Jump to content

i like this


storchy neil
 Share

Recommended Posts

Subject: AWESOME MILITARY COMMENT: TREY GOWDY

 

American but still good!

 

Pity our pollies, let alone senior offices, don't have a similar perspective!

 

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina Congressman, recently responded to a question by a CNN reporter about the DoD ban of transgenders joining the U.S. armed forces. As Trey typically does so very well, he nailed it rather succinctly.

 

Reporter’s question:

 

“How can President Trump claim to represent all U.S citizens, regardless of sexual orientation, when he banned transgenders from joining the military? Isn't that discrimination?”

 

Congressman Trey Gowdy's response:

 

“Nobody has a right to serve in the Military. Nobody. What makes people think the Military is an equal opportunity employer? It is very far from it... and for good reasons. Let me cite a few.

 

“The Military uses prejudice regularly and consistently to deny citizens from joining for being too old or too young, too fat or too skinny, too tall or too short. Citizens are denied for having flat feet, or for missing or additional fingers.”

 

Clearly annoyed by the reporter's attempt to trap him with the question he went on to explain:

 

"By the way, poor eyesight will disqualify you, as well as bad teeth. Malnourished? Drug addiction? Bad back? Criminal history? Low IQ? Anxiety? Phobias? Hearing damage? Six arms? Hear voices in your head? Self-identification as a Unicorn? Need a special access ramp for your wheelchair? Can't run the required course in the required time? Can't do the required number of push-ups? Not really a ‘morning person’ and refuse to get out of bed before noon? All can be legitimate reasons for denial.

 

"The Military has one job: Winning War. Anything else is a distraction and a liability. Did someone just scream, ‘That isn't Fair?’ War is VERY unfair; there are no exceptions made for being special or challenged or socially wonderful.

 

“YOU must change yourself to meet Military standards... not the other way around. I say again: You don't change the Military... you must change yourself. The Military doesn't need to accommodate anyone with special issues. The Military needs to Win Wars.. and keep our Country safe... PERIOD!

 

“If any of your personal issues are a liability that detract from readiness or lethality... ‘Thank you for applying and good luck in future endeavours’.

 

“Any other questions?"

 

oh so true

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a great argument.

 

And I agree that military must only employ people with the physical and mental ability to serve.

 

Except for one thing.......

 

Sexual preference (or gender) does not have anything to do with a individual's "lethality, readiness," or fitness to serve.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that Trey Gowdy is described as an "ardent social conservative", I think his views on transgender people (whether in the military or anywhere else) are formed by his own narrow view of how people should live rather than any real concern about the effectiveness of the military.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have obviously never been in the armed forces, so your comments are way off, Trey Gowdy is spot on about the way the forces select people to serve(except in a ww11 scenario)and if his conservative views are narrow that's his right, from my observations of Australian selection they do admit people of both genders(woman/man)and seem to on the surface accept gay/lesbian recruits ,however they would probably be targeted/ridiculed/ by the forces in general,it has got better for those people but in my time if they were found out they did not stay in for long,there are ways to get them out ,they would have been targeted

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have obviously never been in the armed forces, so your comments are way off, Trey Gowdy is spot on about the way the forces select people to serve(except in a ww11 scenario)and if his conservative views are narrow that's his right, from my observations of Australian selection they do admit people of both genders(woman/man)and seem to on the surface accept gay/lesbian recruits ,however they would probably be targeted/ridiculed/ by the forces in general,it has got better for those people but in my time if they were found out they did not stay in for long, there are ways to get them out ,they would have been targeted

I have served in the armed forces 1979-1990 RAA. I worked in a profession that was not open to females until I think 1982. What a fuss the crusty of conservatives made. It will never work they said, it will be bad for morale they said. With the benefit of time, we can now look back and poke fun at these dinosaurs. This is the problem with conservatism, it almost always looks foolish in retrospect. A colleague of mine from my RAAF days, who is now a high ranking officer is quite anti-woman, when I see him, as I still too from time to time he is quite open about his displeasure with working with women. I do like to remind him of the time in the early 80s when women were attempting to become airline pilots. He argued that women are not suitable and never will be due to biological differences. Time has proven this crusty old conservative to be wrong.

