|
View Poll Results: Banning of transgender people from the military | |||
I am for it | 3 | 16.67% | |
I am for it, as long as it makes the military more effective | 0 | 0% | |
I am against it | 7 | 38.89% | |
I am vehemently against it | 7 | 38.89% | |
I would like to know more data | 1 | 5.56% | |
Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-31-2017, 10:32 PM | #21 |
Megan Fox = April
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tokio, Italy
Posts: 9,998
|
Can we just ban every gender/people from the military?
|
07-31-2017, 10:46 PM | #22 |
Mad Scientist
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,828
|
I'm personally happy with cutting the military budget in half but that can work too.
Spoiler:
__________________
|
07-31-2017, 11:33 PM | #23 |
Megan Fox = April
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tokio, Italy
Posts: 9,998
|
No. Ban everyone from the military.
|
08-01-2017, 03:17 PM | #24 |
Leo-holic
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 16,912
|
We need the military to survive because they're the ones protecting us so that we're safe. I may not condone the transgender lifestyle, but I do feel that if someone of that lifestyle wants to serve their country, they should be allowed to do so. Trump is just like any other politician who says one thing and then does another. He said that he was for the transgender community and would protect the rights of the LGBT community and then he goes and says this. He's no different than any other politician out there.
This is why I don't vote, people. You can't trust any of these politicians no matter what they say.
__________________
"A warrior who never fails, never learns."-The Ancient One. "Embrace your inner a**holiness."-Mr. Anderson. |
08-01-2017, 03:27 PM | #25 |
Weed Whacker
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 29,251
|
Though to be fair, serving in the Armed Forces isn't and has never been a "right" of any sort.
__________________
|
08-01-2017, 03:37 PM | #26 | |
Technodrome Technician
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: third earth
Posts: 4,737
|
Quote:
It is not a right to join the military its a privilege. That being said I don't agree with banning transgender people completely from the military. I would get why they would not want them on the frontline, but from the entire military? The only reason I could think from the entire military is if transgenders have to constantly take chemicals (Estrogen/Testosterone). Regardless it is quite a quagmire.
__________________
GT:Reedeamer THE TECHNODROME REDESIGN 2015 http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=51594 |
|
08-01-2017, 03:43 PM | #27 |
Leo-holic
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 16,912
|
You both have a point but they shouldn't be banned from serving their country if they want to do so. That would be like banning a black person from the military because of their race or banning someone for their religion or lack of religion.
__________________
"A warrior who never fails, never learns."-The Ancient One. "Embrace your inner a**holiness."-Mr. Anderson. |
08-01-2017, 03:54 PM | #28 |
Stone Warrior
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 699
|
It's a volunteer military, though, so I find the idea of turning away able bodied people who want to serve and could do their job well for a reason like being transgender downright silly and counterproductive. There were excuses for segregation of blacks in the armed forces up until the 1950's, once upon a time, as well as the more recent discrimination of gays in the military. Eventually, the old ways died off. Didn't exactly hurt us.
__________________
|
08-01-2017, 03:56 PM | #29 |
Weed Whacker
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 29,251
|
Not precisely. I couldn't join any Armed Forces right now if I wanted to.
__________________
|
08-01-2017, 03:57 PM | #30 |
Stone Warrior
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 699
|
Well, okay, you're right on that, it's not entirely open. They can disqualify you for age and serious health issues, of course. But you get my point.
__________________
|
08-01-2017, 04:01 PM | #31 | |||
PerfectlyTunedFightEngine
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Upsidedown
Posts: 7,926
|
Quote:
You could still volunteer, that doesn't mean they're required to take you.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
08-01-2017, 04:11 PM | #32 | ||
Technodrome Technician
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: third earth
Posts: 4,737
|
Quote:
Like I said before I think they have an argument for ban on the ground of chemical dependency as I mentioned before. Quote:
__________________
GT:Reedeamer THE TECHNODROME REDESIGN 2015 http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=51594 |
||
08-01-2017, 07:29 PM | #33 |
Spooky ghost
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,266
|
I think anyone who wants in should have the opportunity to try. Not to say everyone gets in, but some of the blanket bans don't make sense to me. I know two people who tried to join in their early 20s and were turned away because they had a history of asthma. Neither one was still asthmatic, but the rule said no one who had asthma could join the army. It struck me as silly, because both of these guys were very fit and athletic.
|
08-01-2017, 07:36 PM | #34 |
Resident overthinker
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: what is going on..........
