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.
It does no good to get upset over something you can do nothing about.
True
But you do that often yourself. You are the city-data anti-war hero. Remember? Something (war) you have no control over.
Everybody has something they are passionate about. One of my passion is helping the veterans and I am definitely doing it my way. Good or bad, right or wrong? I don't know, but it is my passion.
That's what some said about gay marriage, and I presume you know what that movement lead to....
Not even close to the same thing. The military has many exclusions, not everyone that wants to get in is allowed based on their qualifications, both mental and physical. I take it you were not in the military.
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylux
The pentagon wants this reversed and it will be after it works its way through the radical courts.
Yes, I think so too. Many people are unfamiliar with the qualifications required for military service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey
Another worthless ruling but a so-called judge. Trump should just ignore it, as usual. He is the Commander and Chief of the armed forces, per the Constitution. They can take that to the Supreme Court if needed, but for now, this means nothing.
I agree. I can't see it getting much traction even with the SC. The military has both mental health and physical health qualifications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
The Constitution precludes the president from discriminating against the citizens of the country. These same arguments were used to stop openly gay citizens from joining and didn't hold up then and won't now.
Gay citizens is not the same. If they could meet the mental and physical qualifications, just like everyone else, they would be allowed to join the military. They would not be coming in with pre-existing conditions that would prevent them from being mission ready.
I was in the military, my husband, my father, my uncles, etc. and most importantly, my older son and I want the guy next to him mission ready without mental and physical issues that would take away from the mission.
They don't enlist someone that is blind, someone with bad eyesight in some positions, people that overweight, people that can't pass an entrance exam, people with life threatening diseases, people that are too short, people who are too tall.
In what branch did you serve? How would you feel about someone that had to spend time in the hospital getting surgeries?
Also, what about the necessary medications? That could also be another issue. Anyone with depression?
Nope, too many mental and physical issues involved in this one. Gays have been serving in the military forever. I worked with a few, lived in the same barracks, etc. They were mission ready and required no special handling.
Not in the military unless they have completed whatever necessary changes they need and are found to be both physically and mentally eligible. Going into the military as a way to transition, just no. They do not admit people that bring in mental or physical health issues to be handled at the expense of the military and the mission.
But you do that often yourself. You are the city-data anti-war hero. Remember? Something (war) you have no control over.
While it's a long shot I most certainly believe we would have made strides there if the (D)'s hadn't cheated Sanders out of the presidency so there is something I can do.
Quote:
Everybody has something they are passionate about. One of my passion is helping the veterans and I am definitely doing it my way. Good or bad, right or wrong? I don't know, but it is my passion.
I'm all for helping veterans. I believe we start by not getting them broken to start with.
While it's a long shot I most certainly believe we would have made strides there if the (D)'s hadn't cheated Sanders out of the presidency so there is something I can do.
I'm all for helping veterans. I believe we start by not getting them broken to start with.
I agree.
But I like to help at VA hospitals. To me, it is more productive. This discussion makes me realize one thing, never argue with somebody who take politics personally. (not saying you do) Never argue with hateful people because they are incapable of answering adult questions. (not saying you are one)
Gay citizens is not the same. If they could meet the mental and physical qualifications, just like everyone else, they would be allowed to join the military. They would not be coming in with pre-existing conditions that would prevent them from being mission ready.
I was in the military, my husband, my father, my uncles, etc. and most importantly, my older son and I want the guy next to him mission ready without mental and physical issues that would take away from the mission.
They don't enlist someone that is blind, someone with bad eyesight in some positions, people that overweight, people that can't pass an entrance exam, people with life threatening diseases, people that are too short, people who are too tall.
In what branch did you serve? How would you feel about someone that had to spend time in the hospital getting surgeries?
Also, what about the necessary medications? That could also be another issue. Anyone with depression?
Nope, too many mental and physical issues involved in this one. Gays have been serving in the military forever. I worked with a few, lived in the same barracks, etc. They were mission ready and required no special handling.
Not in the military unless they have completed whatever necessary changes they need and are found to be both physically and mentally eligible. Going into the military as a way to transition, just no. They do not admit people that bring in mental or physical health issues to be handled at the expense of the military and the mission.
But I like to help at VA hospitals. To me, it is more productive. This discussion makes me realize one thing, never argue with somebody who take politics personally. (not saying you do) Never argue with hateful people because they are incapable of answering adult questions. (not saying you are one)
People with a history of “self-mutilation,” bipolar disorder, depression and drug and alcohol abuse can now seek waivers to join the Army under an unannounced policy enacted in August.
So, if this is the case, then transgender people can certainly serve. Just eliminate all the rules because no one can prove who can do the job, who cannot.
Allow people over 45 to serve too, as long as they can do the job. Not allow older people to serve, that is age discrimination.
Allow people who are cancer survivors to serve, as long as they can do the job
The maximum age for Army enlisted recruits is 35, while the Navy and Marines cap recruit ages at 34 and 28, respectively. Under federal law, the oldest recruit any military branch can enlist is 42, (what is wrong with people who are 43 years old? ) although each service sets its own policy within that limit. The bold is bad too, civilian court judge should make that decision.
It doesn't matter. The courts have consistently ruled for inclusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981
And my argument is military should make the decision, not a civilian court judge. Of course the courts have and should have consistently ruled for inclusion because they view this as a civil right issues, it is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
You are free to argue it. The courts are going to decide.
The Supreme Court is going to decide against inclusion in this case, just as it has and will in the case of the travel ban.
The Supreme Court has never forced the military to include anyone. That was always done by the president, who makes those decisions as commander in chief.
Truman made such decisions regarding blacks, Clinton regarding gays. Don't Ask Don't Tell was not ended by the courts, but by the commander in chief.
The President and Congress decide who gets to serve in the military, not the courts. Someone needs to tell that to these lower court judges.
Oh, but of course, they already know that.
It is too bad that they can't be disbarred for flagrantly overstepping their authority and wasting time and taxpayer money just to express their depraved personal values.
Last edited by dechatelet; 12-14-2017 at 03:51 AM..
The Supreme Court is going to decide against inclusion in this case, just as it has and will in the case of the travel ban.
The Supreme Court has never forced the military to include anyone. That was always done by the president, who makes those decisions as commander in chief.
Truman made such decisions regarding blacks, Clinton regarding gays. Don't Ask Don't Tell was not ended by the courts, but by the commander in chief.
The President and Congress decide who gets to serve in the military, not the courts. Someone needs to tell that to these lower court judges.
Oh, but of course, they already know that. It is too bad that they can't be disbarred for flagrantly overstepping their authority and wasting time and taxpayer money just to express their depraved personal values.
Every group that has wanted inclusion has been granted inclusions. The same will happen here. It's really a complete non point at that since we may be talking a hand full of people.
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.
