Bill Introduced To Deny Military Service To Many Trans People

[Carolyn Marie]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/some-transgender-people-disqualified-military-service-under-new-gop-bill

 

 

I was expecting this kind of bill.  Goes hand in hand with the whole "anti-woke" baloney.  It stands no chance of passage in the Senate for the next two years, but if R's regain the Senate & Presidency in 2025, it will be high on their to-do list.

 

Carolyn Marie

[Marcie Jensen]

Wow. Speaking from the perspective of a retired senior NCO who hasn't read the bill, to say I'm stunned is an understatement. Personally, I never cared about a soldier's gender, orientation, ethnicity or anything else beyond their ability to do their job. The DEERS part is actually the most disturbing portion as it affects all service members, their spouses and children and the VA which currently provides gender care for veterans. If gender markers revert to those assigned at birth, this care could go away. It would also affect the careers of personnel currently serving who are members of the LGBTQIA+ community, which would clearly impact force readiness. Idiots.

 

I also find it disturbing that the bill's sponsors have never served in the military. That alone speaks volumes.

[Ivy]

"new regulations that disqualify from service anyone who identifies as transgender or has a history of gender dysphoria, unless they have been stable in their biological sex for 36 months prior to joining the military. "Stable" means they no longer have a desire to transition and are not suffering from anxiety or depression."

 

2 hours ago, Marcie Jensen said:

The DEERS part is actually the most disturbing portion as it affects all service members, their spouses and children and the VA which currently provides gender care for veterans. If gender markers revert to those assigned at birth, this care could go away.

I've been kinda expecting this one.

 

2 hours ago, Marcie Jensen said:

I also find it disturbing that the bill's sponsors have never served in the military. That alone speaks volumes.

This.    I have a real problem with this kind of "Patriots" 

[KayC]

I'm with @Marcie Jensen!  It's politically motivated insanity just to whip up their 'base' base.

Military service is exactly that ... Service.  It has nothing to do with gender/sexual identity (of any type) and it is why so many LGBTQ+ people end up in the military (whether Out on not).  They're accepted for what they contribute in the Service to this country.

When political motivations try to manipulate that core identity of Service, the damage to our military will be extremely damaging and long lasting.

Let's hope common sense prevails.

[Ivy]

1 hour ago, KayC said:

Let's hope common sense prevails.

Well…

[Lelouch vi Ushiromiya]

As usual, the GOP is up to some evil garbage. Not surprised here in the least but very sad. My heart goes out to all the LGBTQ+ service members who are fighting for their country. Why should they have their freedoms taken away on the basis of their gender identity or sexual orientation? We don't hurt anybody. I wish the GOP would just leave us alone and let us be! 

[Marcie Jensen]

6 hours ago, Lelouch vi Ushiromiya said:

As usual, the GOP is up to some evil garbage. Not surprised here in the least but very sad. My heart goes out to all the LGBTQ+ service members who are fighting for their country. Why should they have their freedoms taken away on the basis of their gender identity or sexual orientation? We don't hurt anybody. I wish the GOP would just leave us alone and let us be! 

On behalf of all service personnel, thank you LeLouch for the sentiments. Something needs to be cleared up regarding their rights, though. When a person joins the military, they give up (VOLUNTARILLY) some of their civil liberties for the sake of military discipline. In terms of LGBTQ+ in the military, the various services have come a long way since I joined over four decade ago. Then, being part of the community was grounds for immediate dishonorable discharge. Then, under Clinton came the "don't ask, don't tell" policy followed by less and less restrictions on service until the military has reached the point where members of the LGBTQ+ community can serve openly. That's real progress. 

 

The restrictions that service members agree to include, but are not limited to, restrictions on participation in politics while in uniform--you can't wear a uniform to a political event, you can't sue military medical and dental personnel for malpractice, if single and under a certain pay grade you have to live in barracks (which have improved greatly from the open platoon bays that often date from WW2 to things such a if your spouse or children commit a crime in government quarters you and your family can be evicted. All for the sake of "the good order and discipline" of the service. It's just the way it is.

 

In terms of equality, there have been a number of strides made; women serving in combat arms branches and on ships for example. These have been the product of both the democrats and the republicans, and keep in mind that the majority of service members are conservatives.

 

As I said previously, the really disturbing part of the proposed bill is what it does to the DEERS portion, as that affects the families of service members' families; both active duty and retired. The impact on veterans is also disturbing, in that it affects the VA in general, and more specifically health care. Health care for veterans and retirees is convoluted to say the least. For example, as a retiree, I have TRICARE (essentially, the military's version of health insurance) BUT that doesn't provide any benefits for gender issues of any sort. I also have VA health benefits which provide some assistance for gender issues,d if one is part of the lucky 4,000 who get approved annually, provides GCS assistance. Dental and vision care are handled under a different program and if all of this isn't enough, at age 65 Medicare takes over as the primary health insurer. 

