I just don’t get the reasoning with this matter of transgenders serving in our military, since the military’s strict order and function are separate from, and in a sense, even above civilian norms and dictates.
The difference found in the military society verses the civilian version is like night and day, as is also the purpose of each. The differing levels of discipline provide the perfect comparison. As such, and based upon the ultimate role and purpose of the military, our Armed Forces have always adhered to their own Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
Obviously, something happened to complicate matters since a U.S. District Court Judge has intervened against a presidential initiative barring transgenders from serving in our military. Therefore, and while evident that my personal opinion isn’t worth squat, it needs noting that what is transpiring against our current President, this total blanket of obstruction, now supports the endangerment of our Country.
As a long ago recruit, I was sternly informed that all luxuries of civilian life were non-existent in the Army. This also included our Constitutional rights. We were no longer part of that “civilian existence” but now a proud member of our nation’s fighting forces. As such, we were separate and apart from that cushy lifestyle. And the odd thing was, it made sense.
Today, as an ex military policeman, I take particular offence to what is happening with a certain deserter yet I now find that a civilian judge is ill suited to intervene against a proper Presidential directive for returning the military’s enlistment criteria back to ageless and accepted standards.
As already intimated, the military life is a harsh and self sacrificing profession which is so diverse from its civilian counterpart that when its “Commander-in-chief” is overruled by a civilian judge, the conclusion must be that of an ill conceived intrusion into a foreign, even an unknown society.
The former in place restrictions on transgender service addressed a specific concern and was quite efficient without the social engineering from Obama’s 2016 edict.
Placing this in no uncertain terms is Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, a recent victim from an unfair media assault. Still, his credibility remains with his military acumen from decades of faithful service.
To Quote Gen. Flynn in part, ‘Too often…our troops are instead distracted by… what words to use, what terminology is politically correct…” “My God, war is not about bathrooms. War is not about political correctness or words that are meaningless.”
The General’s concern is of the creeping civilian trends, fads and inhibitions which survive quite well in that protected sector but are potentially lethal in a military workplace.
A commentator on Fox News, Lt. Col. Ralph Peters adds, “I support gay marriage, but my tolerance ends sharply when it comes to national defense. The primary reason we have a government is not to dole out benefits, but to protect us. Anything that reduces our ability to defend our country and its citizens plunges beyond the limits of my tolerance.”
Also it seems suspicious that such a recently enacted revision is now so vehemently defended. Especially so since this new policy is estimated to cost between four and fourteen million annually.
Concerning the effectiveness factor, this piece dated July 20, 2016 stated, according to Mac Thornberry, R-Tex, “At least some number of transgender people require hormone therapy, which requires regular lab tests and also requires refrigeration. If you have those requirements, whatever your situation, you have been non-deployable.” So, at what point does this become a nonsensical exercise?
Then, from a medical perspective, retired Army officer, Robert Maginnis states that “Transsexxuals suffer from more psychiatric pathologies than the general population and active suicide and major depression episodes occur more frequently…” Also, how beneficial to our military will it be when “the service will offer ‘extended leave’ so that soldiers diagnosed with gender dysphoria at least 18 months earlier can transition to their ‘preferred gender?’” Again, are we as crazy as this judge?
Col. Peters sums it up from the Obama years, with “Why is Obama doing this? Because he can…And the president, as commander in chief, can order the military to do what he desires. What has happened since Obama?
If Col. Peters is correct about Trump’s authority to “order the military to do what he desires,” (especially when concerning military standards) somebody better get the word to our current commander in chief. After all, he is the commander and aside from that Judge, rank still holds its privilege.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com