Posts: 5,318
|
I don't think "chemical dependency" will matter when it comes to non-soldiers, or anyone who isn't working out in the field. That would probably make up a very, very tiny percentage.
And even then, I think at least a few of those might be willing to put a hold on transitioning for at least a little while. That being an even smaller percentage or that tiny percentage. But rather than making assumptions, maybe we should look into how trans people actually served in the military and learn from their experiences?
__________________
|
08-02-2017, 03:16 PM | #35 | ||
Technodrome Technician
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: third earth
Posts: 4,737
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
GT:Reedeamer THE TECHNODROME REDESIGN 2015 http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=51594 |
||
08-02-2017, 03:22 PM | #36 |
Weed Whacker
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Auburn, WA
Posts: 29,251
|
Yeah, or maybe you're stuck out somewhere, pinned down for days, possibly weeks and you can't get your meds. Probably those kinds of situations aren't good for anybody.
__________________
|
08-02-2017, 09:51 PM | #37 | |
Spooky ghost
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,266
|
Quote:
|
|
08-03-2017, 03:24 PM | #38 |
Foot Soldier
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 178
|
Speaking as someone who remembers the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't tell", I can say not a lot of people on the ground in the Marine Infantry didn't really care all that much.
Having said that I do remember when they wanted to start integrating women in the infantry there being (and to some extent is) a HUGE controversy over that....so I do think this would be some sort of quasi-extent of even that issue honestly (even though I personally feel that is a non-issue as well). I think it's safe to say that most people on this forum would probably be against the ban (for the record so am I) but having several old buddies who are or were in combat orientated units I can tell you they aren't so keen to change and are especially not keen to civilians telling them how their units should be ran or integrated. Friend once told me that ultimately every job in the Corps is orientated to one thing and anything that interferes with that is a non-issue. The cost argument is weak at best, and any person who thinks the diagnosis of "gender dysphoria" or that "they're confused argument" is legit I challenge them to post not just an "article" but several scientific ones that we may read to be properly informed and even then I'll be skeptical just because I know the DSM-5 can be a bit of a mess sometimes. But coming as someone that understands the warrior mindset of those men I get why Gen. Mattis had this brought up and he deflected by leaving 6 months for he himself to make a decision about it....and now even Gen. Dunford is saying he's gonna wait until he gets a proper directive from the White House. So the message I get from them is that, it's not an issue. The only issue I see is an orange puppet sticking his two cents into an issue he knows little about, and the culture (especially in combat related units) having an issue with people (who are already serving) possibly threatening their masochistic culture. If this was a real issue (transgender people in the military that is) it would have been brought up awhile ago....like possibly when they repealed DADT.
__________________
Fortuna Favet Fortibus |
08-03-2017, 03:39 PM | #39 | |
Foot Soldier
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 178
|
Quote:
This whole "controversy of transgenders in the military" is really a non-issue for me.
__________________
Fortuna Favet Fortibus |
|
08-03-2017, 08:00 PM | #40 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,619
|
The military, in every portion of it, is like that line from the first MJB movie: only the best of the best fof the best. People who have any kind of illmess, sickness cannot and should not serve. Transgenderism still falls into the mentally unfit for duty. You join the military, its about the military and not you or your needs. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or one. It has zero to do with anything else. Top of the line skils. Top of the line standards. No time off for endless sensitivity training. You join to become part of a machine to do one of two things, kill or be killed for your country. Feelings are irrelevant.
|
|
|