The Political Discussion Thread

[Annoyed]

You're not getting it.

One of the requirements to enlist in the military is to be "in good health".

As I understand it, the trans folks insist that they are not healthy, they claim that they were born into wrong gender body, and that is a flaw that needs to be corrected.

So, by their own definition, they are not eligible to enlist, are they? Either they are healthy, eligible to enlist, and in no need of conversion or they aren't. You can't have it both ways.

So, the problem should never arise, should it?

A few weeks back, in another discussion, you completely ignored the undeniable FACT that we cannot at this point in our technical development actually change XX into XY or the other way around.

Is this just another inconvenient fact that you are just going to ignore because it doesn't jive with the way you want things to be?

[aretood2]

You're not getting it.

One of the requirements to enlist in the military is to be "in good health".

As I understand it, the trans folks insist that they are not healthy, they claim that they were born into wrong gender body, and that is a flaw that needs to be corrected.

So, by their own definition, they are not eligible to enlist, are they? Either they are healthy, eligible to enlist, and in no need of conversion or they aren't. You can't have it both ways.

So, the problem should never arise, should it?

A few weeks back, in another discussion, you completely ignored the undeniable FACT that we cannot at this point in our technical development actually change XX into XY or the other way around.

Is this just another inconvenient fact that you are just going to ignore because it doesn't jive with the way you want things to be?

Do transgender people consider themselves to be in bad health if they have not yet transitioned? The problem is that people with diabetes consider themselves to be happy yet they are largely barred from serving. You're argument is a bit odd in that you are depending on self diagnosis of health here. If anything, this line of reasoning would be better used to argue that paying for conversion has nothing to do with their health but it seems like you are only using it to argue that they should be declined for enrollment in the same way people with diabetes are.

So I have to ask, your issues with paying for transitions, are they more to do with keeping transgender people from being in the military or about needless expenses? Because you seem to be focusing on the former and not the latter.

[jelgate]

I have a headache. I'm in bad health to go to work. Tood hurt my feeling by calling me a Canadian. That too makes me in bad health

[aretood2]

I have a headache. I'm in bad health to go to work. Tood hurt my feeling by calling me a Canadian. That too makes me in bad health

*Says sorry in Canadian*

[Gatefan1976]

Do transgender people consider themselves to be in bad health if they have not yet transitioned? The problem is that people with diabetes consider themselves to be happy yet they are largely barred from serving. You're argument is a bit odd in that you are depending on self diagnosis of health here. If anything, this line of reasoning would be better used to argue that paying for conversion has nothing to do with their health but it seems like you are only using it to argue that they should be declined for enrollment in the same way people with diabetes are.

So I have to ask, your issues with paying for transitions, are they more to do with keeping transgender people from being in the military or about needless expenses? Because you seem to be focusing on the former and not the latter.

I'll go you a step further.
Should religious people be allowed to serve in the military?
They are suffering the mental delusion that there are sky fairies that have an interest in their life, which is a clear case of a pre-existing mental condition.

[Falcon Horus]

If mental health is a reason to not work, then what the hell am I doing getting up in the morning and go to work -- I have Attention Deficit Disorder -- the name alone should qualify for not being fit for work.

[garhkal]

So you are calling anyone who is religious to be mental?? IN that case 90% of the world is nutso..

[Gatefan1976]

So you are calling anyone who is religious to be mental?? IN that case 90% of the world is nutso..

Yes, that is -exactly- what I am saying Garhkal. What else do you call a belief in an unproven being that for some reason cares about you personally?
Sounds pretty mental to me. It's obviously a pre-existing condition, so should they serve? What if they are in combat and remember "thou shalt not kill" at an inconvenient time and refuse to fire on the enemy and it costs people their lives?

[mad_gater]

Yes, that is -exactly- what I am saying Garhkal. What else do you call a belief in an unproven being that for some reason cares about you personally?
Sounds pretty mental to me. It's obviously a pre-existing condition, so should they serve? What if they are in combat and remember "thou shalt not kill" at an inconvenient time and refuse to fire on the enemy and it costs people their lives?

I see you still need to learn the difference between killing for the sake of killing and killing in defense of oneself or killing enemy soldiers in time of war

That commandment was imperfectly translated from Hebrew...the Hebrew word used in that commandment was one used to describe cold-blooded pre-meditated murder

[Annoyed]

Yes, that is -exactly- what I am saying Garhkal. What else do you call a belief in an unproven being that for some reason cares about you personally?
Sounds pretty mental to me. It's obviously a pre-existing condition, so should they serve? What if they are in combat and remember "thou shalt not kill" at an inconvenient time and refuse to fire on the enemy and it costs people their lives?

The big difference is that as I understand it, the transgender people do consider themselves "broken", having been born into the wrong gender body. So I am going on their own standards here.

The religious folks don't count themselves as mental, you're applying some one else's standard to them.

