What will Transgenders in the Military Cost America?

There are many ways to take down this powerful country:

  • Pack the Supreme Court with ideologues who ignore the Constitution
  • Dumb down public education
  • Increase the size and scope of government
  • Put more people on the public dole
  • Put the government in charge of healthcare
  • Over regulate and over tax businesses and corporations driving them offshore or out of business
  • Demonize the productive members of society
  • Refuse an international leadership role
  • Go back on your word to foreign leaders
  • Strengthen the country out to destroy us
  • Weaken the military

Most of these things did not begin with Barack Obama, but there is little doubt that he has picked up the pace.  However, two events making the headlines this week should be enough to shake us awake from our political slumber: His bargain with Iran, which has empowered our sworn enemy and accelerated the arms race, and his decision on transgenders and the military.

I have nothing but compassion for those who struggle with a gender identity disorder.   However the military is not a place to work out or even work with physical or mental problems.

My husband wanted to serve in the military.  He spent two years in an Air Force ROTC program in college before he received the “big” physical exam.   At that time, he was unceremoniously  dismissed because of an undiagnosed congenital heart problem.  I think the words that sealed his fate were, “Son, we wouldn’t even give you a desk job.”

The heart problem wasn’t his fault but it ended his dream of becoming a military pilot, and that’s as it should be.  The defense of this country should be the top priority of our national government.   Everything else is secondary and, many argue, better left to the individual states.

However, a military that is second to none is expensive.  As such, the military and taxpayers should not be burdened with anyone who could become or is currently a problem.

Many years of Supreme Court case law support this notion.  However, in the last couple of decades our leaders have turned that upside down and have turned the military into a laboratory for social experimentation.  As a result, equipment and readiness have been compromised and those who have served this country with distinction are being shortchanged.  Check out the waiting lists and the subpar treatment at many of our veterans’ hospitals.

On Monday, Obama’s defense secretary, Ash Carter, declared the military rules barring transgenders from serving in the military to be outdated and announced that he is creating a working group to review the policies and determine if lifting the ban on transgenders would have any impact of the military’s ability to be ready for battle.  However he said the group will begin with the presumption that transgender people should be able to serve openly “without adverse impact on military effectiveness and readiness.”

If it’s a foregone conclusion, why waste time and money on a study?   It’s a done deal!  Forget the free college education; with this policy change comes the right to the hugely expensive sexual reassignment treatment and surgery.

Consider the underreported case of Bradley Manning, aka Chelsea Manning, the Army intelligence analyst who was sentenced to 35 years in prison for leaking the largest cache of classified documents in U.S. history to the anti-secretary website WikiLeaks.

The day after Manning was sentenced in August of 2013, he announced that he intended to live out the rest of his life as a woman and wanted the Army to pay for hormone treatment.

As outrageous as this may seem, 18 months later, the Obama Administration decided to comply.  Col. Erica Nelson, the commandant of Fort Leavenworth’s detention facility made this announcement:

“After carefully considering the recommendation that (hormone treatment) is medically appropriate and necessary, and weighing all associated safety and security risks presented, I approve adding (hormone treatment) to Inmate Manning’s treatment plan.”

If the military is paying for sexual reassignment treatment for a convicted traitor can there be any doubt that the military will pay for sexual reassignment treatment, even surgery, for anyone who enters our armed forces and demands it?  That’s what the taxpayers of this country are signing up  for.

Over the years, we have unnecessarily spent billions of taxpayer dollars on power steering on our military vehicles and made costly accommodations to our aircraft and weapons systems to accommodate women.  We have lowered the physical standards and we have created whole departments to deal with quotas and sexual abuse, not because of military necessity, but because of the PC police.

What’s next, wheelchair ramps on tanks?

4 thoughts on “What will Transgenders in the Military Cost America?

  1. Incrementally the regime of King Hussein and even the monster’s predecessors have been destroying our military. They let women in the military. Then they let women on ships and trained them as pilots. They tried (unsuccessfully) to get them through the USMC Infantry Officer School, and even Army Ranger School. Soon they will lower standards enough to produce female rangers and SEALs.
    First it was “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Then the military was forced to accept openly homosexual and lesbian troops. Then they were forced to accept and even perform pervert “marriage.” Meanwhile, Muslim chaplains were recruited and Christian chaplains are increasingly persecuted.
    And now transgenders, must be welcomed. And the taxpayers must pay for their hormones and surgeries, so many will flock to the recruiting offices just to receive their free “treatment.”
    By the time Hussein sends our troops to arrest all of us dissidents they will have become such a pathetic joke that we will have nothing to fear.


  2. If we wanted to cut off a traitor’s male member, we would be considered barbarians for that. So I say that if a traitor wants to sentence himself to having his male member removed, we should indulge him!


  3. The “cost” may not be a dollar amount but a total loss of our country. That “cost” would be a bankruptcy to humanity, the loss of the only country and government in human history that has allowed its inhabitants to be free to pursue any goals that suit the individual. Our military should be the heavy-weight champs, the biggest, baddest fighters to walk the earth, and their weapons (tools of their trade) should match their human characteristics. Biggest, baddest! I was fortunate to serve (USAF 1957-63) when our military fit the above criteria. Oh, would it be that we returned to that ideal of what a military defense team should be – actual fighters and defenders as recruited, trained, and utilized by a political and military hierarchy that has common sense and understands why we need a military force.


  4. Sounds a lot like your doom-and-gloom opinions regarding gays in the military. Still waiting for the disaster you predicted. And speaking of expense, as I recall, the hugely expensive job of booting gays out of service was the one expense that had your full support.

    There are many ways to strengthen an organization. Possibly, making the military more inclusive, as odd as that probably sounds to you, will not weaken it. I don’t know, I’m not an expert. You, with your “every change is ‘social experimentation’” outlook aren’t either.

    Keeping transgender people out of the military b/c of the possibility of future surgeries is the type of smoke screen-type issue you like to bring up. One person got surgery approval two years ago, so keep everyone out! Make sense? To you, I guess. But then you thought that all gays should be tossed out over the issue of possible glances in showers. Yes, let’s ruin lives and spend millions to fix THAT huge issue.

    And in the case you mention, it doesn’t sound like the guy was transgender until he was out of the military, so what could anyone do? He’s a vet at that point and has rights to medical treatment just like he would if he were insured publicly. I agree it’s sad that we have to pay for a convict, but it was probably just a legality issue involving care termination rights at that point, and that’s a whole other issue.

    So … keep everyone out who MIGHT be transgender post-discharge, years down the road? How? Or keep post-op transgender people out? Well, their surgery’s done, so there goes your surgery argument.

    BTW, it’s fascinating to me that you claim to be compassionate, loving and un-hating (I’m not aiming to use clichés here, I’m quoting you) yet rarely share an opinion that supports that claim.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s