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.
What I'm hearing is that the military is facing a 1.5 billion dollar cost over the next 10 years to pay medical costs for people to change their gender. I have to agree that that is not how military spending is meant to be spent. I suspect that if transgenders paid for their own medical costs, they would be welcome in the military.
I imagine if costs were really the issue, then something would be worked out in regards to them. Instead of a flat ban.
Seems that would have been the more reasonable course of action, yes?
Also, if you want to go down rabbit hole of what the military "should" pay for in regards to the healthcare for its soldiers, then you should be prepared to have some uncomfortable conversations.
Treatment is estimated to cost as much as $50,000 per soldier. Treatment generally moves from counseling to hormone therapy, and in relatively rare cases, gender reassignment surgery. A military doctor must deem the treatment medically necessary.
you really should stop pretending to be compassionate. You are the one who says they should be serving, but military should not pay for their treatment. Leave no one behind, remember? Once they are active duty, military is obligated to treat them and military should. To deny their treatment once they are active duty is true discrimination.
Funny that you just want to throw them in the military without addressing their real issues. Why do you keep on denying some of these folk need treatment on regular basis?
Oh, I don't think so. You don't get to turn this around and act like I'm the one being a bigot, here. I'm not advocating a ban based on hypotheticals or misinformation. You are. I only suggested the military not pay for it as a potential compromise that addressed the dumb financial cost argument you keep bringing up, but the choice to join under those circumstances would still be up to the trans person.
The question begs. A person enlists into the military. 6 months later declare themselves a transgender. Should the military foot the bill for the process of gender reassignment? Should a person's 4 year enlistment be side tracked to facilitate gender reassignment surgery? Should the military pay for the hormone treatments?
Nope. They have to get a diagnosis of a mental disorder (gender dysphoria) to qualify for surgery, which puts them out of the military. Can't have it both ways.
Oh, I don't think so. You don't get to turn this around and act like I'm the one being a bigot, here. I'm not advocating a ban based on hypotheticals or misinformation. You are. I only suggested the military not pay for it as a potential compromise that addressed the dumb financial cost argument you keep bringing up, but the choice to join under those circumstances would still be up to the trans person.
I think you need to stop calling people a bigot. name calling does not make your argument more valid
Your bold is exactly why I believe you need to stop pretending to be compassionate.
Once they are active duty, military is responsible for their treatment, period. Denying one's medical treatment as a compromise is true discrimination. I simply don't understand why you want to throw them in the military without addressing their true issue "some of these people need treatment on regular basis."
You're doing it again. Comparing a physical ailment that would cause physical performance problems with something that wouldn't. I wonder why you keep using these false equivalencies.
It's not a false equivalency. There are lists provided by military or military affiliated organizations have been posted multiple times in this thread, which lists multiple ailments that cause no physical performance problems, and in fact are 100% void of symptoms with proper medication, that result in a medical discharge because it requires regular medication to be medically stable.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Israel apparently has no problem with transgendered soldiers. Doesn't seem to weaken their combat capabilities any. I suppose Israeli culture isn't hung up on personal adherence to idealized birth gender archetypes as American culture is.
They had women as fighter pilots way before us and women commonly serve in combat too. We are SO BEHIND other nations in so many ways, it's unreal. Russia is more progressive! With women anyway, probably not Trans.
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.
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.
