Transgenderism in the Military

As a retired member of the military, I can attest to the fact the the sign describing denying transgenderism in the military as “bigotry” is flat out wrong.  It’s about safety of the individual and the unit, readiness, and successful accomplishment of the mission.
The military is not subject to many of the “right of employment” laws that exist in the U.S. Commanders have wide latitude, with few restrictions, on setting standards for acceptance into and continued service with the U.S. Armed Forces. Pretty much any aspect about a human being that a commander believes will cause a reduction in the unit’s readiness is subject to being addressed, and if the issue cannot be resolved, the individual is subject to being reassigned. If the problem is severe enough, the individual is, within the limits imposed by the UCMJ, subject to discharge.
The crux of this issue is NOT whether or not transgenders can perform the same functions as well as others. Of course they can.
The issue IS whether or not including transgenders, with their mildly expensive HRT and seriously expensive SRS medical issues, their psychological and emotional issues, and the degree to which the enemy may exploit it, along with issues of unit safety and readiness, along with overall mission accomplishment, is preferable to hiring someone of comparable qualifications who has no such baggage.
Courts throughout our land, up to and including the U.S. Supreme Court, have routinely and consistently upheld the military’s right to reject anyone for any medical, psychological, or physical condition the military itself deems contrary to mission readiness. Most recently, the courts have upheld both basic and special physical fitness standards (SEALs, Rangers) which must be passed and maintained before someone, regardless of sex, is allow in. People with nearly any psychological or emotional issue are routinely denied entry into military service, not only because of what military service requires of them, but also because of what military service could DO TO them, as well as what the risk of substandard performance could risk to life, limb, and welfare of others in the military.
The list of disqualifying conditions is long, and for good reason:  Such conditions run counter to the safety and effectiveness of the individual, the unit, and the successful accomplishment of the mission as a whole.

LGBTQ – Should We ‘Live and Let Live’ or Should We Stand Firm?

A friend of mine stated this morning on Facebook, “As for the LGBTQ crowd, I have a ‘Live and Let Live’ policy.  We all should follow that.”
I’m sorry, my friend, but I follow God of the Bible, and Jesus Christ, who showed us the way. In particular, with the adulteress at the well, he loved her (saved her from being stoned to death, no less!), but he did not allow her to persist in her sin: “Go, and sin no more.” Our Bible: “Male and female he made them,” yet the LGBTQ crowd wants us to believe there are a dozen or more genders? Phooey. I do not accept that because God’s word says that’s false.  It also says homosexuality is a sin, an “abomination before the Lord” in Romans chapter 1, clear as day.  Unless, apparently, you’re blinded by sin.
I accept the Bible.
Along with the Bible, I also accept the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
In highlighting and denouncing the sins of this small segment of society who demands that We the People pay for their elective medical care, I am freely exercising my religion, one which God’s word clearly indicates what we all are to do:
“In the first four chapters of 1 Corinthians, Paul introduces a shameful problem in the church. The Corinthians proudly attach themselves to certain leaders, whose teaching seems to disclose a “wisdom” not known or taught by other teachers, and certainly not by Paul or his fellow-apostles. These cliques and factions are undermining the unity of the church and are a denial of the gospel of Jesus Christ. In chapters 5 and 6, Paul calls attention to two other problems plaguing the church: immorality and lawsuits.
“Chapter 5 is not actually about the immorality of one church member, as much as it is about the pride and passivity of the entire church in response to this sinner. It is not until the end of chapter 6 (verses 12-20) that Paul exposes the evil of immorality.”
“Live and let live” is a secular — and sinful — approach to the problem, which is the fact that that the LGBTQ group not only wants everyone to adopt the “live and let live” mentality towards them, but they want us to believe that it’s somehow good.
It is not good. Adultery is not good. LGBTQ is not good. Abortion is not good. Murder is not good. They are ALL SIN.  Not only does the Bible state, “hate that which is evil; cling to that which is good,” but I refuse to allow my tax dollars to pay for evil i.e. their indulgence in sin.
“Live and let live?” Phooey! That’s how Rome fell. I worked too hard supporting and defending my Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic to allow America to fall to either class of enemies, especially while being being aided and abetted by foolish Americans who are suckered into a “live and let live” attitude, much less an, “Oh, let’s help them!” attitude.
True, this is America, and people are free to sin against themselves and god it they want to, even with other consenting adults. If they want to engage in evil, then they can damned well create pools of funds out of their own pockets to pay for their sin, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to allow them to further their evil with my tax dollars or parade their sin around our nation’s public schools as “good” when God Himself says “sin is evil.”
That’s not only foolishness, but it’s how countries fall, how they are rotted from within.
Not on my watch.