Thread: Pelosi blasts Trump's move to bar transgender troops, calls it 'cruel and arbitrary'

Pelosi blasts Trump's move to bar transgender troops, calls it 'cruel and arbitrary'

By Lukas Mikelionis | Fox News
Pelosi gaining momentum in push to become next House speaker

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is winning over several high-profile opponents heading into leadership elections; Peter Doocy reports from Washington.

President Trump’s decision late Friday to ban transgender Americans from serving in the U.S. military was blasted by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who called the move “cowardly” and “disgusting.”

The Trump administration issued a memorandum that bars people with a history of “gender dysphoria,” which would require medical treatment, from being admitted to the U.S. military “except under certain limited circumstances.”

Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, immediately released a statement slamming the memorandum and condemning the Trump administration.

“The President’s ban is a cruel and arbitrary decision designed to humiliate transgender Americans who have stepped forward to serve our country," she said in a statement.

“This bigoted ban weakens our military readiness and our country, and shows this president’s stunning lack of loyalty to those who risk all to defend our freedoms.

“We will continue to fight this discriminatory action, which has no place in our country. House Democrats will never allow hate and prejudice to dictate our national security.”

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2)]Video


The current policy was based on recommendations made by Defense Secretary James Mattis, who said the Pentagon found that exempting transgender people from military standards could undermine its readiness for combat.

“Exempting such persons from well-established mental health, physical health, and sex-based standards, which apply to all Service members, including transgender Service members without gender dysphoria, could undermine readiness, disrupt unit cohesion, and impose an unreasonable burden on the military that is not conducive to military effectiveness and lethality,” read the recommendation that was included in a court filing.

DOJ ASKS SUPREME COURT TO TAKE UP CASE OF MILITARY TRANSGENDER BAN

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to issue an unusually quick ruling on the Pentagon's policy of restricting military service by transgender people in a bid to bypass lower courts that previously ruled against the administration and its policy barring transgender recruits.

The Pentagon initially lifted its ban on transgender troops serving openly in the military in 2016 under the orders of the Obama administration.

Trump reversed the policy, prompting outrage and lawsuits, which were ruled against the Trump administration.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pel...-and-arbitrary

I don't get it. If the Obama administration can capriciously change the policy, why shouldn't Trump be able to revert back to former policy? Obama's change wasn't a change in law, just a policy change. Trump should have the same decision making ability on policy as Obama did.

Put it on the list of inadmissible medical conditions.

Taxpayer should not foot the bill for any surgery, meds or psychological treatment!

And I do not want to have some dude, who thinks he is a chick, in my shower facilities!

Honestly, I think it's a big ta-do over nothing. People who serve in the US military don't seem to care, these are trained killers in our Armed Forces, I truly don't think they're hung up on these types of sensitivities. They're more concerned with who can fight, who can win, who will watch their backs, and who will risk their lives for our country, the mission and each other. I don't think seeing or potentially seeing someone's private parts in a shower, whatever the gender, is top of their list of concerns, because everyone in the US military has already seen plenty of them, or at least I would hope so.

As to the medical changes and surgeries, I think they need to go slow and careful on that, which to my understanding is the primary issue of this change in policy. Whether it's a warranted concern or not, I honestly don't know enough about the effects of these medical changes and how they would impact military performance to speak on it.

Spoken by someone who served over 20 years of active duty military service, the majority of military members don't think homosexuality and transgenderism has a place in the military! The demands and situations experienced in an active duty military capacity are not the same as working at Wal-Mart or your local 7-Eleven.

In my opinion, Old Veterans are not the ones to speak on this issue for these younger more open-minded members of the US Armed Forces. If the United States had listened to Old Veterans, blacks wouldn't be in the military, women wouldn't be in the military and gays would be in the military but no one would know who they were.

Here’s Definitive Proof Transgenders Have No Place In The Military



President Trump recently initiated a ban against transgenders serving in the military.

Even Americans are divided over his most recent decision–the left is furious he would not include the gender confused, while the political right is praising his efforts to focus on those who are best fit to serve the country.

Now one veteran just proved once and for all the gender confused have absolutely no place in the military.

Combat veteran J.R. Salzman recently tweeted there was absolutely no place for transgenders in the thick of war.

The Daily Caller reported:

For Salzman, the intensity of the war theater is so great that many of the men who were not even suffering from mental issues often snapped, particularly the younger troops. Due to service members being in such close quarters with each other, “any tiny little personal issue they had suddenly became a mountain.” Salzman further pointed out that introducing servicemembers to the team who are “mentally, emotionally, or physically confused or in turmoil” will inevitably lead to people getting killed.

Transgenders in that environment are a “ticking time bomb.”
“Political correctness has absolutely no place in the military,” he said.

From a retired military veteran’s point of view, his argument is unwavering.

The White House will soon release more information about the ban, but it is believed to be the result of budgeting concerns.

The Daily Caller continued:

Trump announced Wednesday that he would not “accept or allow” transgenders serving openly in the military, citing medical costs and general disruption. White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said Wednesday afternoon that the details of the ban still need to be worked out between the White House and Pentagon, with the Pentagon taking a leading role. She also noted that after Trump made his decision on the ban Tuesday, Secretary of Defense James Mattis and other members of Trump’s national security team were immediately informed. However, many other Pentagon officials were left totally in the dark until Trump delivered the news on Wednesday morning.

