I don't care about transgenders or gays in the military...if they can fight and meet the standards without causing trouble then I'll fight with them.  If someone causes trouble and mentally ill whether straight, gay or transgender, kick em out and keep them out.

I don't care about transgenders or gays in the military...if they can fight and meet the standards without causing trouble then I'll fight with them.  If someone causes trouble and mentally ill whether straight, gay or transgender, kick em out and keep them out.

it's not about meeting standards or their patriotism
it's the cost of maintaining themselves.
A person who was born one sex who wishes to transition to another faces a lifelong dependence on hormone treatments and other factors to maintain their existence in the other sex. Is it a valid personal health concern?
Doctors and related professionals of course are supporting them. Why? Lifelong customers. Who's paying for all this while they serve in the military?

it's not about meeting standards or their patriotism
it's the cost of maintaining themselves.
A person who was born one sex who wishes to transition to another faces a lifelong dependence on hormone treatments and other factors to maintain their existence in the other sex. Is it a valid personal health concern?
Doctors and related professionals of course are supporting them. Why? Lifelong customers. Who's paying for all this while they serve in the military?

I agree, they should not make it mandatory that insurance covers that types of treatment, should be paid out of pocket.  Health insurance should be like any other type of insurance like for cars, homes, etc, just cover catastrophic injuries and unforseen high cost problems.  Everything else is out of pocket.

it's not about meeting standards or their patriotism
it's the cost of maintaining themselves.
A person who was born one sex who wishes to transition to another faces a lifelong dependence on hormone treatments and other factors to maintain their existence in the other sex. Is it a valid personal health concern?
Doctors and related professionals of course are supporting them. Why? Lifelong customers. Who's paying for all this while they serve in the military?

Exactly.  Apparently there are many who view the military as a way to pay for their transition, which otherwise would be thousands upon thousands.  Not to mention the practical aspect of providing the lifetime of treatments that go along with all of that. 

I am personally not against transgender.  You, they or anyone is free to do what they please with their own self.  Just don't have the taxpayers have to pick up the bill. 

I agree, they should not make it mandatory that insurance covers that types of treatment, should be paid out of pocket.  Health insurance should be like any other type of insurance like for cars, homes, etc, just cover catastrophic injuries and unforseen high cost problems.  Everything else is out of pocket.

the argument is that health insurance SHOULD cover it because they don't belong in that gender "assignment". If they stay in that gender it will cause them undue mental harm, anguish etc.
The issue is compounded when you rally them in with gay and lesbian rights. Then the whole LGBT community takes it as an issue or attack on their entire community.

I think it is a shame that a former member of DevGru who transitioned called out our President. The Left would call the act bullying.

  .

Hmmmm, "Deviant sexual behavior will disqualify you"

Of course, other than liberals like one here, most would consider what male homosexuals do to each other to be rather deviant. 

Somehow, the Brave New World overlooks that.

Hmmmm, "Deviant sexual behavior will disqualify you"

Of course, other than liberals like one here, most would consider what male homosexuals do to each other to be rather deviant. 

Somehow, the Brave New World overlooks that.

in the past decade or longer, deviant is the new norm
liberal / progressive groups were successful in changing our moral fabric
they dismantle our churches (Mitch Kahle) and pave the roads with drugs and circus acts

it's not about meeting standards or their patriotism
it's the cost of maintaining themselves.
A person who was born one sex who wishes to transition to another faces a lifelong dependence on hormone treatments and other factors to maintain their existence in the other sex. Is it a valid personal health concern?
Doctors and related professionals of course are supporting them. Why? Lifelong customers. Who's paying for all this while they serve in the military?

I think that this issue can be addressed by simply making a policy that military health insurance will not pay for sex changes or hormone treatments. I think that if a gay person can serve then so can one who identifies as the other gender, just that we still treat them as the sex they are born and they provide for their own treatments if they so want.

Right on cue, Dougy boy chin joins in the love fest...
https://ag.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/News-Release-2017-100.pdf

I watched the first 5 minutes of Colbert on Wednesday. He was almost out of breath berating Trump.
It sounded like the entire audience was ready to grab pitchforks and torches.

Is this a ban on being categorized as a TG?  As in, you can ID as what ever you want outside of work, but on your medical records it will state what you're born as (M or F).

I know a girl who's a dude.  She had her boobs removed and entered a men's bodybuilding competition.  But felt embarrassed to have to still wear the female uniform (Class A).  So her records state F, even though she ID's and looks like a M (she's bigger than me).

Is this a ban on being categorized as a TG?  As in, you can ID as what ever you want outside of work, but on your medical records it will state what you're born as (M or F).

I know a girl who's a dude.  She had her boobs removed and entered a men's bodybuilding competition.  But felt embarrassed to have to still wear the female uniform (Class A).  So her records state F, even though she ID's and looks like a M (she's bigger than me).

From my reading, the current Pentagon policy is TGs can join if they have completed transition 18 months or more prior to joining the military.  That excludes anyone trying to transition while on active duty.

I assume if you can get a new birth certificate with the new gender on it, the military would likely use that as the "official" gender, even though your medical records would contain the facts of your transition.

I can see enforcing a rule that someone be treated as their biological gender (or enforcing a rule that someone be treated as whatever gender they claim to be, it's not necessary for me to take a side on that here). But I have difficulty acknowledging a rule banning someone who claims to be a gender they are not. If a guy suddenly says "Tee hee I a woman. Nah brah I jus kidding" does this mean they can suddenly be kicked out because they became transgender for two seconds (potential free speech violation aside)? Would you kick out this guy because he has long hair and wears pink?

I still believe that most mental disorders are fake and subjective, so that's not a way to excuse this ban. The maintenance argument only works if they ask the government to pay extra for their transgender stuff (I have no idea what that may be).

I have no problem with sneakily banning people from the military if they cannot do their duties, and wearing pink clothes could be factored into this, but explicitly targeting transgender individuals seems to have legal difficulties. Also, we allow women in the military (at least in some capacities) and if they want to become more butch and manly I'd imagine that would only improve their capabilities.

Make gender identity similar to a name change where you need the LT Governor's approval or court order to officially change it.  Then simplify the physical fitness test requirements to one standard score depending on the job they are in (how every other employer does it), regardless of age and sex.

I can see.....

I still believe.....

I have no problem.......................

Noticeably missing among your "feelings" about this was any mention of the troops that these disordered characters would be mixed in with.  No interest in what they might think or how it might affect unit cohesion?  Hussein did not give a damn what they think, either.

That tells me you are not a former military service type, are you?

Noticeably missing among your "feelings" about this was any mention of the troops that these disordered characters would be mixed in with.  No interest in what they might think or how it might affect unit cohesion?  Hussein did not give a damn what they think, either.

That tells me you are not a former military service type, are you?

I think peashooter is questioning whether it can be legally justified. Operational difficulties are a serious concern but the question still remains of whether it can be legally justified.