Transgender 101

[redcliffsw]

"Transgender 101: Gender Identity in the Workplace" is a workshop that will be offered by the U.S. Naval Academy tomorrow for faculty, staff, and cadets. It will be conducted by two "transgender trainers" who created the Trans 101 session "with the hope that it would create more supportive and inclusive workplaces by helping people better understand the trans experience and what it means to be an ally to the trans community." How long before voluntary workshops like this will be mandatory for all members of the military? How long before the Navy's new slogan will be "Join the navy, travel the world, and change your gender at taxpayer expense"? And how long before Christians realize that the military is an unholy institution? Tragically, probably long after the first two things come to pass.
-Laurence Vance

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/transgender-101/

[Wake-up!]

For those readers that will read, or have read, the full blog at lewrockwell.com, the article cited above does not represent Libertarianism. And make no mistake, lewrockwell.com is a Libertarian site. The author, Laurence Vance, appears there frequently, and almost always masks issues behind his personal agendas. This link is no exception. Vance seems to be mixing and mashing what I see as distinct topics that Libertarians address. And, I my opinion, Vance's approach misrepresents several of those

As I read the article, he seemed to be deriding the LGBT crowd. That is not a Libertarian point of view. Libertarians are open to a L, G, B, or T being what they are, living the life they freely chose to live. And living that life free of coercion from people that disagree with said lifestyle. All our private lives are ours to live, whomever we are. That means there should be a place in the military for LGBTs that chose to serve. And if you have served, you know the narrow-mindedness and intolerance that is supported, and often fostered, by the military. So there is a need for LGBT awareness in the military. Somehow. I'm not saying Transgender 101 is the correct approach, for I know nothing about that 'course'.

It is also a Libertarian viewpoint that someone choosing transgender surgical procedures would NOT do so on the taxpayers dime. Vance is correct on this one. [Off-topic but relevant, it is just like the Libertarian view on abortion, the choice is the woman's and/or the family's, not the church's or the government's. But it is also Libertarian view that public funds will NOT pay for abortions.]

Vance misses the point about the military, and the military-industrial complex. Just how many transgender surgeries have occurred in the military at taxpayers expense? One? Three? Just how damned expensive has that been relative to the military's budget? Please, put it in perspective. Yes, greatly reduced expenses are a Libertarian focus. But the Libertarian point is to stop the empire building, bring all troops home from all overseas billets, and have a technologically advanced military that protects America's borders. We do not need to support puppet governments around the world. That is how to save billions of taxpayer dollars, rather than worry about the cost of a trans-surgery.

Lastly, Libertarians do not usually bring Christianity, or any other religion, into political discussions. If it seems appropriate to do so, then I encourage readers to judge the military as unholy or not because of the lives it takes. One need look no further, 'Thou shall not kill'.

[redcliffsw]

Well, there's at least two (2) kinds of Libertarians - liberal and conservative - maybe more.  Ron Paul is the conservative and the man (Johnson), who ran for President this time around, is a liberal.  Big difference.

Rockwell's site is pretty much conservative.  Rockwell is a catholic.  Laurence Vance is a Baptist, not a modern or convention Baptist type, but I suppose that "independent" Baptist would describe Vance.

I don't see how Vance misses the point on the military.  The military is needed to defend the country but it's very aggressive and socialistic too.  Ever hear the word 'neocon'?  If so, then you know.

[Wake-up!]

As I'm sure you know, Libertarianism is based on three primary tenets, the non-aggression principle, no State, and completely free markets. All other, issue-related positions derive from those three. If a person does not hold to all three, he/she (ze!) is not a Libertarian. If a person wants to condition those three, she/he is not a Libertarian.

Ron Paul is a Libertarian, one all others should emulate. I do not believe he would appreciate the label, conservative. He and conservatives may share positions on issues. Hell, he and liberals have shared positions on issues. So why not label him a liberal, also? He supports many classically liberal issues; free speech, flag burning, gay marriage, legal drugs, marriages of any sort between consenting adults, etc. When I say he supports them, he does so as a Libertarian. That does not say he embraces them in his personal life. Two different things.

Libertarianism does not support any religion, it allows the personal choice of any and all religions (including witchcraft, if an individual chooses that), or no religion at all. Rockwell's religion or Vance's religion should not come into play in their Libertarian writings. Rockwell is good at separating politics and religion in his writings; Vance often colors his politics with his religion. I'll call him out on that every time he does.

Vance has written many, good articles opposing the neocons and the military's excesses, including its war crimes. But as I said in my previous post, Libertarianism is okay with transgenders in the military. Vance's opposition to transgender in the military, because of his religious belief or not, is in opposition to his position as a Libertarian. And as a self-proclaimed Libertarian writer, his article is misleading readers about Libertarian tenets.

If we are going to talk military, let's talk the cost of a new jet fighter, the cost of drone warfare, the innocent civilian casualties of war, the spooks undermining sovereign foreign governments, government troops on America's streets, ad nauseam. Transgender is irrelevant to that conversation, in my opinion.

[redcliffsw]

The term conservative is kinda broad - well you know it's a broad term because Republicans use the term conservative to describe themselves.   One of the best descriptions for Republicans is neoconservative = neocon for short.  I think Hillary is a Republican and many Republicans can identify with her or Obama on many things - not that Trump is any sort of paleoconservative or Jeffersonian Democrat.  Trump is Republican and that's the stuff we're gonna get.  A former Marine that I know says that Trump is a northeastern carpetbagger and I'm thinking he's right.

Vance is against the promotion and support of the transgender by the military or the government.  And I don't know that so-called Libertarians favor government doing that unless its the liberal type Libertarians which are something else in my opinion.  I'm not a Libertarian.  Lew Rockwell posts many editorials by Confederates/Southerners on his site.  One has to sort what he wants to read on the Rockwell site.  An example, Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Pat Buchanan et al are not Libertarians or claim to be, yet their views are available on the Rockwell site.

One can be a Republican or a modern Democrat and the two sides argue like cats and dogs and both 'em take down Confederate flags and Confederate monuments.  That just about sums it up for both 'em and things will never get much better in this country with that kind of leadership.  They're both socialists and each party does their best to promote their favorite socialist stuff.

I enjoy your posts.