Pelosi:Restricting DoD Funds for Gender Transition Treatments Hurts Nat'l Security

[BucEyedPea]

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi slammed Republicans for trying to “rip away” health care for transgender service members.

In a statement Thursday, Pelosi said the “disgusting” attempt to restrict funds from being used to provide gender transition treatments is “unprecedented, unacceptable and undermines our national security.”

“Republicans should be ashamed: instead of protecting the men and women who risk their lives to defend our freedoms, they are fighting to rip away the health care of thousands of brave service members,” Pelosi said in a statement. “This cowardly Republican amendment targeting transgender men and women in uniform effectively bans these patriotic Americans from serving their country.”

Missouri GOP Rep. Vicky Hartzler filed an amendment to the House National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which successfully moved through the Rules Committee.

If passed, the bill would entail that “funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to provide medical treatment (other than mental health treatment) related to gender transition to a person entitled to medical care.”

While Colorado Democratic Rep. Jared Polis attempted to block the amendment moving to the floor, the Rules Committee struck down Polis’ attempt.

Polis serves as the co-chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus.

The reason for the amendment is that Hartzler believes pro-transgender policies reduce military readiness.

“Military service is a privilege, not a right,” Hartzler said in June. “It is predicated on winning wars and defeating the enemy. All decisions on personnel and funding should be made with this in mind.”...

ro-LGBT military organizations reacted in a similar way to Pelosi, calling the NDAA amendment “vile” and “vicious.”

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/pe...#ixzz4mmCHQtjF

[Prison Bitch]

At some point you have to wonder if the Dems are being paid to try and lose

[jettio]

So if this Hartzler amendment is not in the final bill that passes both houses will military readiness be diminished?

It is not like the military is made stronger by changing the current coverage for this kind of thing for service people and their family members.

What is Hartzler's evidence and argument for making the change? Did she provide specific examples of military readiness being diminished by someone on earth receiving treatment under the current coverage?

Maybe Hartzler think those folks are perverts, and that is why she proposed her amendment.

[Frazod]

Having these freaks in uniform hurts national security.

[BucEyedPea]

Why is Jettio posting pretend questions.

I think there's a Donger virus going around.

[scho63]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

At some point you have to wonder if the Dems are being paid to try and lose

It's hard as hell to believe the battles they pick to fight. Have any of them left California, New York or DC?

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by scho63

It's hard as hell to believe the battles they pick to fight. Have any of them left California, New York or DC?

Only by plane.

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by Frazod

Having these freaks in uniform hurts national security.

What?

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by RobBlake

What?

Did I ****ing stutter?

[RobBlake]

Originally Posted by Frazod

Did I ****ing stutter?

Take their place and take a bullet for them

[kjwood75nro]

Originally Posted by Frazod

Only by plane.

But not to any states that disagree with their dysfunction.

[Frazod]

Originally Posted by RobBlake

Take their place and take a bullet for them

I've already done my bit for king and country, twinkletoes. Probably long before you were even a tear of regret in your mother's eye.

[Bob Dole]

Originally Posted by jettio

So if this Hartzler amendment is not in the final bill that passes both houses will military readiness be diminished?

It is not like the military is made stronger by changing the current coverage for this kind of thing for service people and their family members.

What is Hartzler's evidence and argument for making the change? Did she provide specific examples of military readiness being diminished by someone on earth receiving treatment under the current coverage?

Maybe Hartzler think those folks are perverts, and that is why she proposed her amendment.

You have to be trolling. JFC

[HonestChieffan]

God Bless Vicky Hartzler!!!She would be a great Senator to replace the old hag Claire.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by Bob Dole

You have to be trolling. JFC

If posting in a worthless thread that is going to drop down the board like a rock and is unlikely to record many posts is trolling, I suppose you are right.

I am going to guess that this Hartzler amendment is not in the bill that comes out of conference between House and Senate and military readiness will not diminished.