Chicks in combat? What's next?

I concur

 

NO. It should be considered, lol

 

" I have PMS and an F-35"............. Lead On Col.!

 

I'd prefer that to a pen and a phone.....

 

I don't give a rat's ass what sex you are, If you bring it, yer in.

 

That musical played out in the American Civil War....only it was "blokes" with twats, in uniform....who campaigned, fought, and died, as hard as the men, if not harder. They were women disguised as men, who were not permitted to fight in the CSA or Union forces as (female) combatants, but did so anyway under the guise of being men. The "chicks in combat debate" was not an issue during the American Civil War (or the War of Northern Aggression to you Southerners), because it was (incorrectly) assumed that only men could, would, and did fight as combatants.

Women at the time didn't ask for permission to fight for their causes (North or South): They enlisted under male aliases, shouldered their rifles and went to war, until they died, were taken prisoner, or were discharged. They were no shrinking violets.

 

Yeah, it was the war of Yankee aggression, indeed. And look what happened when the federalists won. We got the federal government in our every life transaction. Cant wait till they start saying when or if we can have sex and dictating with whom we can engage in that endeavor

 

Or when our future single payer medical system has over-budgeted too many gender reassignments (due to political pressure), and a nameless bureaucrat gets to determine who is going to get one anyway instead of that un-budgeted kidney transplant...

 

Although the last couple of posts are somewhat off topic, post #289 does deserve a reply.

It's rather cheeky to speculate that there is some likelihood of there being a direct proportional relationship between the funding of gender re-assignments...and, say kidney transplants. If one follows that logic, it would make just as much sense to suggest that

[when our future medical system has over-budgeted too many phalloplasty procedures, ( http://www.penilecosmeticsurgery.com/pdf/articles/State-of-the-art-in-phalloplasty.pdf -warning this article includes graphic images of male genitalia) Penis size and enlargement surgery (due to heterosexual male gender bias / rampant male penile anxiety), and a nameless bureaucrat gets to determine who is going to get one anyway instead of that unbudgeted kidney transplant.]

Besides...how many are "too many" gender re-assignment surgical procedures.?? Is there some kind of acceptable annual quota??

 

My post was mostly sarcasm.... but as a bureaucrat in the medical industry I can tell you that government budgets are based on projected quotas and that management and especially medical center directors are judged and bonused based on meeting those projections.

When the US is finally forced to a single payer system those same reptilian brained bureaucrats will control the funding for all medical care including procedures. When a given hospital has met their quota for a given procedure there will be no funding for further procedures of that same type until the next fiscal year. I can also guarantee that politics will require virtually unlimited funding for procedures like gender reassignments and abortions at the expense of less politically sensitive procedures such as (example only) bone spur removal or artificial joints.

What a Brave New World we are about to embrace.

 

I take your point about the politics of funding health, and the bureaucratic lick-spitteling that goes with the implementation of government policy. However the post may have been more a matter of railing against a single payer system that may fund medical procedures that one disapproves of, and feels undeserving of being funded; as opposed to those procedures that one approves of and feels are deserving of funding. There seems to be more than a little whiff of moral judgement mixed in with the sarcasm methinks.

The brave new world of single payer medical insurance, funding gender reassignment surgery has not yet touched upon Australia. Australia has had universal health care coverage for some 40 or so years Medicare (Australia) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . At best, some specified procedures may be partially funded, with a substantial gap between the medical insurance funding, and the fees charged by the medical service providers.Male to Female Sex Reassignment Surgery... - Trans Health Australia | Facebook

 

I don't think sex reassignment surgery or breast augmentation, nose jobs etc should be funded by the government. Anything that is medically needed for survival, yes. Knee replacements, shoulder surgery and that kind of stuff, yes.

 

Breast augmentation benefits everybody.*

* oink, oink...

 

Political judgement - yes, moral judgement - no. Frankly, I feel bad for anyone with gender confusion issues. Single payer in America is politics and power and has nothing to do with healthcare except as a vehicle.