[@SleepingSilence]

I am of the belief the current proposal in the memorandum for the President of the United States is the best course of action. In my personal opinion however, I believe any who have been extensively vetted through behavioral health and psychological evaluation should retain their position and authority. They should not be punished or removed from service in a discriminatory manner, but if found mentally unfit for service should be separated from service with a medical discharge and if need be, compensated for appropriately through the Veteran's Affairs, especially to ensure they are offered resolution to their condition, if they so choose.

I do not have an issue with them serving, but they need to be as atypical to their statistics as possible, namely in the realm of suicide and depression. Speaking from experience, deaths of this nature have catastrophic consequences to a mission and operational ends. Mitigating that as much as possible is mandatory and essential, something that has already been in the system through various other means. I myself do not believe denying most transgendered persons service in the military is any more discriminatory than denying people with issues of substance abuse or domestic violence. Some people choose these things for themselves, very few, most do not. The issue is, is that those who do not make these choices cannot just suddenly revoke it or their affects; the concept behind this is very non-discriminatory, in fact.

Serving in the armed forces is an honor one is selected for and like many things in the military, not freely handed out.

[@POOHEAD189]

The marginal numbers are not those supporting the transgender persons, rather the approximately transgender population itself. Even if the half of the United States population agreed and supported them, the other half would be deeply unsettled by examples as the bathroom issue. I have addressed this prior, but if someone has not completed their transition and reassignment therapy, they have no place, in my belief, to be in a restroom of their gender. For the military? This has been noted before by people more skilled than I on the details, but the issue ranges from clinical calculations for dosages, to combat life saving techniques, to minor things like dress and appearance, customs and courtesies, fitness standards among others.

I am certainly not advocating against them, they deserve to be recognized like any other person does, but I am deeply against allowing a minority of persons to hold the rest hostage and them claim moral high ground to besiege everyone else from with their supporters. No less as someone who does represent a very small number of persons in the population, it hits particularly hard to see others be so disrespectful in doing so. I disagree with affording anyone special privileges in general, be it tampering with college entrance exam scores to hiring quotas.

[quote]Do you have any proof that transgendered people make the military lesser quality. [/quote]
The people themselves are not the issue so much as the impact on the role they have. Say I as a supervisor have five troops under me and I realistically need seven to do my mission per the regulation. We have an operational waiver saying we can operate with five to conduct our daily mission. One of my troops is transgendered and has a mandatory appointment weekly for a therapist, consultation, and ultimately a series of reassignment surgeries. Private Snuffy, my transgender troop, is a good soldier and does her job. I ensure she's recognized as female and treat her like a female, ensuring her peers do so as well. I have no issue with her or what she's doing.

What I have an issue with is Private Snuffy making me call in people who work other shifts to fill her slot when she's gone, because I have an instruction, regulation, or order to follow through with. I am already understaffed and am barely able to meet my mandated requirement. If I cannot find a replacement, say someone is on leave, is ill, or just worked - preventing them from working extended duty for certain occupations or mission roles - what do I do now? What do I do as a supervisor when the therapist makes recommendations I have to defer to and contact my command? What do I do when my command finds out I ended up with four people when I need five? What happens if that ends up in the documentation for an inspector?

This hypothetical sounds really silly, but this is a down to earth real problem that I can assure you is quite real. The people themselves are not bad people by and large, but the impact they have on the total force can well be. I don't need to repeat it again, but the military does not need more suicides, especially active, reserve, or guard ones, let alone veterans.

Speaking about the medication, depending upon your code, classification, career field, specialty, assignment, whatever, you can disqualify yourself from that role based on what medications or treatment you are receiving. Imagine for a moment you have, again, a role that needs to be filled now someone cannot fill it because medically they are being disqualified despite being in the regular military. Now you need to reassign them and do force management, which can take months.

Yes, I am well aware of what it is like to walk into a room designated for a person you feel with all your being should be, but physically aren't. Yes, I am very well of that and very, very familiar not just to personal challenges of that or similar issues, but contending with those who do, to include subordinates and peers who were or are homosexuals or transgender. Again, some of my friends are very gone.