FreedomAdvocate

That’s irrelevant because there’s nothing they could find that would make it justified with the way it happened.

The premise of Michael’s tattoos was so much cooler than the actual execution and need for them. His tattoos were basically “here’s a tiny screwdriver shape in this giant demon”, “here’s a number that I could just have remembered but instead put it on a clock”, and so on.

It’s literally acknowledging their existence - the exact opposite of what some, including the lawyer, are saying.

Like it or not, gender dysphoria is a mental condition. Your brain is telling you that you’re “born in the wrong body”. That’s not saying its a bad thing, just that it is a thing - like anorexia where your brain tells you that you’re fat when you’re not.

The debate around which mental conditions make you not able to perform military service is definitely something that needs to be delved into more, but that doesn’t stop an administration from making a decision to start from.

DEIs rejection does not include that assumption at all. It means that you think the best person for the job should get the job, not just the person who ticks the most diversity boxes. Policies like “50% of all board positions need to be women” assumes that 50% of the best people for the position are women, which isn’t the case a lot of the time, especially in male dominated industries.

If the best person for the position is a gay black womens then she should get the job. Likewise if a straight white male is the most qualified and best fit, he should get it. Merit wins.

Calling people a DEI hire has definitely been weaponised, but the fact that champions of dei see that as an insult kinda proves that DEI is what its opponents say it is - unfair.

This EO is nothing to do with DEI though, in any way.

OK you’re not a lefty, you just use all their favourite terms, make all the same arguments for why the things you want to buy should be cheaper, and jump straight to the sane old insults as quickly as leftists do.

If it quacks like a duck and all that…

DEI has nothing to do with this. DEI is about putting people in roles/positions that they didn’t necessarily deserve (as simple a description as you can get for why people oppose it). ie promoting someone because they’re a minority over people who are better qualified.

This is about adding another exclusion to the list of conditions that exclude people from military service eligibility. DEI isn’t even remotely relevant here.

Good job with the name calling though. Really gets across how intelligent and well reasoned your arguments are.

So why does it specifically talk about people with gender dysphoria?

That’s got nothing to do with this EO lol. It’s also not a law.

And many murdered people, committed break and enters, stole property, sold drugs, raped people, etc. Many did it with guns too. You trust those people as being good upstanding honest citizens?