10
10
0
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
I understand the sentiment but this issue goes far beyond who one is willing to accept help from when bleeding to death. I wouldn't care if the person saving me was a paraplegic either, but they aren't allowed to serve either. The issue with this, or any ban, is whether or not the force is strengthened or weakened by their serving. I'm not arguing either in this case but if the president and his advisors think transgendered people would weaken the force then it's the right call (or at least done with the right intention). And as I've said before, if their reasoning was because they hate transgendered people (or something similar) then they are wrong.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
MSgt Steve Sweeney - You could very well be right and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if you are. There's just no way for me to know that at this point so I refrain from passing judgment on the intention behind this. That's not to say I'm never skeptical about decisions made by our leaders.
(1)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
MSgt Steve Sweeney - The fact that they did not wait for the study to be completed makes your doubt very reasonable
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
PO3 Bob McCord - I agree. The media certainly seems to be more concerned with ratings and ratings come with drama. So why not stir the pot and keep the drama high?
(0)
(0)
Read This Next