Gays and The Military: A Bad Fit

[Malsua]

If they are going to make this the law, how about forcing the states to recognize CCW reciprocity? After all, that's an actual right, codified in the bill of rights.

[American Patriot]

Boom!

Yes.

[Ryan Ruck]

If they are going to make this the law, how about forcing the states to recognize CCW reciprocity? After all, that's an actual right, codified in the bill of rights.

Yep!

No justice, no peace!



(Am I doing that right? )

[Ryan Ruck]

US Military Announces Plan Aimed At Lifting Transgender Ban

July 14, 2015

The Pentagon's current regulations banning transgender individuals from serving in the military are outdated, defense secretary Ash Carter said on Monday, ordering a six-month study aimed at formally ending one of the last gender — or sexuality-based barriers to military service.

Carter said he is creating a working group that will review the policies and determine if lifting the ban would have any impact on the military's ability to be ready for battle. But 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, unless and except where objective, practical impediments are identified."

The plan, which was first reported by The Associated Press, gives the services time to methodically work through the legal, medical and administrative issues and develop training to ease any transition, and senior leaders believed six months would be sufficient.

"The Defense Department's current regulations regarding transgender service members are outdated and are causing uncertainty that distracts commanders from our core missions," Carter said in a statement released Monday. "At a time when our troops have learned from experience that the most important qualification for service members should be whether they're able and willing to do their job, our officers and enlisted personnel are faced with certain rules that tell them the opposite."

Carter asked his personnel undersecretary, Brad Carson, to lead the working group of senior military and civilian leaders to take an objective look at the issue, including the costs, and determine whether it would create any insurmountable problems that could derail the plan. The group would also develop uniform guidelines.

During the six months, transgender individuals would still not be able to join the military, but any decisions to force out those already serving would be referred to Carson. One senior official said the goal was to avoid forcing any transgender service members to leave during that time. That official was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Some of the key concerns involved in the repeal of the ban include whether the military would conduct or pay for the medical costs of surgeries and other treatment associated with any gender transition, as well as which physical training or testing standards transgender individuals would be required to meet during different stages of their transition.

Officials said the military also wants time to tackle questions about where transgender troops would be housed, what uniforms they would wear, what berthing they would have on ships, which bathrooms they would use and whether their presence would affect the ability of small units to work well together. The military has dealt with many similar questions as it integrated the ranks by race, gender and sexual orientation.

Transgender people — those who identify with a different gender than they were born with and sometimes take hormone treatments or have surgery to develop the physical characteristics of their preferred gender — are banned from military service. But studies and other surveys have estimated that as many as 15,000 transgender people serve in the active-duty military and the reserves, often in secret but in many cases with the knowledge of their unit commander or peers.

"Obviously this isn't finished, but Secretary Carter's clear statement of intent means that transgender service members should and will be treated with the same dignity as other service members," said Allyson Robinson, Army veteran and policy director for an association of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender military personnel called Service Members, Partners and Allies for Respect and Tolerance for All, or SPARTA.

Brynn Tannehill, who was a Navy pilot before leaving the force and transitioning to a woman, recalled the difficulties when serving.

"It was stressful and it was something that I couldn't talk with anyone about, because if you even breathed a word of it you didn't know what was going to happen," said Tannehill, who still serves in the Individual Ready Reserve. "You could lose your career, that I'd worked so hard for."

Several Congress members, including Rep. Adam Smith, ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, expressed support for Carter's decision. But the more conservative Family Research Council questioned the change.

"Considering the abysmal condition of our military and a decline in readiness, why is this a top priority for the Obama administration?" said retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, the council's executive vice president. "The Pentagon must answer whether this proposed policy makes our military more capable of performing its mission. The answer is a very clear and resounding no."

Military leaders have pointed to the gradual — and ultimately successful — transition after the ban on gays serving openly in the military was lifted in 2011. Although legislation repealing that ban passed Congress in late 2010, the military services spent months conducting training and reviews before the decision actually took effect the following September.

The latest Pentagon move comes just weeks after the Supreme Court upheld the right of same-sex couples to marry.

Officials familiar with the Pentagon meetings said the chiefs of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force did not express opposition to lifting the ban. Instead, they said the military leaders asked for time to figure out health care, housing and other questions and also to provide information and training to the troops to ensure a smooth transition.

The transgender issue came to the fore as the military struggled with how to deal with convicted national security leaker Chelsea Manning's request for hormone therapy and other treatment while she's in prison. Manning, arrested as Bradley Manning, is the first transgender military prisoner to request such treatment, and the Army approved the hormone therapy, under pressure from a lawsuit.

[vector7]

Obama to nominate first openly gay service secretary to lead the Army


Eric Fanning greets Col. Dan Dant, 460th Space Wing commander at Buckley Air Force Base, Colo., in 2013. (Senior Airman Marcy Glass/U.S. Air Force)

By Greg Jaffe September 18 at 3:25 PM

President Obama, in a historic first for the Pentagon, has chosen to nominate Eric Fanning to lead the Army, a move that would make him the first openly gay civilian secretary of one of the military services.

