Pentagon surveys troops on DADT (again)

BrianR · 08-24-2010, 10:22 AM

Not to thread-jack, but I would like to add that this issue also affects transgenders. Most gay issues do, including the right to marry.

Here in Texas, we have the case of Nikki Arraguz, a transgender woman who married a firefighter who was killed in the line of duty on July 4. His family is contesting her right to inherit her husband's estate and is suing for as much as they can get to include custody of his two children from a previous marriage. Nikki had been barred from spending any money from the estate and even prevented from living in their home until the 16th, when she was given $58,000 that was specifically designated to her and thus was not subject to the probate proceeding.

This case promises to define marriage for all Texas transgendered people, whether male or female. Much as gay persons, transgendered people are not permitted to marry as they are still legally male (or female) even after a surgical sex change under Texas law and since Texas does not permit gay marriage, every transgendered person married to a member of the opposite sex is in a gay marriage and thus the union is void. The status of transgendered people who are married to a person of the same sex is still unclear.

To me, equal rights are just that...equal. Marriage has been defined as a basic right time and again by the SCOTUS, with no mention of gender at all. So, a person who has a sex change (who is no longer a member of their birth gender IMO) should be able to marry a person of their choosing. Gays should be able to do the same. Without state interference.

The same applies to serving in the military. Gays are qualified to serve. It has been shown that sexual orientation has little effect on unit morale or ability to perform their duty. Transgendered persons can do the same. As long as the soldier (or sailor or airman) is able to do their job, they ought to be allowed to do so.

Heck, sexual preference has NO bearing on that at all! I know a lot of guys that preferred their hands to living people, which seems like a preference to me. I happened to like a lot of leather to be involved in MY sex when I was younger and that didn't affect my ability to serve either. It was just a preference. I see no difference.

DADT needs to go, along with any regulations dealing with who is fucking whom.

casimendocina · 08-25-2010, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrianR

Not to thread-jack

You obviously haven't seen what happened to the What is Love thread.

08-24-2010, 10:22 AM	#1
BrianR Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 3,338	Not to thread-jack, but I would like to add that this issue also affects transgenders. Most gay issues do, including the right to marry. Here in Texas, we have the case of Nikki Arraguz, a transgender woman who married a firefighter who was killed in the line of duty on July 4. His family is contesting her right to inherit her husband's estate and is suing for as much as they can get to include custody of his two children from a previous marriage. Nikki had been barred from spending any money from the estate and even prevented from living in their home until the 16th, when she was given $58,000 that was specifically designated to her and thus was not subject to the probate proceeding. This case promises to define marriage for all Texas transgendered people, whether male or female. Much as gay persons, transgendered people are not permitted to marry as they are still legally male (or female) even after a surgical sex change under Texas law and since Texas does not permit gay marriage, every transgendered person married to a member of the opposite sex is in a gay marriage and thus the union is void. The status of transgendered people who are married to a person of the same sex is still unclear. To me, equal rights are just that...equal. Marriage has been defined as a basic right time and again by the SCOTUS, with no mention of gender at all. So, a person who has a sex change (who is no longer a member of their birth gender IMO) should be able to marry a person of their choosing. Gays should be able to do the same. Without state interference. The same applies to serving in the military. Gays are qualified to serve. It has been shown that sexual orientation has little effect on unit morale or ability to perform their duty. Transgendered persons can do the same. As long as the soldier (or sailor or airman) is able to do their job, they ought to be allowed to do so. Heck, sexual preference has NO bearing on that at all! I know a lot of guys that preferred their hands to living people, which seems like a preference to me. I happened to like a lot of leather to be involved in MY sex when I was younger and that didn't affect my ability to serve either. It was just a preference. I see no difference. DADT needs to go, along with any regulations dealing with who is fucking whom. __________________ Never be afraid to tell the world who you are. -- Anonymous

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)