Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-22-2019, 01:59 PM
 
52,430 posts, read 26,654,666 times
Reputation: 21097

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by treemoni View Post
I think she's trying to hold onto her life. She probably won't be around much longer after she retires. I'm not a fan of her, but I've seen seniors who rapidly deteriorated once they retired. She probably should have stepped down long ago, but she made the job her life.

She deteriorated horribly as shown in that video. They were doing everything they could to keep her out of view of that camera. This on what looked like a simple car trip for anyone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2019, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Phila & NYC
4,783 posts, read 3,303,157 times
Reputation: 1953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eumaois View Post
I am a Republican who sees people as either male, female, or intersexed. Excluding people who are intersexed, a man is still a man even if he gets surgery to have a womb and a woman is still a woman if she gets a penis surgery. I don't agree with this ban. A trans person should have the right to serve in the military. Now, if that trans person is pre-op and expects the military to cover the costs for that operation, I don't agree with that trans potentially taking advantage of that.

Bad media title. There is no ban on transgenders in the military. Many can still serve under certain restrictions. They have to serve as the sex they were born as, but can still be openly transgender. They can not be in the process of transitioning, nor display Gender Dysphoria.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.b708eedbd3b6
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 06:09 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,663,022 times
Reputation: 18521
Default SCOTUS Upholds Trump's Transgender Military Ban

In a decision that is bound to 'trigger' millions across America!!!!! The justices, voting 5-4, put on hold lower court decisions that had blocked the administration’s planned ban from taking effect. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented.


“This case is about whether men and women who want to serve in the United States Armed Forces to protect their country and who are able and otherwise qualified to do so should be barred from military service because they are transgender,” according to court filings on behalf of current and prospective military members."


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...r-military-ban
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 06:21 PM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
14,689 posts, read 14,662,025 times
Reputation: 15421
stupid ban which does nothing but justify hatred of these individuals. But it “triggers liberals” which is a touchdown for the Kavanaugh court, so all is well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 06:30 PM
 
Location: New York
2,486 posts, read 826,204 times
Reputation: 1883
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
In a decision that is bound to 'trigger' millions across America!!!!! The justices, voting 5-4, put on hold lower court decisions that had blocked the administration’s planned ban from taking effect. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented.

The Dems legislate from the bench. They shop for judges and loaded the SCOTUS and circuit courts.


The fact that there is now 5 Constitutional Justices scares the hell out of them!


They were so close to dismantling it once and for all!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 06:40 PM
 
3,770 posts, read 6,747,131 times
Reputation: 3019
I can see how this would be unconstitutional. But also, it could be seen as too much of a burden on the military. If the genders are separated for things like housing and showering, what do you do with the transgendered people? Does someone with a female body, shower and bunk with males? I can see that as a handicap, and the military will exclude a lot of people based on minor physical flaws. But they could also put them into non combat positions. Seems complicated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 06:47 PM
 
17,311 posts, read 12,267,497 times
Reputation: 17263
Not really resolved, just punted to the lower courts.

Personally, if someone is willing to lay their life down for this country I don't care what's going on between their legs. Let them serve. Especially since "The government has presented no evidence that their doing so harms military readiness, effectiveness or lethality".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 06:53 PM
 
18,069 posts, read 18,832,764 times
Reputation: 25191
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
Not really resolved, just punted to the lower courts.

Personally, if someone is willing to lay their life down for this country I don't care what's going on between their legs. Let them serve. Especially since "The government has presented no evidence that their doing so harms military readiness, effectiveness or lethality".
The military has not presented evidence for a lot of disqualifiers that they say harms readiness and effectiveness".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 07:10 PM
 
34,071 posts, read 17,102,875 times
Reputation: 17216
Lower court overreached. SC fixed it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2019, 07:18 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,237,091 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
stupid ban which does nothing but justify hatred of these individuals. But it “triggers liberals” which is a touchdown for the Kavanaugh court, so all is well.
The gender confused have mental issues. The ban is correct. Or do you want weapons placed in the hands of those with mental problems?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top