Is life over for gays in america?

[malakos]

What flavor is that Kool-Aide?

Kool-Aid? The post you are responding to was merely a description of businessmen. And what I said is fairly commonly understood. Care to reply with something of substance?

 

[dards44]

Are you a Trumpanzee?

 

[HotBulge]

So, for Donald Trump

• in business, say anything complimentary to "The L-G-B---uh, T----> uh, Q" to get their $$ BUT
  
• in politics, throw the "The L-G-B---uh, T----> uh, Q" under the bus as a political wedge issue like it's 2004, as long as the Evangelicals vote for him.

Conclusion: Despicable. This means that Donald Trump only cares about his personal gain and will exploit whole groups of people for it.

Yes, in the sense of only being concerned with what will seal the deal..

 

[CraigS41]

pragmatic businessman,? LOLOLOLOL Playing to your fading base might be more like it. So far all I have seen is a lying orange lunatic.

That was ALL we got from the last administration

 

[CraigS41]

So, for Donald Trump

• in business, say anything complimentary to "The L-G-B---uh, T----> uh, Q" to get their $$ BUT
  
• in politics, throw the "The L-G-B---uh, T----> uh, Q" under the bus as a political wedge issue like it's 2004, as long as the Evangelicals vote for him.

Conclusion: Despicable. This means that Donald Trump only cares about his personal gain and will exploit whole groups of people for it.

How did he "Throw us under the bus"??

I feel that when you go into the military, the sex you started with should be the sex you end with. If you want to have a sex change, then it should be at the persons cost, not paid by the military. I have no problem at all with those that have had a sex change being in the military at all.

As Me Huckabee so correctly said. "The Military is NOT a social experiment. It's job is to kill people and break things." "How is having a sex change protecting the country??"

 

[HotBulge]

Craig, since I am not familiar with your viewpoints yet, I am going to assume your question is sincere and not baiting for the sake of being argumentative.

Issue 1:

How did he "Throw us under the bus"??

Answer: The top military officials were stunned and blind-sided by Trump's announcement that he was going to bar transgenders from the military. The RAND Corporation estimated in 2016 that there were between 1,320 and 6,630 transgender people serving.

• the presence of transgenders does not disrupt morale on fellow officers
  
• the presence of transgenders does not create an undue financial or medical burden the military. (That's why the statistic that the cost of Viagra purchased in the military is 5x to 10x that of hormone therapy for transgenders). The medicine for hormone therapy to transition fits in the palm of one's hand and is no more invasive nor compromising than a diabetic person carrying around insulin.
• There are already thousands of transgenders who are part of the active, inactive, and reserved forces who have served and continue to serve the military. They perform their assignments and duties to the satisfaction of the standards and rigors of the military.

After having studied the matter with years of observations and factual reports, the Pentagon has concluded that there is no rational basis to discharge or prevent qualified transgenders from accepting the call of military service. If there is NO rational basis for preventing the service of transgenders, then the motive is purely political!

As Philo12345 suggested the other day, the political motive is "low hanging fruit" i.e it's easy to scapegoat and demonize transgenders. If the Trump administration can find de facto justifications to systematically discriminate against transgenders, the next step is to apply the same reasoning to the LGBTQ community as a whole. So, yes, transgenders ARE being thrown under the bus for Trump's conservative base to generate votes.

 

[CraigS41]

President Trump doesn't need to "Generate votes" Those that voted for him stand by him, and he is doing a lot of good, although listening to the network news, you would never know it

 

[HotBulge]

Issue 2:

I feel that when you go into the military, the sex you started with should be the sex you end with. If you want to have a sex change, then it should be at the persons cost, not paid by the military. I have no problem at all with those that have had a sex change being in the military at all.

As Me Huckabee so correctly said. "The Military is NOT a social experiment. It's job is to kill people and break things." "How is having a sex change protecting the country??"

Answer: I sincerely hope you are not implying that transgenders enter the military for the purposes of having the military pay for the sexual reassignment operation.

