[url=https://apnews.com/c9c56d51dfdf45d580f51173fdeb842e?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP]Source[/url]
[QUOTE]The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s ban on transgender individuals joining the military.
The federal lawsuit was filed in Maryland on Monday by the ACLU of Maryland on behalf of several service members who are transgender.
Trump directed the Pentagon on Friday to implement the ban on transgender individuals joining the military, which he first announced in a tweet. He also gave to the Pentagon the authority to decide the future of openly transgender people already serving.
The lawsuit says Trump’s policy violates the equal protection rights of transgender service members who now have “grave reason to fear for their careers.”[/QUOTE]
Short story so I posted the whole thing
I hope they've found a good legal basis for this. Does the President's decree in executive orders become law?
Woop woop!
[QUOTE=Jon27;52621947]I hope they've found a good legal basis for this. Does the President's decree in executive orders become law?[/QUOTE]
File suit --> seek injunction preventing implementation of ban --> case percolates through the court system long enough for Trump to either give up on it, get impeached, or lose reelection --> case fizzles out --> ban never actually takes effect --> victory.
You need only stall proceedings long enough for the defendant to lose the ability or will to push the ban and you've won. Without the administration to challenge the suit their ban will fall apart in court.
[QUOTE=TestECull;52621997]File suit --> seek injunction preventing implementation of ban --> case percolates through the court system long enough for Trump to either give up on it, get impeached, or lose reelection --> case fizzles out --> ban never actually takes effect --> victory.
You need only stall proceedings long enough for the defendant to lose the ability or will to push the ban and you've won. Without the administration to challenge the suit their ban will fall apart in court.[/QUOTE]
I suppose it's true that Trump's team - or those who actually agree with him on this, which is basically himself and Pence - won't have the wherewithal to properly fight a court battle against it. Sweet.
[QUOTE=Jon27;52621947]I hope they've found a good legal basis for this. Does the President's decree in executive orders become law?[/QUOTE]
no, he has to use existing law and all the checks with that
[editline]28th August 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=TestECull;52621997]File suit --> seek injunction preventing implementation of ban --> case percolates through the court system long enough for Trump to either give up on it, get impeached, or lose reelection --> case fizzles out --> ban never actually takes effect --> victory.
You need only stall proceedings long enough for the defendant to lose the ability or will to push the ban and you've won. Without the administration to challenge the suit their ban will fall apart in court.[/QUOTE]
trump's team is counting on this, not only will it give his base something to fret over, he wins out because he did something and yet again the deep state liberals are opposing him
[QUOTE=Jon27;52621947]I hope they've found a good legal basis for this. Does the President's decree in executive orders become law?[/QUOTE]
No, executive orders are not and cannot become law. EOs are a directives for federal agencies and employees, and are basically just a way for the president to guide internal policy and enforcement of existing laws, not make new ones or change existing ones. Trump would have to go through congress to change that.
It's sorta worth asking: With how many things can already get you medically discharged from the military, why should this be the exception?
I'm not asking for any huge fight, but I'm trying to wrap my head around this situation. From what I'm aware of, if you are on medications which can effect your mental well being, the military reserves the right to pull you out and discharge you. Why would this be any different outside of the specifics of a widespread ban?
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52622494]Because we dont just discharge people for various mental problems. If they can be managed with conservative therapy (IE medications), and don't effect the persons performance, then the person is free to continue service.
I'd only be fine with discharging transgender service members if they were being discharged for literally being unable to do their job. Dont kick people out just because they have a personal problem, kick people out if their personal problem becomes a problem that beings to effect others.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much this is how we feel about trans servicepeople over here; you'd either have to be pretty damned ill resulting in discharge medical or massively overreact to your condition resulting in lots of mandatory trips to med centres followed by an insubordination charge.
[QUOTE=tyanet;52622242]No, executive orders are not and cannot become law. EOs are a directives for federal agencies and employees, and are basically just a way for the president to guide internal policy and enforcement of existing laws, not make new ones or change existing ones. Trump would have to go through congress to change that.[/QUOTE]
So it's basically the president going "Hey guys, wassup? Can you do this for me pretty please?"?
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;52622472]It's sorta worth asking: With how many things can already get you medically discharged from the military, why should this be the exception?
I'm not asking for any huge fight, but I'm trying to wrap my head around this situation. From what I'm aware of, if you are on medications which can effect your mental well being, the military reserves the right to pull you out and discharge you. Why would this be any different outside of the specifics of a widespread ban?[/QUOTE]
You're just assuming all trans people are constantly on meds?
kicking out active service members already in specialised roles is such a dumb idea
what's the opposite of virtue signalling? shithead signalling. trump is shithead signalling with this move. it's pure culture war.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;52622472]It's sorta worth asking: With how many things can already get you medically discharged from the military, why should this be the exception?
I'm not asking for any huge fight, but I'm trying to wrap my head around this situation. From what I'm aware of, if you are on medications which can effect your mental well being, the military reserves the right to pull you out and discharge you. Why would this be any different outside of the specifics of a widespread ban?[/QUOTE]
Being trans doesn't automatically conjure up mental health issues, last I checked.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52622494]Because we dont just discharge people for various mental problems. If they can be managed with conservative therapy (IE medications), and don't effect the persons performance, then the person is free to continue service.