 

What this bill would do is rip away any and all gender care for military personnel, their families and those of retirees. And it's being proposed by people who have never served. The irony is that the GOP is usually regarded as being pro military and the DEMs are not. The plain truth is that neither party cares one bit for the military or veterans unless it serves their own agendas. The Democrats use the military for social expe4rimentation and budget cuts for social issues to appeal to their base and the GOP uses the military for hypocritical flag waving and false patriotism to appeal to theirs. And yes, I have a dim view of both parties. This is just the latest stunt by a bunch of non-veterans that ha the potential of destroying lives and causing harm to the military in general, service personnel and their families without any regard for the consequences.

 

In the 1890s, Rudyard Kipling wrote the poem "Tommy" about this very topic. It's apt today. One of the verses begins says, "Oh it's Tommy this and Tommy that and Tommy, get behind///but it's please to march in front, sir, when there's trouble on the wind." He was talking about the treatment of soldiers in the UK by politicians and the public. His words have the ring of truth today, and this bill just underscores it. 

[Ivy]

3 hours ago, Marcie Jensen said:

This is just the latest stunt by a bunch of non-veterans that ha the potential of destroying lives and causing harm to the military in general, service personnel and their families without any regard for the consequences.

I've said before that those who avoided service should just sit down and shut up.

[April Marie]

@Marcie JensenWhat an exceptional description of the reality of voluntary military service, the Tricare military system....or the falsity of what it really provides...and the implications of proposed legislation for LGTBQ+ service members and their family members. You are right that neither political party really cares about service members and their families and both have provided both positive and negative policies/programs over the decades. In the old mantra of "Mission First, People Always," both parties stop any real thought at "Mission First." Just wait until you experience the contradiction of terms that is Tricare For Life.

 

When we enlist or are commissioned we give up some of the rights civilians are guaranteed - and was also true in times of the draft/selective service. Good order and discipline, the necessity for the military to maintain a politically neutral position and to maintain the trust of the American people in that neutrality. We take an oath to protect and defend the constitution and to do that we (temporarily) relinquish some of our rights. That's most often not recognized by civilians...and even some service members who run afoul of the UCMJ during their service.

 

The Services and DoD have come very far from when we both served...and even farther from the days of segregation. Not many people in the military even know that the Pentagon was built with double the number of bathrooms needed to support the workforce it holds....because there were separate facilities for blacks and whites. Unfortunately, as a culture, humans are much better at technological advancements than we are at human rights advancement. But, we truly have come a long way.

 

I truly do enjoy your insight and perspective. Reading your thoughts and ideas has been so very helpful to me as I start this wonderfully amazing journey.

[Marcie Jensen]

Thanks for the kind words, April. You are absolutely right about people not understanding about voluntarily relinquishing some of their rights when serving. Thanks for the reminder.

 

And, thanks for the point about Pentagon bathrooms. I learned something new this morning. That always makes it a good day. 

 

Hugs,

Marcie 

[Ivy]

4 hours ago, Marcie Jensen said:

voluntarily relinquishing some of their rights when serving.

Yeah.  I didn't really understand how they could refuse the covid shots.  I don't remember anyone asking me which shots I wanted at Ft Bragg.

[Marcie Jensen]

Me, too @Ivy. Just before Desert Shield we were all given experimental anthrax vaccinations, and it wasn't a matter of choice; or rather, you might say it was; it was "take the shot or go to jail. Those are your choices."

[April Marie]

I've had so many vaccinations over the years - and exposure to nucs - that I glow in the dark. The worst was the old 3 shot Plague series that if you missed the window for the booster due to a field exercise, etc, you had to start over. They have since changed it but I started it 4 times before I got all 3 and the first shot was the worst. 

 

I think the anthrax experience caused DoD to opt out in some cases because it was not FDA approved. I think the Army was the only Service that opted not to discharge people who refused, though. Is that right?

[Marcie Jensen]

I remember the plague shots! OMG they were awful. So was the gamma globulin (sp?) one. And I think you are correct about the anthrax shot, April. I managed to avoid that one because I had a live mission stateside, and deployed late to Desert Storm. I was in the 513th MI Bde for that one, and was one of 17 Arabic speakers in the entire Bde./ The chain of command had no idea as to what was going on. They had the two theater level POW cages as their responsibility, as well as the theater level TECHINT and DOCEX missions. They actually thought that the two Farsi speakers (I was one of those as well) and the Urdu speaker were dialects of Arabic! Imagine recovering an unexploded SCUD missile and no one on the team can read the markings and warning labels or at the cage trying to interrogate a senior enemy leader who has no common language with the interrogator. It got interesting. We had a battalion commander relieved as well as the Bde commander.

 

We still got those shots, though!