It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Tweets NO Transgender in Military

page: 25
78
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

Some of us care about whether you can do the job you signed up to do. If you can't, it's nothing personal, but kindly step aside and allow somebody who can do the job to do it and stop wasting boat space. If you can do the job? Great, ruck up and let's get it done.


That is why Trump made his tweet...sir.




posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: underwerks

perhaps you could explain your post.

I was asking what are people's objections to trans people serving in noncombatant roles, since all everyone is talking about is front line combat.

I never once said I think trans people should be pigeonholed into any certain areas of service, you're the one who brought that up in a feeble attempt to attack me.

I was only wondering about other people's rationale.



Sex change operation and drug costs.
They are unable to serve in any capacity if they want to go through that. Those that have already been through it - too risky to let them.

Transgender doesn't always mean having gender reassignment surgery or being on special drugs.

In fact, most transgenders don't have reassignment surgery. Or use hormones. What about them?



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: underwerks

perhaps you could explain your post.

I was asking what are people's objections to trans people serving in noncombatant roles, since all everyone is talking about is front line combat.

I never once said I think trans people should be pigeonholed into any certain areas of service, you're the one who brought that up in a feeble attempt to attack me.

I was only wondering about other people's rationale.



Sex change operation and drug costs.
They are unable to serve in any capacity if they want to go through that. Those that have already been through it - too risky to let them.

Transgender doesn't always mean having gender reassignment surgery or being on special drugs.

In fact, most transgenders don't have reassignment surgery. Or use hormones. What about them?


Wait, what? You said fact. Let's see you back that up because I am not convinced. Sources?



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Dear all supporters of trans in the military,

Is it possible to compromise on trans allowed but the taxpayers dont have to pay for their sex / gender reassignment surgery and related therapies, or is there just no hope for reasonable compromise with you?


Firstly, I'm a supporter of PEOPLE in the military, transfolk have the same right to volunteer as everyone else.

Secondly, I do class it as an elective surgery, so it should only be covered by any plan that covers electives. If that counts the military plan, change whatever need be changed.



Can you speak to the combat readiness aspects given the astounding potential of surgical & psychological complications on this?

And are the costs reasonable in your mind ($45,000+++)?


Well that was ONE response so far at least. How long will the rest you you dodge the hard questions / facts / realities, while pushing on with your guilt trip pity party?????
edit on 26-7-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   
If Trump wants to fire Sessions,now would be a good time....



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: underwerks

perhaps you could explain your post.

I was asking what are people's objections to trans people serving in noncombatant roles, since all everyone is talking about is front line combat.

I never once said I think trans people should be pigeonholed into any certain areas of service, you're the one who brought that up in a feeble attempt to attack me.

I was only wondering about other people's rationale.



Sex change operation and drug costs.
They are unable to serve in any capacity if they want to go through that. Those that have already been through it - too risky to let them.

Transgender doesn't always mean having gender reassignment surgery or being on special drugs.

In fact, most transgenders don't have reassignment surgery. Or use hormones. What about them?


What about them? They join the military, leave their sexuality and confusion at the door, obey orders and follow the same processes as everyone else, whilst getting the same rewards and benefits as everyone else.
edit on 26/7/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: buckwhizzle
If Trump wants to fire Sessions,now would be a good time....


Might be about to happen - Sessions is at the Whitehouse.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

And I made my comment in light of you posting pictures of trans military folks and asking if people could "take them seriously."



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: eNumbra
Was there some sort of study done about Transfolk signing up just to get a free reassignment and not serving their term? Or did someone pull that talking point out of their ass and some of you have latched on to it as a rallying cry?





Dear all supporters of trans in the military,

Is it possible to compromise on trans allowed but the taxpayers dont have to pay for their sex / gender reassignment surgery and related therapies, or is there just no hope for reasonable compromise with you?


Sure. I don't think taxpayers should have to pay for soldiers' dependents either. Would save a ton of money.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Good. This is an action intended to restore a little bit of normalcy and sanity back into our government, and none too soon, I might add.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

From your article....

Beginning on July 1, 2017 services will begin allowing transgender service members to join the armed forces provided they same accession standards. Additionally, being transgender cannot be a basis to bar someone from admission to a military service academy, participation in the Reserve Officer’s Training Corps or any accession program.

This is about those enlisting. Not current members. Furthermore...



Based on the study conducted by the RAND Corp., Carter is the best estimate for the number of transgender people in the U.S. military is about 2,500 people out of 1.3 million active-duty service members and about 1,500 out of 825,000 members of the Reserve.