I'd only be fine with discharging transgender service members if they were being discharged for literally being unable to do their job. Dont kick people out just because they have a personal problem, kick people out if their personal problem becomes a problem that beings to effect others.[/QUOTE]
the problem is that this is kinda how it's handled right now, at least in the Marine Corps
support is there for anyone who needs it, once you're diagnosed with gender dysphoria and surgery is deemed medically necessary the ultimate result is two or three years minimum of therapies, drug prescriptions, surgeries and reassignment as the opposite sex (including living areas, uniforms, customs and courtesies particular to each sex, mountains of paperwork, etc)
if it's deemed medically necessary to go through the transition, you're effectively not training, not working your job full time, and absolutely non-deployable for the duration of the whole transition
I don't have any straight numbers or a breakdown of each stage of the whole thing, we were given a 500-some page handbook on everything from the steps to take if you're transgender to the battery of treatment to the legal guidelines and everything involved in it, but I can pretty safely say that this will negatively impact the mission readiness of any individual transitioning
I must point out again that just because you're transgender does not mean you're depressed or physically impaired. I've known plenty of transgender individuals who transitioned without a single inkling of depression. I know MtFs who have actually gained muscle mass since beginning transition.
Banning transgender people for being transgender is outright wrong and discriminatory. If a transgender person meets or exceeds all physical and mental requirements then I challenge anyone to find a single logical reason to ban them from serving in the military.
Don't give me bullshit about the cost of medical treatment either. Hormones are dirt cheap compared to other types of medication. The military likely spends more on bee sting kits and boner pills then they could ever conceivably spend on hormones
[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52623410]the US military is the most technologically advanced military force in the world several hundreds of thousands of personnel strong. We're fucking fine.
There's no two sides to this issue, it's right wing identity politics and an attack on equality and rights nothing more.[/QUOTE]
it doesn't make much sense for the military to put someone through basic training, combat training, all of their technical schools, pay for their meals, provide them a place to live, and expect no return on investment
or are you saying the military's budget isn't large enough already
[QUOTE=cccritical;52623433]it doesn't make much sense for the military to put someone through basic training, combat training, all of their technical schools, pay for their meals, provide them a place to live, and expect no return on investment
or are you saying the military's budget isn't large enough already[/QUOTE]
The only way there's no "return on investment" is if Trump follows through with kicking out battle-worthy soldiers for bullshit reasons.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;52623422]Don't give me bullshit about the cost of medical treatment either. Hormones are dirt cheap compared to other types of medication. The military likely spends more on bee sting kits and boner pills then they could ever conceivably spend on hormones[/QUOTE]
The WaPo reported that the US military spends 5x more on Viagra than it does total on medical treatments for trans soldiers.
And the cost of purging the US military of ~15,000 trans soldiers could be between $100 and $200 million, which is way more than the military's bill for either Viagra or hormones.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52623610]
My 2 cents? Send transitioning members into the reserves, tell them they still have to maintain BCA/PRT standards for their transition to be paid for by the fed, and once they've fully transitioned allow them back into active duty to fulfill the remainder of their contract.[/QUOTE]
this is actually a pretty good idea
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;52623585]The WaPo reported that the US military spends 5x more on Viagra than it does total on medical treatments for trans soldiers.
And the cost of purging the US military of ~15,000 trans soldiers could be between $100 and $200 million, which is way more than the military's bill for either Viagra or hormones.[/QUOTE]
This may sound ignorant, and I don't claim to know the details, but why are they spending so much on boner pills? Do guys really [I]need[/I] to get one up [I]during[/I] active service? Like, what's more important: being able to get hard for the bone zone, or helping a trans individual reach self-actualization?
I'm genuinely curious.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52624161]I mean as long as someone could handle being detransitioned due to supply limits, and didn't have other specialized needs, then there's really no argument to make, now is there?[/QUOTE]
I find it hard to believe that we could conceivably enter a conflict where our supply lines would be stretched that thin. The US has been a logistical machine since WWII.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;52626797]I find it hard to believe that we could conceivably enter a conflict where our supply lines would be stretched that thin. The US has been a logistical machine since WWII.[/QUOTE]
When you're sustaining a bunch mountain-top FOBs out in the middle of nowhere with helicopters, it can get difficult to make sure there's enough to go around. I've heard anecdotes from guys out at the ends of supply routes, sometimes the bird would run out of MREs and water before it had a chance to drop shit at their post. They'd end up having to boil water from the local shit creek, and buy flatbread and stuff like that from the locals.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;52626948]When you're sustaining a bunch mountain-top FOBs out in the middle of nowhere with helicopters, it can get difficult to make sure there's enough to go around. I've heard anecdotes from guys out at the ends of supply routes, sometimes the bird would run out of MREs and water before it had a chance to drop shit at their post. They'd end up having to boil water from the local shit creek, and buy flatbread and stuff like that from the locals.[/QUOTE]
If someone is going to be deployed in the middle of nowhere for that long then its a simple matter of equipping them with a few months of pills beforehand. Hormone pills are not exactly a large item, 3 months of my HRT regimen can fit inside a mid sized pill box with ease.
Furthermore if its that much of an issue then just make trans service people aware that if they are put into a conbat role they may be forced off hormones for a small period of time due to supply constraints.
[editline]29th August 2017[/editline]
Theres also some research being done into long term implants so that may be an option in the future
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;52624384][B]This may sound ignorant, and I don't claim to know the details, but why are they spending so much on boner pills? Do guys really [I]need[/I] to get one up [I]during[/I] active service?[/B] Like, what's more important: being able to get hard for the bone zone, or helping a trans individual reach self-actualization?
I'm genuinely curious.[/QUOTE]
Also, I believe a lot of PTSD medication (which is needed in many cases) can cause erectile dysfunction as well
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.