Fanning’s nomination is the latest in a series of actions taken by the administration to advance the rights of gays and lesbians throughout the federal government. The Obama administration has overhauled internal policies to provide benefits to same-sex partners, appointed gay men and lesbians to the executive branch and the federal bench and ended the 18-year ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Fanning, who must still be confirmed by the Senate, has been a specialist on defense and national security issues for more than 25 years in Congress and the Pentagon. As Army secretary, he would be partnered with Gen. Mark Milley, who took over as the Army’s top general in August. Together the two men would assume responsibility for the Pentagon’s largest and most troubled service.

“Eric brings many years of proven experience and exceptional leadership to this new role,” Obama said in a statement. “I look forward to working with Eric to keep our Army the very best in the world.”

The Army, which swelled to about 570,000 active duty troops, has shed about 80,0000 soldiers from its ranks in recent years and plans to cut 40,000 more over the next few years. Those planned cuts would shrink the service to its smallest size of the post-World War II era.

Eric Fanning tours Air Force bases

Play Video0:57

Eric Fanning visited several Air Force bases in 2013. At the time, Fanning was the acting secretary of the Air Force. (DVIDS)

Battered by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has had to deal with a spike in suicides as the wars drew to an end and has struggled at times to provide the war wounded with the care they need to heal.

Recently, the Army’s outgoing top officer, Gen. Ray Odierno, said that tight budgets and the ongoing strain of 14 years of war had badly degraded the Army’s readiness to fight and that only one-third of its brigades were prepared to deploy to a war zone, the lowest readiness rate in decades.

Fanning’s role as Army secretary would give him influence over the generals the Army selects to rebuild the service after a long stretch of counterinsurgency wars in which soldiers dismounted from their tanks and armored vehicles and found themselves leading foot patrols through remote villages.

Much of Fanning’s time in the Pentagon has been overseeing massive ship and aircraft programs. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter tapped Fanning last year to oversee his transition team as he moved into the Pentagon’s top job.

Fanning served briefly as acting Air Force secretary and has been acting undersecretary of the Army since June 2015.

“He understands how the Pentagon works and how to get things done in the Pentagon,” said Rudy de Leon, who was deputy defense secretary in the Clinton administration. “He knows what works and what doesn’t work” inside the federal government’s largest bureaucracy.

Fanning would play a key role in helping the Army, which has struggled to field new combat systems amid the strain of fighting two wars, to upgrade aging tanks, armored personnel carriers and helicopters. Since 2000, the Army has been forced to cancel virtually all of its major new weapons programs because they ran over budget or didn’t perform as expected.

21 of the most influential openly gay and lesbian Washingtonians


View Photos

LGBT issues are advancing by the day in the United States, and with it, there’s a growing class of Washington power players. Here is 21 of the most influential openly gay, lesbian and bisexual people working in the capital, part of a list as compiled by the National Journal.

New equipment for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, like special armored vehicles designed to resist blasts from roadside bombs, had to be developed outside of the traditional procurement channels.

“Eric is taking over at a critical time for the Army,” de Leon said “The Army is still living off equipment from the Reagan years.”

[Ryan Ruck]

Just saw this and was about to post it.

This last year and a half with Obama is going to be hell...

[vector7]

Biden: No Question That Transgenders Can Serve in U.S. Military

Vice President Joe Biden is throwing his unequivocal support behind letting transgender people serve openly in the U.S. military, as the Obama administration considers whether and when to lift the longstanding ban.

Biden's declaration at the Human Rights Campaign's annual dinner Saturday goes further than anything the Obama administration has said before, evoking memories of when Biden outpaced President Barack Obama in endorsing gay marriage. Although the White House says Obama supports a Pentagon review aimed at ending the transgender ban, neither Obama nor the military has said definitively that the policy will be changed.

"No longer is there any question transgender people are able to serve in the United States military," Biden told a crowd of 3,000 gay rights activists at the group's star-studded gala.

Biden, who is considering running for president, declared transgender rights to be "the civil rights issue of our time" as he delivered the keynote speech, just hours after Hillary Rodham Clinton — his top rival if he enters the race — gave a rousing address elevating LGBT rights as a main pillar of 2016 bid. Biden said gays and lesbians shouldn't fear "those shrill voices" trying to undo gay marriage and other advances because Americans "have moved so far beyond them and their appeals to prejudice and fear and homophobia."

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/bide...-weighs-policy

[vector7]

Pentagon Weighs Lifting Transgender Ban in Military




Secretary of Defense Ash Carter will soon issue a final decision on the ban that prevents transgender individuals from serving in the military. Carter announced in July 2015 that the Department of Defense would allow transgender individuals to serve in the military in early 2016, following a six-month review period.

That review period was intended to give military services time to prepare for integration, and to look at projected impact of the switch, The Washington Blade reports. “The transgender working group appointed by the secretary of defense will conclude its deliberations by the end of January and present its findings and recommendations directly to the secretary soon thereafter,” Pentagon spokesman Matthew Allen told The Washington Blade Thursday.

