It Ain't No Ban (Transgender Matters)

DGS49

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
18,327
Reaction score
18,271
Points
2,415
Location
Pittsburgh

Among many other things, Our Beloved President has issued an EO basically saying that if you are a biological male in our Armed Forces you must serve as a biological man, and if you are a biological woman...you get the idea.

What this means is that if doing so is something you don't care to do, then GTFO. It is not a "ban," it is a guideline. The Left likes to call these things "bans" because then it sounds evil, but this ain't no ban. Fortunately, the documentation accompanying the EO explained the reasoning for the policy.
 

Among many other things, Our Beloved President has issued an EO basically saying that if you are a biological male in our Armed Forces you must serve as a biological man, and if you are a biological woman...you get the idea.

What this means is that if doing so is something you don't care to do, then GTFO. It is not a "ban," it is a guideline. The Left likes to call these things "bans" because then it sounds evil, but this ain't no ban. Fortunately, the documentation accompanying the EO explained the reasoning for the policy.
If you put other in your application for a gun, you are instantly disqualified for owning a gun. Why wouldnt you do the same with mentally ill military members who can get their hands are fully automatic weapons and cannons?
 
1738097840141.webp
 
And if you are intersexed?
What does that mean? It's a made up diagnosis or a mental disorder isn't it? I doubt if genuine hermaphrodites could pass the physical in the rare case that they would volunteer.
 
I was almost refused at enlistment because my feet were almost too flat.

Yet Democrats think people who need surgeries with long recovery times and constant medical care belong in the military.

Democrats can't be trusted with...well, anything, but especially not national security. They fuck up everything they touch.
 
Back
Top Bottom