Absurd Use Of Military Spending Is A Danger To Our Nation

The citizens of the United States depend on our military personnel to protect and defend our nation and be ready to serve at a moment’s notice.

And supporting our troops should be a top priority of the government and its people.

But now, U.S. soldiers are being instructed on an unbelievable issue, one that is endangering our country and those who serve, and also costing taxpayers dearly.

Soldiers in the U.S. Army, mostly women, are now being forced to attend classes on sharing their barracks and other private facilities with men.

LifeSite News reported:

The U.S. Army is telling women soldiers that they need to accept gender-confused, biological men in their showers, bathrooms, and barracks as part of a controversial policy to build “dignity and respect” for “transgender Soldiers.”

The guidance is part of the Pentagon’s new “transgender inclusion” agenda launched by Obama and gaining ground in the Armed Services. Social conservatives are mounting a counteroffensive to ditch the “trans” program altogether.

Upon enlistment in the Army, recruits must choose a “gender marker,” which typically would identify their biological gender.

But now, in the name of “inclusivity” — in a program started by former President Obama — recruits may choose the “gender marker” that they associate with.

This means that if they “identify” as the opposite gender, they are to be treated as such and use the facilities on base reserved for that gender.

This is particularly disturbing and dangerous for female soldiers who are already facing an uphill battle in a predominantly male profession.

Vignette 4 of Army regulations states:

Soldiers must use the barracks, bathroom, and shower facility associated with their gender marker.

Understand that you may encounter individuals in barracks, bathrooms, or shower facilities with the physical characteristics of the opposite sex, despite having the same gender marker.

All Soldiers should be respectful of the privacy and modesty concerns of others.  However, transgender Soldiers are not required or expected to modify or adjust their behavior based on the fact that they do not “match” other Soldiers.

The regulations also state that a transgender soldier may not have had gender reassignment surgery, and therefore, female soldiers should be prepared to see male genitalia in their private facilities.

LifeSite news reports that does not sit well with Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness (CMR).

“The Army Directive orders all personnel to accept transsexuals having a new ‘gender marker’ in bathrooms, showers and other private areas, showing zero concern for the feelings of women exposed to ‘gender pretenders’ taking advantage of the situation,” Donnelly writers in a new CMR special report.

LifeSite News continued on the double standard these regulations implement:

The Army’s “transgender”-affirming documents are startling in the degree to which they: 1) cater to a tiny percentage of “gender-non-conforming” Americans (in 2011, the pro-LGBT Williams Institute estimated that just 0.3 percent of the population, or 700,000 adults, was “transgender”); and 2) risk alienating the privacy and conscience rights of a much larger pool of Army soldiers in the name of providing “dignity and respect” to the severely gender-confused.

The new guidance is fueling calls by conservatives for the Armed Forces to ditch President Obama’s “transgender-inclusive” policy in the military, announced late in his term by then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter. The pro-“transgender” policy, which was never voted on or fully debated in Congress, had been slated to go into full effect July 1, allowing open recruitment of gender-bending people.

Also mentioned is the safety of our military personnel, and our nation as a whole, with the implementation of this dangerous policy.

And the cost to U.S. taxpayers, especially if the soldier has gender reassignment surgery while an active duty member, is astronomical.

“This policy is costly and a threat to our readiness. The deployability of individuals going through the sex transition process is highly problematic, requiring 210 to 238 workdays where a soldier is non-deployable after surgery,” Hartzler said in a June 29 press release. “This recovery time equates to 1.4 million manpower days where transgender personnel cannot deploy and fight our nation’s wars, therefore relying on an already stressed force to pick up the burden.

“It makes no sense to purposely recruit individuals who cannot serve,” she said, noting that people with “lesser physical issues,” such as flat feet, bunions, asthma, and sleep walking, have been denied entrance into the Armed Forces or special military units like JAG (Judge Advocate General’s Corps). “This is a senseless and highly unfair double standard.”

Hartzler honed in on the high cost of “sex-reassignment surgeries” and procedures: “By recruiting and allowing transgender individuals to serve in our military we are subjecting taxpayers to high medical costs, including up to $130,000 per transition surgery, lifetime hormone treatments, and additional surgeries to address the high percentage of individuals who experience complications.”

The policy implemented by Obama is now under review by the Trump administration, with Secretary of Defense James Mattis consulting with staff on the best course of action.

Until then, our military women are being put in a dangerous position.

Instead of focusing on their training and safety to protect and defend the nation, they now must worry about their personal safety in their base facilities.

We will keep you up to date on any changes in the status of this policy.