Breitbart reported:

As Wictor explains, “transgendered people have become political props used by angry leftists attempting to destroy everything they oppose.” They were also about to cost the U.S. taxpayer heinous amounts of money – perhaps $8.4 million a year – because, thanks to legislation introduced last year by President Obama, the Defense Department was liable for the cost of the gender reassignment surgery on any soldier whose ability to serve was “adversely affected by a medical condition or medical treatment related to their gender identity.”

Not only were these transgender sensitivity policies burdening the military with unnecessary costs but they were also making it less effective. Wictor: “Talk to people who served in 2016. They’ll tell you that they spent a huge amount of time in sensitivity training seminars.”

While social activists fight for “transgender rights”, real soldiers are needed to fight overseas to protect our domestic interests.

https://www.americanpatriotdaily.com...ders-military/

Given the number of suicides of veterans and PTSD among the general population of our Armed Services, I think there's a lot of personal issues around with grave consequences that have nothing to do with someone's sexual orientation or transgender issues.

Should Transgender Americans be Allowed in the Military? Not So Fast: Military Readiness Has to be First Concern

Aug 8th, 2017 3 min read

COMMENTARY BYThomas SpoehrDirector, Center for National Defense
Thomas W. Spoehr conducts and supervises research on national defense matters.

I
t seems caution is prudent.iStock

President Donald Trump has reversed yet another policy decision of the Obama administration. On July 26, he announced the U.S. military no longer will "accept or allow" transgender people in its ranks.

Last year, then-Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter announced that transgender individuals serving in the military no longer would be forced to leave. Moreover, Carter said, openly transgender individuals would be allowed to join the military, starting this July 1.

Carter's announcement got widespread news coverage. But neither Carter nor President Barack Obama ever articulated how the new policy would affect military readiness. And that is the most important factor by which we should evaluate changes to existing military personnel policy.

So what is the state of U.S. military readiness today? Most experts agree with the Heritage Foundation's assessment that our military is under extreme stress, "beset by aging equipment, shrinking numbers, and rising costs." In response to growing threats from virtually all corners of the world, the Pentagon has deployed forces in more than 180 countries.

The pace of deployments has increased as well. In many cases, troops completing a nine-month deployment get only nine months back at home to recover and train before being deployed yet again. This puts tremendous strains on marriages, relationships, and overall mental health.

From 2001-2003, when I commanded a brigade with responsibilities for basic training at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri, I saw a constant flow of individuals who failed to meet the medical requirements for military service. At the time, the most common reason for failure was asthma. Sometimes it was a pre-existing condition that had been missed during the initial physical. Sometimes the asthma developed only after the person engaged — for the first time in his or her life — in hard physical exertion.

All of these young Americans desperately wanted to serve their country. But the requirements were crystal clear: If soldiers were going to need continuing medical attention to treat their condition or if there was a question about whether they would be able to serve in the harshest of battlefield conditions, they were not allowed to join. Even an individual with sleep apnea, who needed only a device that required access to electrical power, was ineligible.

What about people who wanted to enlist but had a prior injury or condition, like a torn tendon in a shoulder, that required surgery? They weren't eligible to serve until the condition had been resolved.

Often those being rejected or dismissed would ask, "Isn't there a desk job where I can serve in the rear echelon?" While I respected their desire to serve, that's not the way the U.S. military operates, nor can it. Every individual in uniform must be able to deploy, fight and win in austere conditions, without any reliance on a daily flow of medications, medical treatment or special provisions.

It's an unforgiving standard but a necessary one if U.S. forces are going to prevail on distant battlefields.
Which brings us to the president's decision regarding transgender individuals and the military. Certainly, their desire to serve is laudable. But desire to serve does not, of itself, answer the fundamental question of whether a transgender individual's service helps or harms military readiness.

These individuals would need medical treatments — hormone therapies and, often, surgeries and the accompanying recovery times — throughout the duration of their service. On this basis alone, under existing rules applicable to all, they would not be allowed to join.

But putting that aspect aside, there is another readiness-related question that must be asked: Are transgender individuals as mentally resilient and as able to withstand the extreme stresses of the harsh crucible of combat as non-transgender individuals? Some studies report that transgender individuals attempt suicide and experience psychological distress at rates many times the U.S. national average. To be clear, this is self-reported data, not data gleaned from rigorously controlled, clinical tests. But at this time, these survey results are the best available data. It would be both irresponsible and immoral to place such individuals in a position where they are exposed to the additional extraordinary stresses and pressures of the battlefield.

So, it seems caution is prudent. Prior to the president's recent announcement, Defense Secretary James Mattis had delayed implementation of the Obama administration's policy for six months.

The vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, provided more insight on that decision, saying "Our decision to delay the accessions ... was largely based on a disagreement on the science of how mental health care and hormone therapy for transgender individuals would help solve the medical issues that are associated with gender dysphoria."

These concerns should be fully resolved before our country goes forward with any change in longstanding policy. The stakes are too high to experiment with our national defense or to inadvertently cause harm to those wishing to serve.

This piece originally appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer

https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/should-transgender-americans-be-allowed-the-military-not-so-fast-military

Originally Posted by Judy

Given the number of suicides of veterans and PTSD among the general population of our Armed Services, I think there's a lot of personal issues around with grave consequences that have nothing to do with someone's sexual orientation or transgender issues.

BINGO! Actually your comment adds to the argument of why transgenders shouldn't be allowed in the military! It doesn't make any sense to allow folks with known mental issues to serve in combat or under the other arduous demands of military service. Military service is challenging enough without adding reasons for potential failure.