Trump's new transgender military ban includes not allowing people who will be needing transgender surgery to join. This makes perfect sense as we need soldiers who quite frankly won’t cost the taxpayers too much money. Having to pay for surgeries, counseling, medications, time off from serving, etc., isn't fair to taxpayers or fellow soldiers of a transgender because they must pick up the slack when the person is out for medical reasons. The military wants young people because they don't typically have medical problems so they're a good value to taxpayers...transgenders don't fit this mold, and this is what General Maddox was saying.
If transgenders made superior soldiers, then it might be worth the additional costs, but this hasn't been proven. Keep in mind I have nothing against trans people and I greatly appreciate their willingness to serve, it just boils down to operational readiness and costs.
All jobs have requirements and sometimes we just aren't cut out for them, but it doesn't mean it's a human rights' violation. If someone can't lift 60 pounds and the job requires it then it should be accepted not questioned. If a woman gets the job and can’t lift 60 pounds (say at a job at Home Depot), then she’s going to get other people to do her work for her when it comes to the lifting part of the job. Is this fair to the other employees? How could she possibly be as effective as other workers when she can’t fulfill the requirements in her job description?
This topic is no doubt controversial, but I leave it in the hands of the military experts who have evaluated the pros and cons to transgenders serving in our military and they have now voiced their opinions and they don’t think transgenders would improve the quality of our military. Who am I to go against the very people who understand the impact?
If transgenders made superior soldiers, then it might be worth the additional costs, but this hasn't been proven. Keep in mind I have nothing against trans people and I greatly appreciate their willingness to serve, it just boils down to operational readiness and costs.
All jobs have requirements and sometimes we just aren't cut out for them, but it doesn't mean it's a human rights' violation. If someone can't lift 60 pounds and the job requires it then it should be accepted not questioned. If a woman gets the job and can’t lift 60 pounds (say at a job at Home Depot), then she’s going to get other people to do her work for her when it comes to the lifting part of the job. Is this fair to the other employees? How could she possibly be as effective as other workers when she can’t fulfill the requirements in her job description?
This topic is no doubt controversial, but I leave it in the hands of the military experts who have evaluated the pros and cons to transgenders serving in our military and they have now voiced their opinions and they don’t think transgenders would improve the quality of our military. Who am I to go against the very people who understand the impact?
RSS Feed