined for the wrong reasons. If you're offended by this, fine. It's not my intent to offend anyone. My intent is to express my disagreement for what some believe the purpose of the military to be. The military is our defense force, not a stopping ground for freebies. If you believe the military is the place to get your free stuff, then you can't disagree with transgenders joining to get their free sex change surgery.

 

[This_person]

Worth the read

 

[awpitt]

Do I have it right that the justification for this is that it's distracting and too much of a medical expense? From what I understand, we're talking approximately only 2,500 transgendered persons in the military, some of whom already have or are not going to go through transition. What about the women who fraternize and get knocked up costing us pre- and post-natal care? Is that not also a distraction and a medical expense? Isn't pregnancy a bit disabling?

It seems to me that if this is the justification that is going to be used, they need to use it across the board. Why does there have to be a ban? Why not just ban certain medical expenses instead? Frankly, I am down for not paying for a soldiers' transition just as I am down with not paying for a soldiers' birth control and/or OB costs.

This is probably to most reasonable post I've seen in this entire thread.

Based on a lot of the comments, it seems many in here don't even know what transgender means. I really have no problem if Trump wants to exclude transgenders from the military. That's his choice. I guess he needed to do something to distract attention away from how he's throwing Sessions under the bus for doing the right thing. What I do have a problem with is that there are about 4000 service members who are transgender, who signed up post transition, have been serving honorably, with little to no disruption (despite the mis-information we hear from Twitter), who have been following the rules. And now Trump wants to throw them out of the military. At the very least, these group of people should be "grandfathered" so they don't get kicked out for having been serving honorably.

 

[Gilligan]

What I do have a problem with is that there are about 4000 service members who are transgender, who signed up post transition, have been serving honorably, with little to no disruption (despite the mis-information we hear from Twitter), who have been following the rules. And now Trump wants to throw them out of the military. At the very least, these group of people should be "grandfathered" so they don't get kicked out for having been serving honorably.

Nobody knows how many there are. The RAND study suggested only 1500. But I agree..anyone who openly identifies as TG and is now serving and doing so honorably should be grandfathered.

 

[Hijinx]

This is probably to most reasonable post I've seen in this entire thread.

Based on a lot of the comments, it seems many in here don't even know what transgender means. I really have no problem if Trump wants to exclude transgenders from the military. That's his choice. I guess he needed to do something to distract attention away from how he's throwing Sessions under the bus for doing the right thing. What I do have a problem with is that there are about 4000 service members who are transgender, who signed up post transition, have been serving honorably, with little to no disruption (despite the mis-information we hear from Twitter), who have been following the rules. And now Trump wants to throw them out of the military. At the very least, these group of people should be "grandfathered" so they don't get kicked out for having been serving honorably.

Someone always gets the shaft when mistakes are fixed.

The mealy mouthed, bi-sexual, Muslim President should never have done this in the first place.

 

[Wishbone]

 

[PsyOps]

Worth the read

Doesn't this sort of make the case that anyone with personal issues could put the mission at risk when put under this kind of stress? Would a person with marital problems be any different than a trans trying to figure themselves out under those conditions? Would a woman on her period be any different?

 

[Restitution]

Driving home from work vice taking the bus, walking, or getting a ride from someone else needs prior approval?

What in the hell are you talking about? And what does it have to do with the point(s) you made previously or the point(s) I am making?

Please come out of left field with this one...

 

[Lurk]

That's where I disagree. This is meant to appease their base after months of failure on health care and constant talk of Russia.

Let's do some math.

The number of Trans people in the military according to the number I've most seen reported in the press is 2500.

Let's say 500 have reassignment surgery during their service. Let's use the very generous $50,000 for surgery leaving hormones out since that is an expense the person would pay themselves after insurance.

That equals $25 million. That's not insignificant but with a budget of $6 billion a year I hardly think the decision was a financial one. There are a lot of easier ways of saving $25 million.

Ignoring the financial shell game, let's discuss what allowing transgenders to have surgery in the military would mean. Why should the DoD allow its surgeons to waste time doing the surgery when there will be no wartime requirement for that capability. You cannot believe that the Department of Defense medical command is sitting in some SCIF saying "We really must train our surgeons to do gender reassignment surgery. The terrorists have developed a suicide jock-strap and will be blowing up our soldiers at crotch level. We have to be able to do reconstructive surgery to save these men (er, former men)."

 

[Lurk]

That is absolutely untrue. Can you prove that allergy sufferers are barred from
All forms of military service?

I can. I wrote the military accession medical regulations while assigned to the Department of Defense. The Military is very aware that an asthmatic in basic military training is at a danger of asthmatic attacks and possible death. They must be able to function under strenuous conditions without medications. No inhalers, no tablets.

 

[stgislander]

That is absolutely untrue. Can you prove that allergy sufferers are barred from
All forms of military service?

I remember being asked if I was allergic to wool and if I took and allergy pills or used a inhaler..

I almost didn't get in because of hay fever. It took two doctor's letters (one a certified allergist) to certify that I didn't have asthma and didn't require the shots I took as a child. Also, a young guy was dating my stepdaughter. He had a severe allergy to yeast. He was medically discharged from the Marines after going into anaphylactic shock from eating a sandwich during 'A' school. He should have never been enlisted. The Marine recruiter knew about the allergy but played the severity down.

 

[Lurk]

I can. I wrote the military accession medical regulations while assigned to the Department of Defense. The Military is very aware that an asthmatic in basic military training is at a danger of asthmatic attacks and possible death. They must be able to function under strenuous conditions without medications. No inhalers, no tablets.

Maybe reading the accession standards (revised and updated since my retirement) will help. Look at page 23 of DoD Instruction 6130.03, Medical Standards for Appointment, Enlistment, or Induction in the Military Services.

 

[Bann]

Not being TG myself, I would assume there would be a high probability of some level of psychological effect on a person who lived a good deal of their life as one gender who identified as another. It is likely because of this they would be at higher risk for further psychological injuries. Because of this risk factor, they should be barred from military service, unless they can successfully demonstrate their previous psychological injury is no longer a factor. In garrison, this is likely not to cause problems. However, while deployed, things could get unpredictable quick.

If they are going through the transition, they are likely taking lifelong medications. In garrison, this would not be a problem. But once deployed, who knows when they will have access to their medication.

In order to serve in the military, you need to be deployable, or to be able to be deployable within a certain time period. A person with a higher risk of psychological injury will not be deployable. A person who is dependent on medications will not be deployable. The risk is too great to have them in theater.

 

[Bann]

come one Psy ..... Education has LONG been an enlistment carrot

I do not think the Military would get half the recruits they do now, if the Education Incentives were cut