Posted on Jul 23, 2021
On U.S. Soldiers’ Moral Obligation to RejectCompelled Gender Ideology
3.68K
224
105
13
13
0
Posted in these groups: 
GenderUSD Policy
GenderUSD Policy
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
13
13
0
LTC Vincent Moore Very comprehensive article against compelled gender ideology. Here are 3 specifics from the article which will certainly undermine military fairness, cohesiveness and trust :
1)In granting legitimacy to the notion that certain men can become women by mere stipulation, or can be ‘gender fluid’, such a commitment ends up violating the rights of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim soldiers who believe that there are only two essential sexes specifically determined by God.
2)If soldier and officer promotions are, in part, evaluated by sex-based physical fitness metrics, so isn't it unfair to actual female soldiers who must now compete with ‘trans’ women soldiers (i.e. actual men)?
[I consider this reverse discrimination]
3)If one can be trans-gender then why can’t one be trans-racial, trans-age, trans-height?
[Trans-animal?] ~~~ seriously.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs LCpl Leo Morrissey SPC Woody Bullard Col (Join to see) Lt Col Charlie Brown SSG Franklin Briant Cpl James R. " Jim" Gossett Jr CPL Christopher Thomas MSgt (Join to see) SSG Robert Webster LTC Jeff Shearer 1SG Steven Imerman SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth A1C Riley Sanders Sgt Kelli Mays
1)In granting legitimacy to the notion that certain men can become women by mere stipulation, or can be ‘gender fluid’, such a commitment ends up violating the rights of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim soldiers who believe that there are only two essential sexes specifically determined by God.
2)If soldier and officer promotions are, in part, evaluated by sex-based physical fitness metrics, so isn't it unfair to actual female soldiers who must now compete with ‘trans’ women soldiers (i.e. actual men)?
[I consider this reverse discrimination]
3)If one can be trans-gender then why can’t one be trans-racial, trans-age, trans-height?
[Trans-animal?] ~~~ seriously.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs LCpl Leo Morrissey SPC Woody Bullard Col (Join to see) Lt Col Charlie Brown SSG Franklin Briant Cpl James R. " Jim" Gossett Jr CPL Christopher Thomas MSgt (Join to see) SSG Robert Webster LTC Jeff Shearer 1SG Steven Imerman SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth A1C Riley Sanders Sgt Kelli Mays
(13)
(0)
LTC Vincent Moore
SPC Jesse Davis Why don’t the gender confused persons’ “rights” to call themselves what they are clearly not end when they violate another individual’s right to state the truth? Sure they have the right to call themselves whatever, but that right stops when it imposes the obligation on someone else.
(2)
(0)
Sgt (Join to see)
LTC Vincent Moore - I agree w you, horrifying that biological persons’ rights obviously do not matter anymore. I can’t even believe persons with higher rank such as SFC Casey O'Mally dare, even with a straight face, to state that its “not a lie” in support of males who want to call themselves females. Here we go: how about if men start calling themselves a tree or a dog since now it’s acceptable to identity by declaration alone!
How how the Chicomms, the Ruskies and Iranians are laughing at US ! No foolishness like that going on over there in their militaries, just straight up training to fight the >>outside enemies.
How how the Chicomms, the Ruskies and Iranians are laughing at US ! No foolishness like that going on over there in their militaries, just straight up training to fight the >>outside enemies.
(2)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
Sgt (Join to see) - Which "rights" of "biological persons" (as compared to robots?) do you think are being violated? The right to demean, ridicule, disrespect, and/or persecute others? The right to be "comfortable" at all times?
These "rights" do not exist within the military.
Or are you saying you have the right to insist that others conform to your subjective reality? Because see, that would be kind of hypocritical.
The use of "top" to refer to the 1SG is rather common in the Army. It is slang, there is no official allowance for it, and it technically is not allowed by Army customs and courtesies. Nevertheless, I had one 1SG who insisted on being called "top." Was calling this 1SG a lie? I mean, technically it was not his title, but he insisted on being called by it.
I had another who adamantly refused it, and even chewed out his CSM at a staff meeting for referring to him as such. Was refusing to be called "top" a lie? I mean everyone, to include himself, knew who we referring to.
My brother, Robert, is called Bob by everyone. Is calling him "Bob" a lie since that is not his REAL name? What about the Richards we call Dick, or the Samanthas and Samuels we call Sam, or the Christophers, Christines, and Christinas we call Chris?
None of these are lies. We refer to people how they want to be referred to. That isn't a lie, it is common courtesy and respect.
These "rights" do not exist within the military.
Or are you saying you have the right to insist that others conform to your subjective reality? Because see, that would be kind of hypocritical.
The use of "top" to refer to the 1SG is rather common in the Army. It is slang, there is no official allowance for it, and it technically is not allowed by Army customs and courtesies. Nevertheless, I had one 1SG who insisted on being called "top." Was calling this 1SG a lie? I mean, technically it was not his title, but he insisted on being called by it.
I had another who adamantly refused it, and even chewed out his CSM at a staff meeting for referring to him as such. Was refusing to be called "top" a lie? I mean everyone, to include himself, knew who we referring to.
My brother, Robert, is called Bob by everyone. Is calling him "Bob" a lie since that is not his REAL name? What about the Richards we call Dick, or the Samanthas and Samuels we call Sam, or the Christophers, Christines, and Christinas we call Chris?
None of these are lies. We refer to people how they want to be referred to. That isn't a lie, it is common courtesy and respect.
(1)
(0)
Sgt (Join to see)
SFC Casey O'Mally You have been ignoring my points while trying to foolishly oversimplify the terrible situation the Biden Admin has imposed upon our military. Continuing conversation w you is not worth it.
(0)
(0)
9
9
0
This ideology is destroying our military and trust in one another. While I miss being in uniform I am grateful not to have to deal with this as a commander any more.
(9)
(0)
LTC Vincent Moore
Totally agree, but I have concerns for future conflict and the security of (what’s left of) the Nation.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google