 

My sister attempted the join the RAAF and would have been the first female in (this field) in about 1981. She was turned down on spurious medical grounds only to apply to the army a year later (when progress had been made on these issues) she was accepted and by the way she was also in a same-sex relationship. My sister, never shy of complaining never complained about bullying or bad treatment because of her sexual orientation. It may be because she and I worked with intelligent educated people. I knew quite a few gay colleagues, it was probably not talked about but I think considered irrelevant. Of course in any group l opinion will vary. I did witness some bullying to the first female members (by a couple of morons) but it was short lived. The key was how well you could do your job.

 

There was a time when gays were banned from the military, "it will be a disaster" the crusty old conservatives cried. Progress led to the "don't ask don't tell" it will be a disaster they cried. Now we are at the stage where sexual orientation is becoming irrelevant (amongst most people) It is not much of a stretch to imagine that we are heading for a time when your gender will be totally irrelevant. An indeed we have already seen a senior army officer who is transgender and I imagine there are many others that we don't even know about.

 

The thing about ultra-conservatives is that time nearly always makes them look foolish.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a sign of an evolving society that gender and sexual orientation are becoming unimportant in any workplace. With modern technology, the brute force has been virtually eliminated from most occupations. Also we are moving further into a society where brain is valued more than brawn and I'm not saying it's offal that it is happening.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OBJECTION !

 

"and seem to on the surface accept gay/lesbian recruits"

 

The people of Lesbos Island, want their name back, they have taken it to the highest court, to no avail.

 

Are all males of that persuasion "Gay" . I thought the correct term Is homosexual.

 

They're so Not Gay, it could be all these names they get tagged with.

 

Just an observation

 

spacesailor

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lji

 

OBJECTION !"and seem to on the surface accept gay/lesbian recruits"

 

The people of Lesbos Island, want their name back, they have taken it to the highest court, to no avail.

 

Are all males of that persuasion "Gay" . I thought the correct term Is homosexual.

 

They're so Not Gay, it could be all these names they get tagged with.

 

Just an observation

 

spacesailor

Language has and always will evolve, probably best to evolve with it. I suspect that this is the best way to spend your life being happy rather. than grumpy.spacer.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope you don't mind, but since today was not the 39 degrees of yesterday, I'm happy and gay. And that doesn't mean anything about my sexual preference.

 

That's the frustrating thing about our evolving language..... Meanings change so fast, it's getting too easy to get into trouble.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meaning of gay has been changing for longer than people think

 

The word may have started to acquire associations of immorality as early as the 14th century, but had certainly acquired them by the 17th.[2] By the late 17th century, it had acquired the specific meaning of "addicted to pleasures and dissipations",[11] an extension of its primary meaning of "carefree" implying "uninhibited by moral constraints". A gay woman was a prostitute, a gay man a womanizer, and a gay housea brothel.[2] The use of gay to mean "homosexual" was often an extension of its application to prostitution: a gay boy was a young man or boy serving male clients.[12]

 

Gay - Wikipedia

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My comments were for Marty

What, you have a crack at me for saying that LGBTI people should be able to serve in the armed forces, and when someone else (who did serve) comprehensively destroys your argument you say "no, wasn't talking to you"?

 

No, I have never served in the armed forces. But I'd like to think that if I had I still wouldn't be prejudiced. Last time I checked soldiers were normal people with their own set of ethics and views.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had X soldiers for teachers & No they're Not normal,

 

regimented at the least. brutal at there worst.

 

No, I have never served in the armed forces, I served a night in the jail then the judge, let me live.

 

My Uncle had a " conscientious objector " drop a primed hand grenade at his feet, after he was thrown over the barrier, my uncle took a lot of shrapnel in his legs,

 

After all the "press-gangs" were banned & outlawed by an English queen.

 

spacesailor

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not prejudiced at all, saying as a fact 50 years ago they(gays,lesbians,trans or whatever )did not last ,they were ridiculed and usually left after being subjected to harassment or the "above my pay scale" officers soon found ways to get them out,medical,trumped up charges etc etc, never encountered a gay person then so only hearsay,and don't forget it was at that time a criminal offence to engage in homosexual acts in UK, times have changed all for the good in most cases , I have no real feelings about lgbti people, they don't impact on my life and my argument was about the Brit and Us army and as trey gowdy is right, armed forces are there to wage war, would you like to see your daughter at the blunt end in a war,I would not like to see mine there ,women have the right to serve as does anyone if they have the right stuff, look at the Kurd women fighters they had a very real reason for fighting and by accounts they are good soldiers ,we in the west are not of the same mettle

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...