“The secretary will take whatever time he needs to analyze, evaluate, and discuss the Working Group’s findings with his immediate staff and the senior leadership of the department. We do, however, anticipate a final decision from the secretary sometime in the spring.”

In the interim period, the services have made it almost impossible to remove transgender troops currently serving in violation of regulations. Authority to remove these individuals has been elevated to virtually the highest levels of command. The likely outcome is that the ban will be lifted, as the working group established by Carter set out with the assumption that “transgender persons can serve openly without adverse impact on military effectiveness and readiness, unless and except where objective, practical impediments are identified.”

Word from the Pentagon was well-received by the American Military Partner Association, a group representing LGBT members in the military. “Our transgender service members and their families are eagerly waiting for a decision from the Secretary of Defense,” said American Military Partner Association President Ashley Broadway-Mack in a statement.

“For far too long, transgender service members have been forced to serve in silence. It is our urgent hope that Secretary Carter will make the right decision, finally lift the outdated ban, and allow our transgender troops to serve authentically.”

Republicans have remained almost completely silent on the issue, with the exception of GOP Sen. Jim Inhofe, member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Inhofe asked which bathroom transgender service members would use. Inhofe also added that he doesn’t immediately intend to frustrate the Pentagon’s potential plans to integrate transgender individuals into the military.

GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz also said in October 2015 that he opposed the idea of transgender service members, adding, “We shouldn’t view the military as a cauldron for social experiments.”

[vector7]

Navy moves toward gender neutral uniforms

April 13, 2016

By Carl Perry

The United States Navy honors its traditions, and the white “Navy Dixie Cup” hat worn by sailors is among those symbols of continuity that bind together shipmates working under conditions of isolation and stress.

A lot of time, and water has moved under the bridge since this 1917 poster was first deployed as a means to recruit Sailors during WWI. At last it finally seems to have nearly come to fruition.




Female Navy recruits are now being issued the Dixie Cup, which until now has been a traditional part of the male Navy uniform for Sailors E-6 and below.




This is only the most recent action as the Navy strives to reach gender neutrality in uniform for Sailors.





This most likely came about as a result of a media discussion in July 2015 about U.S. considerations of transgender personnel currently in the military. Some of them were wearing the female versions of military uniforms of several countries. After seeing this this, how could the Navy not take notice and start hatching a plan to conform in its own way while simultaneously maintaining some kind of control.




Of course, other than deeming the issue addressed, this in no way helps the Navy with larger issues which include a Freedom Class Littoral Combat Ship developed by Lockheed Martin, three of which have been plagued by catastrophic failures, some found within weeks of being commissioned. (Here, and here)

On the strategic front, China expands its hold on the shipping lanes in the South China Sea in an astounding military buildup. China has created several new islands there by dredging up sand to make defendable platforms that are capable of supplying an increasing number of aircraft carriers, destroyers and frigates. The goal of finally laying claim to these islands creates a threat to several countries there that realize they are strategically vulnerable to being taken over by the communist behemoth. (Here)

Since its conception in 1775 the U.S. Navy and Marines has been keeping shipping lanes open worldwide and began fighting to do so against Muslim pirates on the Barbary Coast in 1801. Since that time, the Navy has been key to protecting trade routes during peace and times of war when countries sought to deprive allies by attacking shipping lines and were key to overpowering Germany in WW1 and both Germany and Japan in WWII, and again in Korea, Viet Nam, Gaddafi’s “Line of Death” in the Gulf of Sidra, and both Iraq and Iran’s attempts to close the Persian Gulf by mining the Strait of Hormuz.

Navy vigilance has always ensured trade routes are open and have met threats to free trade with superior strategy and tactical presence, many times at great cost.

That imposing figure of sea power has been greatly diminished in recent years due to the current administrations preoccupation with social justice and experimentation, a position our enemies witch include Russia, China, Iran, and a constantly growing number of Islamic terrorist organizations, openly mock. See here.

But never fear. Multiculturalism, diversity and gender neutrality will save the day.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/..._uniforms.html

[vector7]

Transgender troops able to serve openly 'soon'

By David Wilkes
6/21/16 4:22 PM



Transgender troops soon will be able to serve openly, as a historic reversal on a gender dysphoria ban is expected within weeks.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter established a working group last July to measure the impact of allowing transgendered people to serve openly. A Pentagon spokesman on Tuesday said that officials are quickly moving toward a consensus after it was reported a "high-level" meeting took place Monday.

Peter Cook, the Pentagon's spokesman, was asked at a Pentagon press briefing Tuesday if Carter changed his previous view that it's hurtful to not allow transgender people to serve openly.

Cook reaffirmed Carter's position to lift the ban. "[Secretary Carter] has indicated that he expects to make a final decision soon," he added.

Another spokesman acknowledged "this process has taken some time."

"There are those that would like to see a policy decision immediately," Eric Pahon, a Pentagon spokesman said in a statement.

Pahon reiterated the importance for the Pentagon to consider the medical, privacy and service-unique issues so transgender troops can serve openly.

According to a Rand Corp. report, fewer than 2,500 of the military's 1.2 million active duty troops are transgender, and only 65 would seek treatment.

