Greater burden on transgenders in military

It surprises me that the reporting on President Trump's position on not allowing transgender people in the military seems to focus on gays and lesbians as well. Make it clear he has not singled them out and made no such statement they may not serve.

The issue which should be focused is there is a greater burden on a fighting force for a transgender than there are gays and lesbians. By accepting a transgender you have created two additional sexes which you now must provide facilities. If you have ever served on a submarine you are well aware there are barely enough room for a crew of males let alone private and separate facilities for other sexes.

The issue the president is calling to our attention is not what is morally right or not but the cost to the taxpayers and the effect on the soldier to be combat ready. Yes you could argue there would be limited impact on the soldiers behind the lines but in my opinion it does effect those that are asked to risk the ultimate sacrifice for our country.

If you are a soldier you are a fighting man/woman first and that is where the issue escalates. In theory, if you are going to allow a transgender to serve than you must also allow a man or woman who does not meet the physical requirement s to serve as well, e.g. flat feet, loss of limb, blind etc.

However, the question I have for all, when it comes time to assign those to go to the front lines, should your physical skills, gender or bathroom requirements not be a factor? Unfortunately is it will, it does and it has.

Larry Eichman

Addison