I did see an interview of a transgender [male -- > female] state that of the transgender population, about 1/5 are either current or past participants in the military. It naturally raises the question why there is a strong attraction of a subgroup to the military. The representative offered the explanation that members of the transgender community gravitate to the military because it offers a form of expression with validation. For female --> male, they can act in more stereotypical masculine, aggressive roles; for male --> female, the desire may be to downplay one's aggressive persona and allow for stereotypical vulnerability or emotional expressiveness after having been in an environment that emphasizes suppressing emotional pain.

Regardless of one's motives and presence for being in the army, the FUNDAMENTAL issue is the right to have a medically necessary quality of life and self-expression. If the military can justify spending 5x the amount on VIAGRA to help soldiers have a quality of like - i.e. post-traumatic stress is a significant contributor to erectile dysfunction - then transgender soldiers have a right to their quality of life as well. The only "volatile" stage is when transgenders are actively transitioning with hormone treatments which takes several months to stabilize. After a number of sustained hormone dosages, the effects stabilize -- as I understand the process.

The additional step to have re-assignment surgery often happens years (if at ALL) the initial hormone treatment. It is reasonable to think that transgenders would opt for the final step at a point of stability i.e. (1) obviously not during combat or (2) not during active deployment on the field. The transgender service professional has presumably served long enough and earned the entitlement to the medical care and treatment in the same way that an (ex) soldier who needs a hip replacement or treatments for an injury have earned their medical care.

 

[HotBulge]

"Generating new votes" or sustaining old ones - regardless, Trump is throwing red meat to his political base at the expense of the LGBT community. Attacking the "T" ,as the most vulnerable subgroup, is throwing the community under the bus and attacks our Civil Rights. It's codified discrimination, using the military and federal system against a law-abiding group of US citizens. It's discrimination because transgenders are not conforming to gender norms, despite their ability to serve well on the job.

President Trump doesn't need to "Generate votes" Those that voted for him stand by him, and he is doing a lot of good, although listening to the network news, you would never know it

 

[HotBulge]

Issue 3:
Actually, Mike Huckabee's statement is ignorant even if he meant it in earnest. The military is about far more than just combat and killing. Combat is just the tip of the iceberg, built on top of a robust infra-structure which includes:

• supply chain military bureaucrats who track all of the resources needed to sustain the activities of the military
• operations specialists
• technicians for all sorts of vehicles and maintenance
• IT operations
• intelligence officers who often know multiple languages or have specialized IT skills
• medical staff and medical technicians.

One will find transgenders in a wide variety of roles within the complex military organization.

As Me Huckabee so correctly said. "The Military is NOT a social experiment. It's job is to kill people and break things." "How is having a sex change protecting the country??"

 

[malakos]

Are you a Trumpanzee?

Ironic. I'm left wondering if you're capable of carrying a conversation? Or is throwing around buzzwords and cheap insults as good as it gets?

 

[malakos]

So, for Donald Trump

• in business, say anything complimentary to "The L-G-B---uh, T----> uh, Q" to get their $$ BUT
  
• in politics, throw the "The L-G-B---uh, T----> uh, Q" under the bus as a political wedge issue like it's 2004, as long as the Evangelicals vote for him.

Conclusion: Despicable. This means that Donald Trump only cares about his personal gain and will exploit whole groups of people for it.

Well, it would be a somewhat more reasonable perspective than suggesting he's legitimately "anti-Gay".

However, "LGBTQ" is identity mashing and lacks authenticity. These diverse groups do not have the same interests, no matter how much the Left would like us to believe we do. We were here discussing specifically his relation to Gay people. I fail to see how he has thrown Gay people under the bus.

 

[phillo12345]

Well, it would be a somewhat more reasonable perspective than suggesting he's legitimately "anti-Gay".

However, "LGBTQ" is identity mashing and lacks authenticity. These diverse groups do not have the same interests, no matter how much the Left would like us to believe we do. We were here discussing specifically his relation to Gay people. I fail to see how he has thrown Gay people under the bus.