They were pushing to allow them to have trans surgery as it is not allowed now.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

So anyone is open to serve but their families should not be covered? Wow! You sure like equality.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Hey, it's a lifestyle choice. If you choose to have a family, that's on you and I don't want to pay for it just cuz you 're in the military.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: SlapMonkey


Bottom line, if you're willing to die for your country, you should have that right.

But I don't make the rules. If I did, things would be quite different.



Some of your posts I dont agree with, BUT this statment needs repeating.

And to anyone who says this Trumps tweet is correct for whatever reason lets hope that you are actually in the military cos if your just sat in your warm home with a beer its because other people are risking their lives, show at least some respect for that.

I tell you its a massive example of entitled generation, when non military can bitch and moan about who should risk their lives for them.

Make America Great Again - starting to sound a little selective about who or what it is to be American

And again from DBCowboy

Bottom line, if you're willing to die for your country, you should have that right.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: underwerks

perhaps you could explain your post.

I was asking what are people's objections to trans people serving in noncombatant roles, since all everyone is talking about is front line combat.

I never once said I think trans people should be pigeonholed into any certain areas of service, you're the one who brought that up in a feeble attempt to attack me.

I was only wondering about other people's rationale.



Sex change operation and drug costs.
They are unable to serve in any capacity if they want to go through that. Those that have already been through it - too risky to let them.

Transgender doesn't always mean having gender reassignment surgery or being on special drugs.

In fact, most transgenders don't have reassignment surgery. Or use hormones. What about them?


Wait, what? You said fact. Let's see you back that up because I am not convinced. Sources?

Sure. It would probably do a lot of people in this thread well to understand what transgender actually means..


In reality, only 33 percent of transgender people have reported undergoing some form of gender-confirming surgery

Link

Link to PDF with methodology etc..




posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: eNumbra

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Dear all supporters of trans in the military,

Is it possible to compromise on trans allowed but the taxpayers dont have to pay for their sex / gender reassignment surgery and related therapies, or is there just no hope for reasonable compromise with you?


Firstly, I'm a supporter of PEOPLE in the military, transfolk have the same right to volunteer as everyone else.

Secondly, I do class it as an elective surgery, so it should only be covered by any plan that covers electives. If that counts the military plan, change whatever need be changed.



Can you speak to the combat readiness aspects given the astounding potential of surgical & psychological complications on this?

And are the costs reasonable in your mind ($45,000+++)?


Well that was ONE response so far at least. How long will the rest you you dodge the hard questions / facts / realities, while pushing on with your guilt trip pity party?????

Can you discuss anything without having a #ty attitude towards your opponants?



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Like welfare queens or Obamacare? I guess we should tell them to shut their legs and stop squeezing out kids too right? That is the lifestyle choice. Tell people to get a better job because why should I pay for something a person is not willing to do themselves.

The military is not a lifestyle choice. It is a job. A man bun? That again is a lifestyle choice. A poor one but one none the less.


edit on 07pm31pmf0000002017-07-26T13:22:05-05:000105 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs


What are you going on about? The ban WAS lifted and transgender folk were enlisting and serving openly is the armed services. Trump is saying that he's going to reinstate the ban and that no transgender folk whatsoever will be allowed to serve.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

You don't. At least not to the extent that people want you to believe.

BAS is a fixed rate, and isn't enough (nor intended to) cover food for family members.

BAH is intended to cover the cost of a dwelling appropriate to your pay grade. It varies slightly when comparing single to married servicemembers, but it's a fixed rate for an "average family size." Whether that family is three or ten. BAH is only given when government housing isn't provided.

About the only thing the average taxpayer is on the hook for when it comes to military members and their families is health care, to some extent. Even with Tricare, there's still out of pocket costs, deductibles, dental costs, etc to pay for.

The military isn't quite the welfare program some folks try to make it out to be. Sure, some people game the system. And the flip side of that coin is that others are royally screwed by the system.



posted on Jul, 26 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Here are some figures.


The study by the RAND Corporation estimated that 2,450 of the 1.2 million active-duty members of the military are transgender, and that every year around 65 will seek to transition to the other gender.

The RAND study said that if the Pentagon did not cover the medical procedures for service members — like hormone therapy and surgery — they would likely avoid seeking medical care and would have higher rates of substances abuse and suicide.

Paying for the procedures would cost the Pentagon between $2.9 million to $4.2 million a year, the report said. By comparison, the Pentagon each year spends $6 billion of its $610 billion budget on medical costs for active-duty service members.


Study Finds Few Obstacles to Lifting Military’s Transgender Ban
edit on 26-7-2017 by TheTory because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
78
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join