NuRayZ said:
Unlike a *edited* guy, a woman is genetically different than a man.
Last I checked the running liberal excuse for being *edited* was that they were genetically predisposed to be that way. This would make them genetically different from straight men, just like women.
You can’t use both sides of the argument here.
The military is made of primarily heterosexual males and until we have true equality of carrying the burden (IE women and *edited*s NOT being exempt from the draft) I have no problem bashing others or pushing them to secondary roles. Keep in mind that removing homosexuality as a draft dodger will put millions of you liberals back in the draft pool if/when we ever do have another draft. IMO you’d be better off not having “equality”.
I have nothing against *edited*s, it’s a choice they make, but straights don’t flaunt their heterosexuality in the military so why should they tolerate *edited*s flaunting their homosexuality. I mean really, the military is a choice, you don’t HAVE to be there.
Btw, the whole “can’t have a picture” thing is nonsense. Give me one source that backs that up with proof a soldier was actually punished for having a picture of a male.