The oath one takes when entering the military states; “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God”.
Let’s put aside all the protests, threats, name calling, and platitudes and discuss this the American way, with honesty and civility.
I challenge anyone who opposes the president’s recently issued decree on transgender people in the military to put forth an argument against my own in support of his position, which admittedly could have been handled with a bit more discretion.
What does it mean to be a member of the United States military? When an American decides to enlist, it should be, hopefully, to serve his or her country with honor, courage and distinction. You do not join the military with a prefix before your name as a qualification. In other words you are not a transgender, lesbian or gay American, nor are you, an Italian, Irish, Jewish, Black or Hispanic, etc. American. To assert any one of these taxonomic group identifiers as an added classification of who you are can be for only one reason, you expect special treatment and accommodation.
This in my opinion is a betrayal of the oath and the true intent of military service. If you feel you cannot serve as just a man or woman, and without others knowing your gender preference, then you are not the right stuff. If as a man, with male genitalia, you expect to bunk in the female living quarters, and use the restroom and shower with the ladies, you are not the right stuff. When you leave military service, you can go about your life as you please. The military should not be used as a laboratory for some progressive social experimentation.
There is a list of medical conditions, both physical and mental, that would exclude a candidate from military service. This includes those who for whatever reason rely on drugs to control their condition. Why then should transgender people, who expect to be accommodated for transition and gender dysphoria, and any of the medications that would be required to enhance the so called change, be allowed to serve? What about people with other maladies that require special drugs to go about their lives, shouldn’t they to be allowed to serve as well?
While we’re on the subject, does it not appear that the LGBTQ agenda has achieved significant and a broad degree of acceptance in the American culture, and that it seems to have reached a state of inviolability and is above any reproach. The media, Hollywood, and business worship at its altar and sing its praises, and anyone who questions, criticizes or disagrees with its tenets, even a president, will suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. Millions of the American people have no say in the matter.
The president could have best served all the parties involved, had he advanced another means of dealing with this dilemma. In February of 1994 the Clinton administration instituted the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. All could serve, but keep your sexual proclivities to yourself. In September of 2011 the Obama administration repealed the DADT policy, and in 2016 repealed the restriction of transgender people serving.
I suggest the Trump administration reinstate the DADT policy.
If it is felt however, based on further study, that military readiness would in fact be harmed, and create acrimony or hostility among the troops, then transgender people should not be allowed entry into the military.