Brad Carson, the Pentagon's former acting undersecretary for personnel, is an advocate for the change. "The real accolades for this historic moment go to those brave transgender service members who raised their hands and demanded that their service and identity be recognized," he said.

[vector7]

Navy to name ship after 'gay' child molester

Exclusive: Matt Barber on 'slap in the face' of those who served, fought, died for America

Published: 07/29/2016 at 6:43 PM
Matt Barber | Email | Archive
Attention on the poop deck. It seems our “first gay president” intends to “milk,” with pride, his fetish for all things “LGBT” in the closing months (mercifully) of his catastrophic presidency. USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute) reports that the Obama Navy presumes to ram, without consent, the most reprehensible aspects of the extremist homosexual political agenda down the throats of a divided American public.

“The Navy is set to name a ship after the gay rights icon and San Francisco politician Harvey Milk, according to a congressional notification obtained by USNI News.

“The July 14, 2016 notification, signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, indicated he intended to name a planned Military Sealift Command fleet oiler USNS Harvey Milk (T-AO-206).”

An “oiler.” You can’t make this stuff up.

It remains unclear whether the USNS Harvey Milk will come equipped with sonar/radar or Grindr, be modeled after a Disney “cruise” liner and adorned with the American flag, or the rainbow colors of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Why Disney?

What would you call a 33-year-old man who both had, and axiomatically acted upon, a deviant sexual appetite for underage, drug-addicted, runaway boys?

No, not Jerry Sandusky, but good guess.

What would you call a man of whom, as regards sexual preference, his own close friend and biographer confessed, “Harvey always had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems”?

In a 2013 interview with OneNewsNow.com, I called this man “demonstrably, categorically an evil man based on his [statutory] rape of teenage boys.”

But you can call him Harvey Milk.

Harvey Milk’s only claim to fame is that he was the first openly homosexual candidate to be elected to public office (San Francisco city commissioner). His chief cause was to do away with the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. In 1978 Milk was murdered over a non-related political dispute by fellow Democrat Dan White.

And a “progressive” martyr was born.

Merriam Webster defines “pederast” as “one who practices anal intercourse especially with a boy.” It defines “statutory rape” as “the crime of having sex with someone who is younger than an age that is specified by law.”

Harvey Milk was both a pederast and, by extension, a statutory rapist. One of Milk’s victims was a 16-year-old runaway from Maryland named Jack Galen McKinley. Motivated by an apparent quid pro quo of prurience, Milk plucked McKinley from the streets.

Randy Shilts was a San Francisco Chronicle reporter and close friend to Harvey Milk. Though Shilts died of AIDS in 1994, he remains, even today, one of the most beloved journalists in the “LGBT” community.

Shilts was also Harvey Milk’s biographer. In his glowing book “The Mayor of Castro Street,” he wrote of Milk’s “relationship” with the McKinley boy: “… Sixteen-year-old McKinley was looking for some kind of father figure. … At 33, Milk was launching a new life, though he could hardly have imagined the unlikely direction toward which his new lover would pull him.”

In a sane world, of course, the only direction his “new lover” should have pulled him was toward San Quentin. But, alas, today’s America is anything but sane.

Whereas McKinley, a disturbed runaway boy, desperately sought a “father figure” to provide empathy, compassion, wisdom and direction, he instead found Harvey Milk: a promiscuous sexual predator who found, in McKinley, an opportunity to satisfy a perverse lust for underage flesh.

Years later, McKinley committed suicide.

Another teen who crossed paths with Harvey Milk was Christian convert and former homosexual Gerard Dols. In a 2008 radio interview with Concerned Women for America, Dols shared of how – as a physically disabled teen – the “very nice” Harvey Milk had encouraged him in 1977 to run away from his Minnesota home and come to San Francisco.

According to Dols, Milk told him, “Don’t tell your parents,” and later sent him a letter with instructions. Thankfully, the letter was intercepted by Dols’ parents, who then filed a complaint with the Minnesota attorney general’s office.

The incident was swept under the rug.

Milk was also reputed to offer room and board in his San Francisco flat to young sailors in exchange for sodomy. His history of child sexual abuse was (and is) no secret to Obama or the homosexual community.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council penned a detailed expose on Milk in 2009. “He continued to engage in homosexual conduct while serving in the U. S. Navy,” wrote Sprigg. “Shilts reports that Milk, who had his own apartment off base, would pick up hitchhiking sailors by offering them a bed to sleep in. ‘The guests often would not know that Milk’s apartment had only one bed until they walked in the door.’

“Milk later exploited his time in the Navy during his political career – by lying about it, claiming falsely that he had received a dishonorable discharge for his homosexuality. Milk ‘knew the story would make good copy,’ according to Shilts. ‘Maybe people will read it, feel sorry for me and then vote for me,’ Milk told one campaign manager.

“The information Shilts provides about Milk’s sexual partners is revealing about the nature of male homosexual life in America,” concluded Sprigg. “Milk’s first long-term lover, Joe, had his ‘introduction to gay life’ when he performed sex acts upon men in a movie theatre for money – at age 9. Milk’s next lover, Craig, had been arrested after having sex with a 40-year-old man – when Craig was 14.

