Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: Donald Trump's Banning Transgender People From Serving - Right or Wrong?

Threaded View

  1. #14
    Lilac Tentacles's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,725
    Userbars
    52
    Thanks
    1,015
    Thanked
    2,992/1,244
    DL/UL
    10/0
    Mentioned
    369 times
    Time Online
    68d 19m
    Avg. Time Online
    23m
    I'm going to weigh in here since it personally affects me and my unit readiness. One post, that is all. I will not be replying or rebutting anything. I always get in trouble on these posts.

    This is a good thing.
    Up until a few years ago, transgenderism was a mental disorder. Not sure on the current status, but it is just that. It's your brain, not functioning cohesively with your body. It's a work hazard for everyone involved.

    There is no such thing as "non-deployable". Either you're able to deploy, or you aren't. Pregnant women, medical injuries, psychological damage: all of it is pretty much ok short term because it doesn't affect long-term unit readiness for deployments. People are medically discharged all the time if they're deemed unfit for a period of time. Now take a transgendered person who requires medicine to keep their hormones in balance, has a 50% suicide rate, anxiety, disphoria, hormones imbalances, etc and tell me that's not going to impact a unit's ability to get boots off ground?

    Now, say we are all deployed, the transgender person has fully transitioned, is mentally stable, passed all tests, and a supply line has been interrupted, the medic has run out of whatever hormones are required to maintain this person's body, and it'll be a while before another bag of pills comes in? It's a lot of "what ifs", but for the sake of a Soldier's life, I think hurting a few feelings is just necessary collateral damage. We aren't a social experiment. Joining the military isn't a right and since, up until a few years ago when PC culture took over, being transgendered was a mental illness, they don't fall under "discrimination" for a physically demanding job that can get people killed.
    We disqualify people for asthma, eating disorders, long-term depression, blood disorders, EVERY physical handicap under the sun... why should this be any different? It screws with unit cohesion and the raw numbers for a unit to deploy. Especially since the government was supposed to foot the bill. How useful is someone to me if they're in and out of surgery, therapy, and recovery instead of being there for training? Feelings don't mean shit. Sorry guys, I know a couple hundred might be affected, but they're a bigger pain in the ass than they're worth to the military.

    Love it or hate it... it was the right decision.

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Lilac Tentacles For This Useful Post:

    Bridge (10-26-2017),Cybun (07-26-2017),Daviid (07-29-2017),Drizzy (07-26-2017),I_royalty_I (07-26-2017),Mophead (07-26-2017),Tarot (07-26-2017)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •