Quote from: learningtolive on August 26, 2013, 12:03:45 AM
Obama would never sign off on that.  That would take a little political courage.  Seriously, the right would complain that Obama is causing the destruction of the country's moral fabric by allowing Manning to have access to hrt.  Embracing the gay community is not as politically risky as embracing the trans community.  He doesn't want that sort of pressure. Plus, he wants to appear tough on Manning in general.  I don't approve of that, but that's what it will be.

Well, if Manning's suit claims that denial of hrt violates the 8th amendment, wouldn't that be considered a constitutional issue?

An interesting reading of the situation.  Of course, this all happened on Obama's watch, so he has no one to blame.  I seem to recall, though, how good Obama would be for the trans*community.  I wonder what a President Romney would have done?  Whether he would have taken a less hard line, or authorized humane treatment.

They could try an 8th Amendment challenge against C&U punishment, but that is another civilian right that the military may be exempted from.

UCMJ, Article 55, reads:  "Punishment by flogging, or by branding, marking, or tattooing on the body, or any other cruel or unusual punishment, may not be adjudged by a court-martial or inflicted upon any person subject to this chapter. The use of irons, single or double, except for the purpose of safe custody, is prohibited."  It is the military equivalent to the 8th Amendment.

And as it is in the UCMJ, any request for HRT by active duty Private Manning, would necessarily be adjudicated first in the military courts.

The convicted serviceperson can appeal, if unsuccessful, to, in this case, the Armed Forces (Army) Court of Criminal Appeal, but that court can only rule on matters of law, not matters of fact.

After the review of the Armed Forces Court of Criminal Appeal, a case can go to the US Supreme Court, through "collateral review."

Please note:  this tangent was split away from a news item, moved to this forum, and retitled

Quote from: Jamie D on August 26, 2013, 09:46:40 PM
An interesting reading of the situation.  Of course, this all happened on Obama's watch, so he has no one to blame.  I seem to recall, though, how good Obama would be for the trans*community.  I wonder what a President Romney would have done?  Whether he would have taken a less hard kine, or authorized humane treatment.

They could try an 8th Amendment challenge against C&U punishment, but that is another civilian right that the military may be exempted from.

UCMJ, Article 55, reads:  "Punishment by flogging, or by branding, marking, or tattooing on the body, or any other cruel or unusual punishment, may not be adjudged by a court-martial or inflicted upon any person subject to this chapter. The use of irons, single or double, except for the purpose of safe custody, is prohibited."  It is the military equivalent to the 8th Amendment.

And as it is in the UCMJ, any request for HRT by active duty Private Manning, would necessarily be adjudicated first in the military courts.

The convicted serviceperson can appeal, if unsuccessful, to, in this case, the Armed Forces (Army) Court of Criminal Appeal, but that court can only rule on matters of law, not matters of fact.

After the review of the Armed Forces Court of Criminal Appeal, a case can go to the US Supreme Court, through "collateral review."

I'm not saying he has someone to blame; however, I do believe this is why he isn't taking any action.  Politicians are very myopic.  If there isn't any foreseeable  political or social capital to be gained for a risky act, then they are unlikely to make a move.  I don't know why anyone would expect Obama to help the trans community directly.  He has been good on some LGBT issues, but it's still seen as a political risk to fully embrace the trans community.  As for Romney, it's pretty obvious his treatment of the lgbt community, especially the trans community, would be even worse.  It's even more politically risky for him as it would annoy his base and hurt potential fundraising from the Christian right.  I don't see how he would benefit from embracing the trans culture anymore than Obama.  Again, it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's about what helps them.  Unfortunately, that's how the system works.

Yeah, it's a long shot at best for Manning.  I highly doubt it would make it to the Supreme Court, but I really hope it does.  I think this has the potential to be a landmark case given the media attention and resources available to Manning. 

I never really learned military law in school, so it's all ambiguous to me.  I ought to do more reading on it in general as I hate being ignorant on a political matter. 

Quote from: learningtolive on August 27, 2013, 03:29:56 AM
I'm not saying he has someone to blame; however, I do believe this is why he isn't taking any action.  Politicians are very myopic.  If there isn't any foreseeable  political or social capital to be gained for a risky act, then they are unlikely to make a move.  I don't know why anyone would expect Obama to help the trans community directly.  He has been good on some LGBT issues, but it's still seen as a political risk to fully embrace the trans community.  As for Romney, it's pretty obvious his treatment of the lgbt community, especially the trans community, would be even worse.  It's even more politically risky for him as it would annoy his base and hurt potential fundraising from the Christian right.  I don't see how he would benefit from embracing the trans culture anymore than Obama.  Again, it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's about what helps them.  Unfortunately, that's how the system works.

Yeah, it's a long shot at best for Manning.  I highly doubt it would make it to the Supreme Court, but I really hope it does.  I think this has the potential to be a landmark case given the media attention and resources available to Manning. 

I never really learned military law in school, so it's all ambiguous to me.  I ought to do more reading on it in general as I hate being ignorant on a political matter. 

I want you to apply this old political adage to the current situation:

"Only Nixon could go to China."

I was going to respond with a long discussion about why Nixon differs from pragmatic politicians like Obama and Romney.  Then I was going to talk about the political context, both domestically (ex. democratic party in turmoil/ Nixon's popularity and McGovern's long shot) and abroad (ex. Sino Soviet Split), and show why Nixon had much more to gain from opening up to China than Romney would from embracing the trans community.  Furthermore, I could show how the party demographics have changed drastically from 1972 to our current day situation which would highlight why party attitudes and evangelicalism activism in politics differ drastically today. However, I will simply say, "Governor, you are no Dick Nixon."  Politicians like Obama and Romney are nothing alike to guys like LBJ or Nixon.  They are pragmatists who will say what they want to achieve political gain and expediency.  Ideals and remaining strongly convinced over their beliefs and policies are not their strong points.   They are cut from a very different cloth than someone like Nixon or LBJ, so I don't think that statement is applicable here. 

May I ask, why do you think Romney would embrace the trans culture more than Obama?  Do you really think Romney would allow Manning to have access to hormones?

Purely speculative on my part.  But who would have predicted Bill Clinton's "Sista Souljah" moment?

Romney is a moral man and providing the medications is an act of moral courage.

Quote from: Jamie D on August 28, 2013, 01:46:06 AM
Purely speculative on my part.  But who would have predicted Bill Clinton's "Sista Souljah" moment?

Romney is a moral man and providing the medications is an act of moral courage.

Romney has not been a fan of the lgbt community in many ways.  He is a "moral" man who would likely say these medications are in fact immoral and against god's plan.  To establish that he would have supported the transition of Manning beyond speculation would require some further evidence to convince me.  I don't see it at all.

Also, wouldn't it take some moral courage to support ENDA and prevent the discrimination of employees based on sexuality or gender orientation? 

Gov. Romney was widely criticized from the political right for his "pro-Gay Rights" record in Massachusetts.  During the 2012 election, Romney only distanced himself on the issue of traditional marriage.

Of course, this is a purely hypothetical question.  However, we know that the current president was unwilling to tackle ENDA as either a Senator or as President.

Quote from: Jamie D on August 28, 2013, 02:05:53 AM
Gov. Romney was widely criticized from the political right for his "pro-Gay Rights" record in Massachusetts.  During the 2012 election, Romney only distanced himself on the issue of traditional marriage.

Of course, this is a purely hypothetical question.  However, we know that the current president was unwilling to tackle ENDA as either a Senator or as President.

Sure, which is why I said both men are pragmatic and lack traditional political courage.

As for Romney, he did oppose ENDA quite vocally, so I wouldn't say marriage is the only way he distanced himself.  Also, the phrasing of his argument shows that he had a moral opposition to it based on his beliefs.  That makes me question how much he would support a transgender person to transition.  I'm curious if he was ever on record about that.  I'll have to look that up further. 

I would be interested in what you find out.

It is sort of unfair though.  We are comparing a person with an established track record of not helping the trans community when he has had abundant opportunities to do so, versus speculation about what the other might have done in a similar circumstance.

Mitt Romney opposed transgender student anti-bullying school regulations.

http://www.xojane.com/issues/mitt-romney-secretly-fears-bisexual-and-transgender-kids

Specifically, Romney objected to the word "transgender" itself.

http://www.advocate.com/politics/election/2012/06/12/mitt-romney-objected-words-bisexual-and-transgender

I am not aware of any cases where Mitt Romney showed compassion or fairness towards trans persons.