DGAmerican Governments America as a country knows that there is strength in numbers which is true in most cases. It is a country that prides itself on the idea that it is a place of freedom and many believe it still holds true to this idea. In most cases that may be the case but the line seems to be drawn on the case of sexuality. The issue I look too, and hope that others outside of the LGBT community, is part of the long battle for the right to be who one wants to be. In July 2017, President Trump had announced over Twitter the administration’s new policy that would ban most transgender people from serving in the military. Not only was this new proposed policy endorsed by President Trump, but it was also released officially by Secretary of Defense James Mattis in 2018 and was passed by the Supreme Court January 2019. The fight for those in the LGBT community has been a long a difficult battle with acceptance of one another under the flag of freedom not being an easy goal to obtain.
This ban however did not start with the Trump Administration. The first ban on transgender military service began on May 17, 1963 with the application of Executive Order 10450 which allowed businesses to terminate employment of those who were or were suspected of being homosexual. This included federal employees as well as military service members. Legal battles were fought against this action but it was ruled by the courts that it was valid while using an Air Force member, Leyland as an example. The person had undergone a gender reassignment surgery and was discharged shortly after. The courts had determined that genital surgery was similar to amputation surgery, which by military standards, effectively makes the individual unable to meet the demands of a soldier. (Witten 2007) It wouldn’t be until the presidency of Barack Obama that the ban would be ended on June 30, 2016 with some officials were mentioning that the ban was expensive as well as un-needed since there was no signs of skill impairment regardless of sexual preference or those who had undergone gender reassignment surgery. This however would as current President Trump would come into office and announce the administration’s new policy on banning those who suffer from gender dysphoria from serving in the United States Military. The LGBT community has battled long and hard to get to where they are today. Support for each other has been the staple of the community so everyone can live their lives happily and free to be who they want to be. With that said, the transgender ban does place a struggle on multiple aspects, not just for the community but for the lives of Americans as well. The ability to serve and fight for one’s country is a great honor to many families who have one of their own serving currently and for those who have had members serve in the past. It is easy to forget that the ban doesn’t hurt just a single group of people. There are those who support the ban regardless because of what they believe is right. It is thought that those who are confused about their own gender, could be a hinderance in the field. While I personally don’t believe such a thing is true, I can see why they would think that a transgender person would not be effective rather than a “normal” person. But that is something that those who support the ban should take a moment to think about. As I stated before, this ban does not affect just transgendered people. It affects Americans who wish to fight to protect their country and stops family legacies from continuing. There are many families who pride themselves on serving their country. Whether it be a father or a mother serving, the family will most likely influence their children or other families to join. To stop someone based on their gender preference would be to stop this chain of events and may discourage more from joining. If anything, one should take the point of view as a commander of an army. An army needs people and it is a good thing if a large number of people are joining. If I, as a commander, were to stop a group of people from joining, it would cause the number of people joining to reduce. A loss is a loss and there is no way to truly compensate for someone being extremely vital to the function of the army regardless of who they are as a person. With the 2020 election in sight, it is important to note that there has not been much word on the ban by the upcoming candidates. As far as it looks, I have not caught wind of any candidate aiming to help get the ban reversed but I believe it is something that may be on their mind. Military service is an important part of American life. It is a choice that any can make and that choice should be protected for everyone.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorUndergraduate student generated content. Blog posting and updating done by Kristina Flores Victor, Assistant Professor of Political Science at CSUS Archives
March 2020
Categories
All
|