[aretood2]

I'll go you a step further.
Should religious people be allowed to serve in the military?
They are suffering the mental delusion that there are sky fairies that have an interest in their life, which is a clear case of a pre-existing mental condition.

Because of course you would.

The big difference is that as I understand it, the transgender people do consider themselves "broken", having been born into the wrong gender body. So I am going on their own standards here.

The religious folks don't count themselves as mental, you're applying some one else's standard to them.

You miss the point he made with his hyperbole. What disqualifies someone is the the existence of a condition but that that condition would prevent them and the unit/military from safely and efficiently carrying out their assigned duties and any unforeseen military developments. The mere fact of someone being transgender is no more debilitating to that end than someone simply being religious (pacifists excluded of course, though technically they aren't barred from enlisting, it's just that the US military isn't stupid enough to make them enlist).

[Gatefan1976]

I see you still need to learn the difference between killing for the sake of killing and killing in defense of oneself or killing enemy soldiers in time of war

Not at all, I know the difference MG. If Caine felt threatened by Abel, was he justified in killing him, and if he were justified, WHY was he cursed by God?
I am pointing out the hypocrisy.

That commandment was imperfectly translated from Hebrew...the Hebrew word used in that commandment was one used to describe cold-blooded pre-meditated murder

Yes, everything that you don't like was either "imperfectly translated", or "not applicable today", or "not under Catholic dogma position", There is -always- an out, isn't there.............

The big difference is that as I understand it, the transgender people do consider themselves "broken", having been born into the wrong gender body. So I am going on their own standards here.

So, you are attempting to use psychology, something you don't believe in, to justify your position?
Damn, that's rich.
Hint though, they don't believe they are "broken".

The religious folks don't count themselves as mental, you're applying some one else's standard to them.

Trans people do not consider themselves mental, you are applying -your- standard to them.

Because of course you would.

For the sake of -THIS- argument, sure I would, why not. It's a far more apples to apples argument than many others.

You miss the point he made with his hyperbole. What disqualifies someone is the the existence of a condition but that that condition would prevent them and the unit/military from safely and efficiently carrying out their assigned duties and any unforeseen military developments. The mere fact of someone being transgender is no more debilitating to that end than someone simply being religious (pacifists excluded of course, though technically they aren't barred from enlisting, it's just that the US military isn't stupid enough to make them enlist).

You may have a cookie, and I will raise my drinking horn and sacrifice some of it's bounty in your honour!

[aretood2]

Yes, everything that you don't like was either "imperfectly translated", or "not applicable today", or "not under Catholic dogma position", There is -always- an out, isn't there.............

He is right about that though. MG's statement has been one given since the European dark ages by both Christians (Catholic or otherwise) and Jews. And linguistically, it's as clear as black and white. Pacifist Christians get their pacifism from elsewhere, not the ten commandments. However, I would argue that "murder" can be defined as God's determination of what Murder is versus a state's determination. That said there is enough wiggle room to develop a more pacifist versus legal interpretation. But that verse on it's own, does nothing to further any pacifistic beliefs.

[Gatefan1976]

He is right about that though. MG's statement has been one given since the European dark ages by both Christians (Catholic or otherwise) and Jews. And linguistically, it's as clear as black and white. Pacifist Christians get their pacifism from elsewhere, not the ten commandments. However, I would argue that "murder" can be defined as God's determination of what Murder is versus a state's determination. That said there is enough wiggle room to develop a more pacifist versus legal interpretation. But that verse on it's own, does nothing to further any pacifistic beliefs.

I'm not talking about pacifism Tood, I am talking -only- to the 10 commandments. Now, you can argue that there is a body of work -surrounding- them, how to interpret them etc, but the 10 commandments -as written- do not themselves contain asterix's or numbered footnotes written by God. It is peoples and structures -interpretations- of those words that create those, and as you know yourself, they can be wildly different. Given that we are talking about war here, and that there -are- exceptions for "just war" as I am sure MG will attest to, what if that war was not Just because it was ordered under false pretence? Does the soldier now have justification for not killing if the war is not "just"?

[mad_gater]

I'm not talking about pacifism Tood, I am talking -only- to the 10 commandments. Now, you can argue that there is a body of work -surrounding- them, how to interpret them etc, but the 10 commandments -as written- do not themselves contain asterix's or numbered footnotes written by God. It is peoples and structures -interpretations- of those words that create those, and as you know yourself, they can be wildly different. Given that we are talking about war here, and that there -are- exceptions for "just war" as I am sure MG will attest to, what if that war was not Just because it was ordered under false pretence? Does the soldier now have justification for not killing if the war is not "just"?

I do believe military service allows for conscientious objection to carrying out wartime acts that wouldn't be just....such as thermonuking 2 whole cities with lots of non-combatants (one of the rules of just warfare is to never intentionally target non-combatants)

but it is a historical fact that the original 10 Commandments was written in ancient Hebrew...and some of those old languages often don't translate well into English