Appeals court orders military to recruit from the mentally ill

A Federal Court of Appeals has ordered the armed forces to begin recruiting so-called "Transgendered" individuals starting January 1st.

The ruling was another legal blow for the president, who surprised military leaders when he announced in July in a series of tweets that the U.S. government “will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.”

His order reversed an Obama-era policy allowing transgender people to serve openly and receive funding for sex-reassignment surgery. That order was promptly challenged in federal court by active-duty transgender service members who say it violates their Fifth Amendment rights to equal protection.

At this point you may be asking, what is the Fifth Amendment? Did the Founding Fathers create the Fifth Amendment to protect the right of mentally ill people to join the military and get free sex change operations? Not surprisingly, that wasn't foremost on their mind. Here is the actual text:

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The Fifth Amendment basically talks about giving people due process when they are charged with a crime and protection against taking of private property. What does that have to do with mentally ill people joining the military?

The answer: Absolutely nothing.

But the judiciary is so riddled with hard-core leftists that they are creating imaginary rights as easily as they ignore actual ones they don't like, like the Second Amendment.

Here are some interesting facts.

1) During most of the Obama administration, it wasn't legal for transvestites to join the military. Right before Obama stepped out the door, he issued an executive order saying that military should permit transvestites, but they should only start admitting them after he had left office. Perhaps Obama was rightly worried about the disruption that would be caused by a whole platoon of Mary Poppinses or Corporal Klingers and didn't want to take the heat when his efforts at social engineering in the military went bad.

2) Before Obama issued this executive order, transvestites didn't have the right to join the military. And yet until that time, not a single court found the "right" for cross dressers to join the military. This "right" was only discovered after Obama legalized it; and his ability to legalize it, without an act of Congress, was questionable at best.

3) This "right" is a lot more than just allowing cross dressers to join the military, it is a way for them to get free surgery and hormones so they can "Dr. Frankenstein" themselves at taxpayer expense.

Our countries has laws against racial discrimination. Our country also has laws against gender discrimination. But we have no federal laws against discrimination involving people with red hair, people who wear bandanas, people who ride skateboards, people who eat vanilla ice cream... and men who dress up as women. These are not what the law calls "protected classes", like race or religion. There is no prohibition on discriminating based on these characteristics. In fact, from a public policy standpoint, one would hope the governent would discriminate against the "transgendered" because they are severely mentally ill. Liberals don't want the mentally ill to have guns but they are full throated in their demands for the "transgendered" to be given "military-style" assault weapons. This can only end in tragedy.

The Trump Administration must now plead with the Supreme Court if it wants to fight this further. But if the President were gutsy, he would announce that he is going to disregard this appeals court decision because it is so blatantly unconstitutional on the face of it. I think when the executive branch kotows to every unreasonable decision a court makes, it only encourages courts to do more of the same. Courts are given so much deference that they effectively have unlimited power. It would be refreshing if the President stood up to them, in a case that most people would immediately recognize as ridiculous.

[originally in AT]

Tell us what you think on Facebook.
Facebook Twitter Email

Related articles:
FAA frowns on pilots having more than one gender in five years

Medical Schools teaching doctors to give hormones to "transgendered" pre-teens

Emmys under fire for limiting award categories to men and women

Highly respected fraud Stephen Hawking dies

I am a super genius!

The "Paralympics" are a total virtue signalling fraud

Now that the real Olympics are over, the "Paralympics" are taking place in South Korea, featuring people with all kinds of debilitating illnesses:

Feminist Prof. says husband's repeated requests for sex were violations

Vox had a very long op-ed by an anonymous feminist professor who claims she was violated every time her husband had sex with her. She "acquiesced", learning coping strategies, such as reading a book to distract to keep her upper half occupied while her husband engaged her lower half.

What's the difference between Russian Twitter bots and liberal media polls?

When I was younger I wondered why candidates running for office would pay to put up signs featuring the candidate's name. Nothing else, not even the party the candidate was running with, and certainly no policy positions, would appear on the signs. Why would people vote for a candidate knowing nothing about him except his name?

Johns Hopkins proudly employs convicted killers

The PBS NewsHour (at the 9 minute mark) last night had an inspiring story about a black church which helped ex-cons get jobs. The program focused on a very sympathetic obese black lady named Cally Thomas. She's soft-spoken, she dresses well, and she even dyed her hair blonde like Beyonce. We're still somewhat sympathetic even after we learned that Cally Thomas is a convicted killer because, as NewsHour assures us, the murder was "domestic violence related", so maybe she won't kill anyone else except boyfriends. But then we learn where Cally has a job; as a janitor at John Hopkins Hospital.

GOP pushing bill to reduce jail time for armed robbers and drug dealers

What often happens when Democrats run the government? As "Sideshow Bob" says in the clip below:

How can banks discriminate against blacks in a free market economy?

The PBS Newshour, which I love for telling me what to think and when to think it, had a piece yesterday about a black lesbian woman who claimed she couldn't get a mortgage because racist banks wouldn't lend to a black person. When her Japanese lesbian partner applied for a loan, however, she quickly got it.