He met Milk when he was 17. ‘[I]t would be to such boyish-looking men in their late teens and early 20s that Milk would be attracted for the rest of his life,’ Shilts reports. Another lover, Jack, moved in with Milk when he was 16 and Milk was 33. Jack attempted suicide several times, and once when he physically attacked Milk, ‘Harvey literally tied him up and threw him in a closet,'” reports Shilts.

So what does a man like Harvey Milk get for his crimes and predatory predilections? While most sexual predators get time in prison and a dishonorable mention on the registry of sex offenders, Harvey Milk got his own California state holiday (“Harvey Milk Day”), official U.S. postage stamp, a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom and, now, is honored with a U.S. Naval ship in his own name.

God bless America?

This shameful “honor” bestowed upon a child molester is a slap in the face of every man and woman who ever served, fought or died for this great nation in decline. If you’re as disgusted by it as I am, please contact your congressional representative and demand they torpedo this predatory ship of fools.

[vector7]

Transgenders in Uniform – The US Military’s Latest Lunacy

Posted on July 21, 2016 by Ray Starmann





Welcome to 2016 when male soldiers train in pregnancy simulators, tactical lactation stations dot the battlefield, women are fraudulently passed through Ranger School and US Navy sailors willingly surrender their boats and equipment to Iranian thugs without so much as firing a flare.

It’s the era of breast milk in the field and Liberace joins Delta Force…

A perfect storm, a Category Five hurricane of doom and destruction is sweeping over the US military with the deadly accuracy of the Angel of Death on Passover. We have a President who is intent on destroying the military through insane social engineering. We have willing lackeys in the Pentagon from Ash Carter to Ray Mabus to the whole rotting, spineless lot of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who are all too eager to rubberstamp the lunacy. We have an American populace so separated from the military because they never served, so ignorant of the military, so clueless about combat operations, that they really believe Jill, the cute blond Tri Delt can be a Navy SEAL and Captain Bill should be able to swap spit with Captain Bob in the Bravo Company orderly room.

I know. I’m being so insensitive. So politically incorrect…

Guess what? Our enemies aren’t politically correct. Our enemies aren’t sensitive. Our enemies aren’t compassionate. Our enemies burn people alive, behead innocent women and children and drown dissidents. They also spend their time devising ways to destroy us. The Pentagon now spends its time trying to be diverse and sensitive to the point of irrationality and seemingly spends no time training for war these days.

We’re making it easy for the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Iranians and ISIS. We’re doing all the work. The US military is on a 24/7 Charge of the Light Brigade into oblivion.
The latest absurdity and another threat to military order and discipline is the recent authorization by all around sycophant and general idiot, Ash Carter to allow transgenders, aka the mentally ill, to serve in the military.

I know, I’m being insensitive again. Who am I to stop Jack, who thinks he’s Jenny, from serving. He/she/it should be afforded gender reassignment surgery courtesy of Uncle Sam, who is actually Aunt Samantha on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

The loony meter is in the red right now. The Pentagon is wasting tax payer dollars and training for war time to write manuals and set up command centers for transgenders.

Hey, Sarge, you got a copy of FM-001, Transgender Operations?
Yeah, it’s right under the 5^th Special Forces Group commander’s breast pump. Here you go…
Gee, thanks sarge… Hey, sarge…
What?
I think I’m a woman and I’m pansexual…
Fill out a DA-5670… I’ll put it in channels. We better head to PT. Suit up in your red high heels. We have to show empathy towards female rape victims this week.

Don’t worry about spare parts for Marine aircraft, or the fact that no one in the US Army Armor Community knows how to run a combined arms range or qualify on a tank. We wouldn’t want to focus on military stuff when the military itself can become Obama’s Personal Freak Show.

On October 1, 2016, the DoD issued DOD INSTRUCTION 1300.28 IN-SERVICE TRANSITION FOR TRANSGENDER SERVICE MEMBERS.

The 15 page directive was cleared for public distribution and is available online at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives.

Here are some highlights from what can only be described as 15 pages of unadulterated insanity:
DoD and the Military Departments will institute policies to provide Service members a process by which, while serving, they may transition gender.
Service members with a diagnosis from a military medical provider indicating that gender transition is medically necessary, will be provided medical care and treatment for the diagnosed medical condition.

Why in God’s name would gender transition be a medical necessity? Is someone going to drop dead because they can’t get female hormone injections to grow boobs? Is it a matter of life or death if Private Jane Smith doesn’t get an artificial penis in the next 90 days?

Recommendations of a military medical provider will address the severity of the Service member’s medical condition and the urgency of any proposed medical treatment.
The only thing that is severe is the level of mental illness the soldier, sailor, airman or Marine is suffering for wanting to change genders.

Commanders will assess expected impacts on mission and readiness after consideration of the advice of military medical providers and will address such impacts in accordance with this issuance.
Of course it’s going to affect readiness. Men running around a military base in dresses usually puts a damper on military operations. The whole subject is a walking, talking gigantic distraction from military readiness. Then again, the Obama White House and the Ash Carter Pentagon is a distraction from military readiness.

