Quote:President Trump said Wednesday that the U.S. military will not accept transgender troops into its ranks or allow them to serve in any capacity, reversing a policy begun under the Obama administration.
In a series of morning tweets, Trump said that, after consulting "with my generals and military experts," the U.S. government "will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military."
The U.S. military, he said, "must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail."
It’s unclear how the announcement will affect the estimated 6,000 transgender troops now serving. Under the policy announced in July 2016, those troops were allowed to serve openly. Prior to that the military discharged them for medical reasons. It's also unclear whether a series of tweets constitute a presidential directive, and whether Trump must sign documents to make the new policy effective.
The decision immediately drew criticism from Democratic lawmakers and civil rights advocates.
"The president is sanctioning discrimination," said Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., speaking on MSNBC.
On Twitter, Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe said, "this Trump anti-LGBT move is an affront to human dignity and military success. A real twofer."
Under Trump and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, the Pentagon delayed implementation of a key portion of the Obama administration's plan: requiring the services to being accepting and recruiting new officers and enlisted troops. The Army, Air Force and Marine Corps requested more time to implement the policy, saying they needed time to study the effects of accepting transgender troops.
However, the Pentagon commissioned a report last year by the non-partisan RAND Corp. on transgender troops. Their research found that treating transgender troops would cost as much as $8 million per year and have a negligible effect on the military’s readiness to fight.
Last month, the Army had begun compulsory transgender sensitivity training for soldiers and civilian employees.
Some members of Congress have also tried to limit spending on transgender troops in this year’s legislation authorizing military spending.
On Tuesday, in a statement to USA TODAY, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen urged the acceptance of transgender troops by the military, saying that previous policies that prevented gay and lesbian troops from serving damaged the military.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(07-26-2017, 11:17 AM)Millhouse Wrote: I am fine with gays & lesbians serving in the military. But oddly I am ok with this decision though when it comes to Ts & the military.
(07-26-2017, 11:17 AM)Millhouse Wrote: I am fine with gays & lesbians serving in the military. But oddly I am ok with this decision though when it comes to Ts & the military.
This is a "we need a win" scenario. That's all. The administration has been impotent for 6 months and this is something they can both hang their hat on and use as a divisive issue to take attention away from health care and the Russia investigation.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(07-26-2017, 01:28 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is a "we need a win" scenario. That's all. The administration has been impotent for 6 months and this is something they can both hang their hat on and use as a divisive issue to take attention away from health care and the Russia investigation.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
(07-26-2017, 02:12 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Why was the ban originally in place?
Most likely the same reason for banning gay people, "it's damaging to unit cohesion."
Whenever this comes up, or when gay people serving in the military came up, this is what I always think of:
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(07-26-2017, 12:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: I guess I fall with the idea that it is a volunteer military and if they volunteer and can do the job they should be allowed to.
The argument being made that cost has anything to do with it seems odd given the size of the military budget.
As I said I am ok with it. I can go either way on whatever is decided.
But ultimately in the end if I was the POTUS, I would allow Ts to serve as opposed to not. And if I was Trump, I wouldn't have even have touched this with all the other hooplah going on, because I bet anything there will be quite a few Republicans opposing him on this, something he doesnt need right now.
I think he he should keep pushing it. Ban all gays. Ban women. Get rid of blacks and Jews, too to please his base. Gotta make the Jerry Falwell/Richard Spencer crowd happy. The more emboldened his most fervent supporters become, the more comfortable they'll be showing their true colors in more public forums. Get as many groups as possible mobilized against this unfit clown before midterms.
He needs to think bigger and go for the prize that his people truly want.
Posts: 3,267
Threads: 195
Reputation:
16836
Joined: May 2015
Location: Well, ain't this place a geographical oddity. Two weeks from everywhere!
Mood: None
(07-26-2017, 06:02 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: Looks like he's losing some of his most ardent supporters.
Well @realDonaldTrump, from one Republican to another, this is a disaster. You made a promise to protect the LGBTQ community. Call me.
— Caitlyn Jenner (@Caitlyn_Jenner)
He can protect the gay community and have some standards in the military at the same time. the military isn't the place for social justice warriors virtue signaling.
(07-26-2017, 10:51 AM)GMDino Wrote: Despite studies showing the cost is negligible.
The military spends more on Viagra than it does accommodating trans service members. Trump spends more on one trip to Mara-a-Lago than the annual budget to accommodate trans service members.
It's not about money at all.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(07-26-2017, 06:31 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He can protect the gay community and have some standards in the military at the same time. the military isn't the place for social justice warriors virtue signaling.
i think its funny that the "man" who got 5 deferments thinks he can tell someone they arent qualified to serve their country
I hate this discussion because i cant get past my belief this is a mental issue.
Plenty of mental issues disqualify you from military service.
Body mutilation like some guy who wants to look like a cat or some girl who wants to look like barbie is a mental issue.
Behave however you want to behave. But your sex is your sex. Once you start lopping off genitals and insisting your chromosomes are wrong i cant help but think there are some mental issues going on.