Trump reportedly pleads with Congress to raise gas taxes on all Americans

In a closed door meeting President Trump repeatedly asked Congressmen to raise the gax tax. President Trump is so eager to raise taxes that he even volunteered to take the blame for it:

Is Trump well-served by saying "I'm totally opposed to domestic violence"?

When Richard Nixon said, "I am not a crook", what did most people think?

How many people did useless heart stents kill?

For years the "gold standard" for treating clogged arteries of the heart was to perform very invasive surgery to insert a small plastic tube, or stent, into the clogged artery to reduce the blockage. It sounds like common sense, doesn't it?

Why does replacing food stamps with food so anger liberals?

President Trump has proposed replacing some food stamp grants with actual food. This has curiously enraged liberals, who you would think would be delighted to see "hungry" people getting food. The program in question is called "SNAP", which I think, due to repeated accounts of fraud, is more appropriately called SUCK (Stealing Unearned Cash Knowingly).

Trump calls for money for border wall by 2028, a week too late

President Trump's budget calls for funding for his border wall. Kudos, President Trump, mega-kudos to you!

Let's replace the words "Trump" with "Obama" in biased headlines

The liberal media, which bills itself as non-partisan, is running especially rabid now that President Trump has released his budget containing modest proposed cuts for certain agencies. Looking at the ferocity of the biased headlines, I wonder what the headlines would look like if Trump's name were replaced with Obama, as well as adjusting for circumstances.

Study: Immigration enforcement gives illegal aliens PTSD

Would it surprise you to learn that there is not just one or two but dozens of studies examining the psychological effects of enforcing the law against illegal aliens? Apparently, enforcing immigration law causes all kinds of effects on illegal aliens; it makes them anxious, depressed, and, according to one study, victims of post traumatic stress disorder.

New budget allocates no money for border wall for two years

In addition to being a an enormously bloated deficit busting spending bill, the two year budget that President Trump signed allocates zero dollars for construction of a border wall for the next two years. So unless Mexico suddenly writes us a check, there will be not an inch constructed of a new border wall three full years into President Trump's term of office.

Medicaid recipients find $1 premiums too confusing to pay

Imagine if you were poor and you got Medicaid, heavily subsidized by the taxpayer, but you had to pay between $1 and $15 a month in premiums. Wouldn't that be confusing? For many people it is so confusing that they don't understand how to pay and end up being kicked off Medicaid.

If Rand Paul were President, we wouldn't have this Democratic-inspired budget

Senator Rand Paul succeeded in briefly shutting down the government last night when he demanded a vote on restoring the budget spending caps before voting on the GOP deficit busting bill. By the time you read this, however, it is expected that a coalition of Democrats and RINO Republicans will have succeeded in passing a monstrosity of a budget bill which, although it will increase defense spending, will also increase domestic spending by hundreds of billions of dollars over the coming years, and is estimated to create a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit in 2019. That's $1,200,000,000,000 added to the debt in one year alone.

GOP spending $400 million to teach pregnant women how to navigate

If you're on a cruise ship and you learn that the captain is a pregnant woman, wouldn't you still expect that she would know how to steer the boat? I would!

A GOP House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP President cannot cut a penny in spending

The budget agreement reached by the Republican House and Republican Senate would increase spending over 500 billion dollars over the next two years. It does not appear to cut a penny from domestic spending; in fact, along with military increases, it increases domestic spending by hundreds of billions of dollars.

White House calls for citizenship for "Lazy Dreamers"

One of the many conspiracy theories floating around to justify President Trump's call for citizenship for 1.8 million illegal aliens is that Trump will vet them thoroughly and permit a number far less than 1.8 million to be granted citizenship.

Would "Black Panther" have a 100% Rotten Tomatoes score if it were "White Panther"?

The liberal media is going ga-ga over the upcoming superhero movie "Black Panther". What makes Black Panther different from other Marvel films is that the protagonist, as well as most of the cast, are black, and Africa is portrayed as a super technologically advanced continent filled with spaceships. As of this writing the film has a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. What are the odds of every single film reviewer agreeing on this film... or any film?

Can Barbara Comstock get reelected running like a Democrat?

Barbara Comstock is a GOP congresswoman from Northern Virginia. Political scientists appropriately call her district "marginal", rather than "wholesome", because it is infested with a growing number of leftists, ideologically toxic fallout blown westwards from the work-free drug zone of Washington D.C.

Dems think drug addicted voters can push them over the top in 2018

The votes of drug addicts could be crucial in the 2018 midterm elections. That's what Democrats think, which is why they are going all out to show their support for pot addicts.

Warning: This article is illegal in Poland

Poland is on the verge of passing a law which will make it illegal to refer to Polish participation in the Holocaust.

Who likes football teams staffed by foreign mercenaries?

The Philadelphia Eagles are not from Philadelphia. The New England Patriots are not from New England, much less Massachusetts.

Search Topic Areas
o Abortion
o Economy
o Education
o Environment
o Feminists
o Phony global warming
o Gun control
o Hillary Rotten Clinton
o Homosexual agenda
o Illegal aliens
o Jeb Bush
o Marco Rubio
o Pop culture
o Radical islam
o Rand Paul
o Republicans
o Reverse Racism
o Scott Walker
o Ted Cruz
o Transvestite agenda Copyright 2015


Privacy policy