SECRETARIES OF THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS AND COMMANDANT, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD (USCG). The Secretaries of the Military Departments and the Commandant, USCG:

1. Establish a Service Central Coordination Cell (SCCC) to provide multi-disciplinary (e.g., medical, legal, military personnel management) expert advice and assistance to commanders with regard to service by transgender Service members and gender transition in the military and to assist commanders in the execution of DoD, Military Department, and Service policies and procedures.

More wasted time and tax payer money. Apparently, the SCCC is now the military’s command center for transgender nonsense. The military now has a whole command focusing on this garbage.
Gender transition while serving in the military presents unique challenges associated with addressing the needs of the Service member in a manner consistent with military mission and readiness.

1. Living in Preferred Gender. Real Life Experience (RLE) is the phase in the gender transition process during which the individual commences living socially in the gender role consistent with their preferred gender. Although in civilian life this phase is generally categorized by living and working full-time in the preferred gender, consistent application of military standards will normally require that RLE occur in an off-duty status and away from the Service member’s place of duty, prior to the change of a gender marker in DEERS.

So, basically Sergeant Dan will be a man by day in the Marines and off duty hang out as a chick at the local bar and grill. Okay…How is he going to deploy if needed, as a man or woman or as a hybrid?

1. Military Readiness. Unique to military service, the commander is responsible and accountable for the overall readiness of his or her command. The commander is also responsible for the collective morale and welfare and good order and discipline of the unit, the command climate, and for ensuring that all members of the command are treated with dignity and respect.

What readiness? What morale? What good order and discipline?
The Pentagon’s authorization to allow transgenders to serve in uniform is the height of political correctness, leftist irrationality and complete stupidity. Those suffering from gender dysphoria are mentally ill. Allowing transgenders is just another social engineering project that is contributing to the demise of the US military and its eventual destruction on a future field of battle.

http://usdefensewatch.com/2016/07/tr...latest-lunacy/

[vector7]

Pentagon issues handbook on sex change in the ranks

By Bill Gertz - - Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Political correctness remains a central characteristic of the Obama administration’s policies. Take the Pentagon’s new anti-discrimination policy on what a newly-published handbook calls “gender dysphoria,” or “the distress that some transgender individuals experience due to a mismatch between their gender and their sex assigned at birth.”

Under the new policies, military commanders are now responsible for approving or denying sex changes for troops who self-identify as the opposite sex, according to the 72-page handbook, “Transgender Service in the U.S. Military: An Implementation Handbook,” published Sept. 30.

“The commander, informed by the recommendations of the [military medical provider], the [service central coordination cells], and others, as appropriate, will respond to the request to transition gender while ensuring readiness by minimizing impacts to the mission (including deployment, operations, training, exercise schedules, and critical skills availability), as well as to the morale and welfare and good order and discipline of the command,” the handbook states.

The handbook is the result of a Pentagon policy adopted in July that permits troops who self-identify as the opposite sex while serving openly in the ranks. In the past, such cross-dressers were limited by the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of hiding sexual orientation.

The new policy is controversial. Scientists say sex is determined by chromosomes at birth and cannot be altered by hormones or surgery, regardless of whether a person self-identifies as the opposite sex. Critics say the administration is seeking to politicize the armed forces by imposing new sex policies as part of liberal social engineering efforts within the traditionally conservative military.

The report contains “tips for commanders” from the Australian air force diversity handbook that include protecting the privacy of transgender service members and consulting chaplains, behavioral health personnel and medical providers in dealing with transgender people. Also, commanders are to “ensure bullying, harassment, hazing or any other unacceptable behavior is not tolerated.”

In response to concerns about showering, the use of toilets and other shared space, commanders “may employ reasonable accommodations, such as installing shower curtains and placing towel and clothing hooks inside individual shower stalls, to respect the privacy interests of service members,” the handbook states.

Military leaders also are urged to avoid upsetting transgender troops.

“In cases where accommodations are not practicable, you may authorize alternative measures to respect personal privacy, such as adjustments to timing of the use of shower or changing facilities,” the handbook says. “This should be done with the intent of avoiding any stigmatizing impact to any service member.”

Military members are told in the handbook not make assumptions about sexual orientation and to “speak up” when service members “are expressing opinions that may alienate others.”

Proper use of pronouns like “he” or “she,” “him” or “her,” in conversations is now required. “You should be sensitive to the use of pronouns when addressing others,” the handbook says. “This will vary by individual and unit. If there is ever any question about pronoun usage, do not hesitate to ask the service member how they wish to be addressed.”

Social transition for transgender people in the military can also involve the unusual practice of identifying a service member by male or female at different times of the day.

“Social transition, in the military context, will generally encompass living in the preferred gender after duty hours,” the handbook stated. “You may encounter a situation where you know a service member by one name during duty hours and another after duty hours; this all depends on the individual’s transition.”

Medical treatment can include behavioral health care, the use of hormones that may change physical appearance, and surgery.