Do you believe Trump's supporters who aren't gay like yourself see the differences between LGBTs? You think kicking trans people out of the military is a legitimate priority of the people in DC? You don't believe Trump is doing this solely to rally his hard right base? Trump says he will "strongly consider" overturning our right to marry; that doesn't seem like he's coming after the gays?

 

[umdoistressilvaquatro]

You get support, not controversy, for being anti-gay in politics. LGBT people are getting a false sense of security over recent victories.

 

[CraigS41]

I bet ya'll are getting your news information from the liberal media and therefor not getting the complete story

 

[malakos]

You get support, not controversy, for being anti-gay in politics. LGBT people are getting a false sense of security over recent victories.

The most significant part is not the politics, but the cultural shift.

 

[phillo12345]

I bet ya'll are getting your news information from the liberal media and therefor not getting the complete story

Would you expand on this statement?

 

[HotBulge]

Quick Response: You need to worry about discrimination and the LAW, not the culture wars and the media.

Well, it would be a somewhat more reasonable perspective than suggesting he's legitimately "anti-Gay".

However, "LGBTQ" is identity mashing and lacks authenticity. These diverse groups do not have the same interests, no matter how much the Left would like us to believe we do. We were here discussing specifically his relation to Gay people. I fail to see how he has thrown Gay people under the bus.

ANSWER: Are you aware that the Jeff Sessions and the DOJ filed an amicus brief (ie a "friend of the court" letter) to the Supreme Court in the last week of July 2017, to limit the interpretation of Title VII? Title VII, which makes sex discrimination illegal, does not explicitly cover discrimination based on sexual orientation and should not be interpreted include sexual orientation? Since 1992, the lower courts have upheld that sexual orientation discrimination is a form of gender discrimination and therefore is illegal under Title VII. Sessions is using the weight of the DOJ to challenge that interpretation and therefore threaten the employment status of hundreds of thousands of people.

Basically, you could get married to a same-sex person on a Friday, and your employer could legally fire you on a Monday if your employer didn't conform to Title VII?

So, returning directly to your statement that the Trump administration is not anti-GAY (male) specifically, their hostile actions don't support your claim. Despite the disparate interests of the various groups within the LGBTQ community, they share a common interest in upholding anti-discrimination measures with the law! The same discrimination laws that support Gay and Lesbian rights also support the rights of Transgenders and other groups.[/QUOTE]

 

[HotBulge]

History will not distinguish between Trump the businessman and Trump the President during the Trump administration:

You can claim that Trump doesn't personally dislike "the Gays" or is "anti-Gay". President Trump's personal attitude towards "the Gays" is irrelevant if he allows his administration to implement discriminatory practices and policies. Trump accepted the job as the 45th President of the United States; Trump is ultimately responsible for the actions of his administration. When Jeff Sessions, representing the DOJ, enacts discriminatory policies or when Betsy De Vos, representing the Dept of Ed, enacts discriminatory policies - either actively or passively by failing to protect citizens - all Americans suffer.

Well, it would be a somewhat more reasonable perspective than suggesting he's legitimately "anti-Gay"..

 

[chrisrobin]

History will not distinguish between Trump the businessman and Trump the President during the Trump administration:

You can claim that Trump doesn't personally dislike "the Gays" or is "anti-Gay". President Trump's personal attitude towards "the Gays" is irrelevant if he allows his administration to implement discriminatory practices and policies. Trump accepted the job as the 45th President of the United States; Trump is ultimately responsible for the actions of his administration. When Jeff Sessions, representing the DOJ, enacts discriminatory policies or when Betsy De Vos, representing the Dept of Ed, enacts discriminatory policies - either actively or passively by failing to protect citizens - all Americans suffer.

If taking any action will garner support or votes or contributions then Trump will go for it.
As has been seen he never goes for these things himself but gets one of his fall guys or gals to do his dirty work, they can take the flak if it all goes wrong.
So currently the rust belt and the bible belt are all being catered for in government legislation (maybe) against anything that doesn't match up the presidents idea of sexual norm (pussy grabbers excluded) so yes, cross dressers, gays and mixed genders beware.