Last week Donald Trump announced a ban on transgender people serving in the USA military in "any capacity", with the Republican president stating that they would be a "burden" and a "disruption" to the service.
"Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and can not be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail", he wrote.
Number crunchers were quick to calculate that the now serving transgender personnel cost the military health services between $2.4 million and $8.4 million (U.S.) a year.
The military's own studies have concluded that trans service is not a burden.
The media has widely covered the backlash against Trump's shock decision, particularly from within the trans community, with the likes of reality TV star Caitlyn Jenner strongly criticizing him. "There is no guidance yet on what this ban means for folks who are active duty or who are veterans receiving care from the [Veterans Affairs]".
The American Civil Liberties Union said its chances of getting a court to block Trump's proposed ban might depend on the details of the plan.
The CNN host interjected, saying Trump didn't tell the Pentagon before announcing the new policy and questioning how that was a great rollout of a new policy. As of the publishing of this article, they have yet to receive any legal action from Trump for moving forward. In a Twitter post, Reuters foreign policy correspondent Idrees Ali revealed that U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Joseph Dunford wrote a letter that said the military's policy on transgenderism will remain the same for the meantime.
On July 26, U.S. President Donald Trump sent out a series of tweets to the effect that the American military will no longer "allow or accept" transgender personnel in its ranks.
A former Army secretary says he's angry and shocked that President Donald Trump would - in his words - "turn his back on thousands of transgender Americans serving today".
"VA's policy has not changed".
Similarly, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have continued to speak out since President Trump announced this sweeping ban. This has been studied extensively, and the consensus is clear: There are no cost or military readiness drawbacks associated with allowing trans people to fight for their country.
Mattis, who was on vacation at the time of Trump's decision, only had one day's worth of notice before Trump tweeted his announcement of the policy, the paper. Unless a large number of transgenders were going to enlist immediately, I really don't see how this is even relevant to the Left.
"I think it's being twisted and spun to make it seem like it would be more than it is". The mission and sole goal of America's military is to defend the homeland and keep citizens from harm.
There are leading studies from the medical establishment, for example, that state that the transgender community has a 40 percent suicide attempt rate.
"F$3 olks at this intersection are incredibly resilient in the face of adversity", Cor continued. Although there may also be a variable of national urgency in the calculus: Given all the pressure on the USA armed forces across the globe, Democrats (and some Republicans) may reason that if someone wants to serve, we shouldn't be hasty in telling them they can't. "Their dedication to service is unmatched". It's all hypocrisy and they are not for tolerance anymore, they are against free speech, ' she said.