Retired Army officer Robert Maginnis, a critic of the new policy, said the handbook undermines the readiness of the military and should anger Americans over the misuse of scarce military resources on politically correct policies. Military medicine under President Obama is now about meeting individual desires, not contributing to combat readiness, he said.

“This policy forces the military to deflect valuable resources better spent on improving the readiness of the force to focus on the mental and emotional well-being of anyone who wishes to serve,” Mr. Maginnis said. “This is a very dangerous path to pursue for the armed forces and America.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...e-in-the-rank/

[Ryan Ruck]

[vector7]

Firestorm Coming: Draft Of Trump Executive Order May Deny Services To Gays, Transgendered People

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...nsgender-peopl

In what may be the biggest firestorm set off by a Trump executive order to date, surpassing even the widespread angry response to the Trump immigration order, a draft of an executive order circulating in the Trump administration would dramatically expand the legal protections for individuals, organizations and employers on the grounds of their religious beliefs, and as the WSJ reports, would potentially allow the denial of services to gay and transgender people, and contraception coverage for employees.

The draft is titled “Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom.” While it hasn't been signed and may never make it to President Donald Trump’s desk, advocacy groups see the draft order as a broad statement of intent from a president who courted conservative Christian voters during the campaign by promising to expand the role of religion in public life. As the WSJ adds, the draft order lays out many of the proposals that conservative Christians have been requesting for years, including legal protections for organizations that claim religious objections to providing a wide range of services. It also directs federal agencies to “avoid potential violations of Religious Freedom”, instructing officials not to “coerce” religious entities or individuals into “participating in activities that violate their conscience.”

If this order or a similar one were signed, it would immediately plunge Mr. Trump into a debate over religious freedom, gay rights and reproductive rights, which has churned through states and courts for years—most recently with the disputes over transgender people’s use of bathrooms. Some religious groups have argued that they should not have to violate their beliefs in business, education or as civil servants. Corporations and sports leagues have largely sided with civil-rights groups and threatened to cancel events over legislation viewed as discriminatory.

Gay and transgender rights groups have already pounced on the draft order, calling it a “license to discriminate” that would effectively gut many existing protections for LGBT people by allowing those who claimed religious objections to ignore them. “If the White House did even a fraction of the things that are in this draft executive order, that would be an unprecedented rollback of LGBT equality and rights,” said David Stacy, director of government affairs for the Human Rights Campaign. “This would provide a blanket exemption for religious organizations not to have to follow any statute that they say violates their religious beliefs.”

Perhaps hinting at the order, while speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday morning, Trump reiterated his commitment to expanding the role of faith in the public square, vowing to repeal a law known as the Johnson Amendment that bars churches from engaging in political activity. Those deemed in violation risk losing their tax-exempt status. “I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution,” Mr. Trump said.

The WSJ adds that it wasn’t immediately clear on Thursday exactly what the effects of the order would be if it were enacted as written. But all sides agreed its implications would be far-reaching, affecting the health-care industry, employment regulation and policy about who could receive government grants and contracts.

Many of these subjects are currently being litigated, like whether Catholic hospitals are required to provide hormone therapy or hysterectomies to transgender people. Conservative groups argued that the order simply makes explicit protections for religious expression that are already enshrined in law and in the constitution, following an administration that they considered hostile to religion. “Many Americans voted for Donald Trump based on concerns about what the other candidate might do with regard to religious liberty,” said Greg Baylor, a lawyer with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal organization. The draft order, he said, “reflects a very different attitude by the new administration toward respecting the conscience of religious organizations.”

As the WSJ points out, "the draft order reveals a political tension for Mr. Trump, who has tried to position himself as both a champion of religious freedom and a friend to gays and lesbians—two political constituencies who have frequently squared off in court in recent years."

On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced that a 2014 Obama administration executive order, which established new workplace protections for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, would remain in place—prompting complaints from some Catholic and Protestant leaders. But Mr. Trump hardly won any plaudits from LGBT groups, which continued to castigate him through the week, assailing his executive orders on immigration and expressing doubts about his commitment to their causes. They said the draft order on Thursday better reflected the president’s priorities.

“Freedom of religion doesn’t mean private businesses and government officials providing public services have the right to turn people away because of who they are,” said Harper Jean Tobin, director of policy for the National Center for Transgender Equality. “That would really be out of step with some core values.”

Conservatives, naturally, saw things in a different light: “This is conceptually in keeping with what I anticipate from this administration,” Tony Perkins, founder of the Family Research Council, a conservative advocacy group, said of the draft order. “We’ve seen policies in the last eight years that have sought to marginalize and intimidate people of orthodox Christian faith. This simply says the government can’t bully you. The IRS can’t be used to silence you.”

In short: Trump continues to do what he vowed to do during his campaign and it is infuriating his opponents, although should this order pass, it would have the most profound social response yet from liberals around the nation. For now, the executive order remains in the trial balloon stage, but should enough grassroots support for it emerge, it is possible that Trump will ultimately sign it, in the process undoing a big part of Obama's progressive agenda over the past 8 years, unleashing a social firestorm of angry protests.

[Malsua]

After his open support for Gays and such and supporting the Obama EO as well as his statement during his nomination, the above "Firestorm" strikes me as a false flag by the left.

[Ryan Ruck]

More good stuff but would have preferred it simply be dismissed outright like the garbage it is.

Pentagon Halts Obama’s Transgender Endorsement Plan

June 30, 2017

The Secretary of Defense has frozen a decision by former President Barack Obama to recruit transgender soldiers this year, and a new poll shows the planned recruitment freeze is very popular.

Two of every three swing voters say the Pentagon should postpone plans to accept “transgender” people who are trying to live as members of the opposite sex, according to the new poll by Rasmussen Reports.

Defense Secretary James Mattis explained his July 30 decision to delay Obama’s plan for six months, just before it was to begin operating:

Since becoming the Secretary of Defense, I have emphasized that the Department of Defense must measure each policy decision against one critical standard: will the decision affect the readiness and lethality of the force? Put another way, how will the decision affect the ability of America’s military to defend the nation? It is against this standard that I provide the following guidance on the way forward in accessing transgender individuals into the military Services.

The six-month delay will encourage and help opponents lobby against Obama’s pro-transgender policy.

Throughout 2016, Obama used his power as president to push schools and other institutions to support the claim by transgender activists that people have a hidden “gender identity” which is independent of their sex and biology. These advocates also say that a person’s sex is determined by their “gender identity,” not their male-or-female body. In turn, the advocates demand that the federal government force Americans to accept the sex-switching “gender identity” claims made by each person, regardless of scientific data about genetics, biology and the variety of normal behavior and appearances shown by normal women and men.

Transgender activists were furious about Mattis’ last-minute decision to block Obama’s directive, which would have resulted in a de-facto endorsement of the transgender ideology by the most respected government institution in the nation.

“For the past year, transgender troops have been serving openly … stonewalling on full inclusion will, just like ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ compromise military readiness,” said a statement from the pro-transgender Palm Center in California.

Obama’s proposal is widely opposed, in part, because it would require soldiers to share bathrooms and shower facilities with people of the opposite sex, and would require the U.S. military pay for the expensive procedures — such as hormones and perhaps surgery — used by people trying to live as members of the opposite sex.

The military’s most famous transgender recruit, now named Chelsea Manning, was recently freed from military jail on Obama’s orders. When serving in Iraq, Manning illegally copied a huge haul of military records and videos and released them to the world.

The Rasmussen poll was published just before the Pentagon announcement. The June 26 to June 27 survey of 1,000 likely voters showed 48 percent of voters supporting a delay, only 32 percent oppose a delay and an unusually larger proportion — 21 percent — avoided comment, saying they were “not sure.” Read the poll here.

The cross-tabs, however, showed that GOP supporters split 60 percent for a delay and 23 percent opposition to a delay. Democrats split 33 percent for a delay and 44 percent opposition to a delay.

Importantly, 52 percent of the swing-voting independents back a delay, while only 25 percent oppose a delay — and 23 percent declined to comment. That is a two-to-one preference among swing-voters for delay, and most of the no-comment voters likely favor a delay also.

Among self-described conservatives, 64 percent want a delay, while only 22 percent oppose a delay. Self-described “moderates” split 42 percent for a delay, 35 percent opposed a delay.

The questions about a “delay” – instead of outright opposition — offered voters some opportunity to show opposition to the media-favored transgender agenda while protecting themselves from claims of bigotry.

That worry was clearly visible in a prior Rasmussen question, which asked likely voters whether the decision to allow transgender people into the military is good or bad for the military.

Twenty-three percent said transgenders are good for the military — including just 32 percent of Democrats. Thirty-one percent said transgenders are bad for the military — but only 16 percent of liberals.

Significantly, the largest group — 38 percent — of voters waffled by saying transgenders would have no impact. That 38 percent number likely hides some opposition to recruiting transgender for the military because it is actually larger than the 32 percent who oppose a delay.

The question of whether the military should accept “transgender” people was unimaginable a few years ago. However, it is now an issue because the Democratic Party’s progressive leadership — and much of the elite media — has embraced the transgender ideology.

The ideology claims that people have a hidden “gender identity” which is independent of their sex and biology, and which justifies their claim to be members of the opposite sex. The ideology also demands that the federal government force Americans to accept the “gender identity” sex-switching claims made by each person, regardless of scientific data about genetics, biology and the variety of normal behavior and appearances shown by normal women and men.

The progressive push to bend Americans’ attitudes and their civic society around the idea of “gender” has already attacked and cracked popular social rules for how Americans handle the many charming differences between complementary men and women — the rules governing single-sex bathrooms and shelters for battered women, sports leagues for girls, hiking groups for boys, K-12 curricula and university speech codes, religious freedoms, free speech, the social status of women, parents’ rights in childrearing, practices to help teenagers, women’s expectations of beauty, culture and civic society, scientific research, prison safety, civic ceremonies, school rules, men’s sense of masculinity, law enforcement, and children’s sexual privacy.

To read more about the “transgender” ideology, click here.