US Traitor sentenced to 35 years wants sex change now.

[Rockheart]

This person joined the Army as a man,
Made a commitment to their country as a man,
swore and oath to protect their country as a man,
betrayed their country as a man.
Their drivers license said male when they committed the crime and they are most likely not in treatment for Gender Dysphoria.
This person made their choice.
If transitioning was so important, they should have chosen that over the Male path.
People make mistakes that screw up all their plans, shit happens.

The opportunity to transition in prison paid or not should not be allowed.
Anything else would be special treatment.
Special treatment = more money.
Prisoners cannot vote which is considered by many to be one of the highest rights you can have.

The actual number of people that would actually transition in prison now is very tiny.
The only reason it would become commonplace is if people thought they could get special treatment by transitioning.
Everyone would claim to be TG if they can get extra stuff and nicer treatment.

Before anyone says it, there is no place for dedicated Transgender prisons.
The fact is MTF TS say they are women.
FTM TS say they are men.
We do not need TG prisons, because it is only a transitional state.

Beyond that she is going to military prison and is still in the military.
It makes no sense that the armed forces would allow basic trainees under transition.
In the case of a MTF TS, you are actually trying to decrease your muscle mass usually, this would be a medical hinderance to basic training. The goal of both men and women in basic training is to increase fitness and muscle mass, which generally conflicts with most TS goals.
Plus the fact that Transgenderism is considered a mental affliction, does not fit well with troops being able to trust each other.

In the old days she would just have to break rocks for 35 years.
You don't even need a gender to break rocks.

[Shyla Wild]

We can argue this for years and still not convince each other. It is simply a matter of different opinions and views. You have stated your argument and I have made mine. Now members of the forum have the benefits of both sides, if I could claim that there is any benefit to my side of the argument!

Very true....I'm heading to law school in January, so this sort of thing is fun for me.

Stay Safe.

Shyla

[Mike72]

AJ...

So this dude gets sentenced to 35 years in Levenworth and he suddenly wants to become the girl he always was.
Can't anyone pull this bullshit? Sure he was a crossdresser in the past but who hasn't been to some extent?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/23/army-cant-say-if-manning-gender-swap-would-be-permitted/

This is how many men get out of mandatory military service in Thailand, become a Ladyboy.
To me it just seems like a scam to get out of spending time in the general population.
Probably special treatment in a medical facility.
He can go through all the motions and keep putting off the final surgery saying he is not ready or something.

I don't know if this should be allowed after men are convicted of essentially a life sentence.
Isn't this all part of freedom?

Just a few questions: Was Daniel Ellsberg a traitor? (Daniel Ellsberg fully supports Chelsea Manning.)
Do governments commit crimes? Or have we been taught to think -- and believe -- that governments and their actors, as it were, are above the law?
Do governments commit crimes of aggression? Are Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld war criminals?
What about the torture that was undertaken by Bush officials? Is that a crime?
And under international law Manning had to expose those crimes otherwise she could've been prosecuted.
Anyway, she pleaded guilty.... Pointing out that she couldn't turn a blind eye to the crimes committed by her own government.
I think and believe there's a profound difference between one's country and one's government. Remember government is an institution that's concerned with maximizing its own power. Nothing more; nothing less. So, Manning, exposing their crimes and wrongdoings, minimizes their power. Hence the reason they loathe Manning.
And she has known since she was a child that she's transgender. There are a couple of important books written about Manning.

[Ginnydawn]

This soldier's "crime" was to leak information which exposed massive war crimes by the US military, including mass murder, as well as various other sleazy and criminal acts by the US military and political elites. S/he is a hero, but in the modern security police state these heroic acts warrant a 35 year sentence, while the big criminals walk free in Washington. Chelsea deserves a medal, but instead will be slandered as a "traitor". I admire her courage.

me too

[Shyla Wild]

Just a few questions: Was Daniel Ellsberg a traitor? (Daniel Ellsberg fully supports Chelsea Manning.)
Do governments commit crimes? Or have we been taught to think -- and believe -- that governments and their actors, as it were, are above the law?
Do governments commit crimes of aggression? Are Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld war criminals?
What about the torture that was undertaken by Bush officials? Is that a crime?
And under international law Manning had to expose those crimes otherwise she could've been prosecuted.
Anyway, she pleaded guilty.... Pointing out that she couldn't turn a blind eye to the crimes committed by her own government.
I think and believe there's a profound difference between one's country and one's government. Remember government is an institution that's concerned with maximizing its own power. Nothing more; nothing less. So, Manning, exposing their crimes and wrongdoings, minimizes their power. Hence the reason they loathe Manning.
And she has known since she was a child that she's transgender. There are a couple of important books written about Manning.

LOL.....exposing crimes and wrongdoings? Your Country doesn't give a crap about either. Especially not for a lowly transgender person. What proof?

How did John F. Kennedy get shot in the face, if Oswald was behind him and to the right? No one fought this, and the bullshit answers have been accepted. The second that the government knew that they got away with killing the President, it knew it could get away with anything.

Micheal Moore scratched the surface in Fahrenheit 911, but if you can handle it...this is better and much more detailed.

[xoxJanexox]

How did John F. Kennedy get shot in the face, if Oswald was behind him and to the right? No one fought this, and the bullshit answers have been accepted. The second that the government knew that they got away with killing the President, it knew it could get away with anything.

Micheal Moore scratched the surface in Fahrenheit 911, but if you can handle it...this is better and much more detailed.

So, if Bradley Manning released "classified" documents revealing the true answer to JFK assassination by a special force, would he be a patriot or a traitor?

[Shyla Wild]

So, if Bradley Manning released "classified" documents revealing the true answer to JFK assassination by a special force, would he be a patriot or a traitor?

Neither....If you had that information, you would have been buried next to JFK, RFK, etc...


Oswald had that info right? How did it go for him?

[dom r]

So this dude gets sentenced to 35 years in Levenworth and he suddenly wants to become the girl he always was.
Can't anyone pull this bullshit? Sure he was a crossdresser in the past but who hasn't been to some extent?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/23/army-cant-say-if-manning-gender-swap-would-be-permitted/

This is how many men get out of mandatory military service in Thailand, become a Ladyboy.
To me it just seems like a scam to get out of spending time in the general population.
Probably special treatment in a medical facility.
He can go through all the motions and keep putting off the final surgery saying he is not ready or something.

I don't know if this should be allowed after men are convicted of essentially a life sentence.
Isn't this all part of freedom?

Well........So he was convicted of only leaking classified information? Is he their slave or something? It should NOT BE illegal to tell what one has learned no matter if secret or classified,although it depends(?). This shows you that government can be so unfair with their over controlling power. What one has learned of information,the WHOLE WORLD should have the right to know as well and it shouldnt be illegal because this is the internet age,naut 1980. So certainly he/she shouldnt be forced 35 years in an army, it should be one's choice and im also anti-draft and anti-war.Although they should draft real criminals into the army instead of prison. Have them earn their own way by f'cking working while in the army so we dont have to fork over our multi trillion tax dollars to cover prisons or armies.Why should we pay for their fuck up?

Ok,I looked at his/her picture and it seems hes much more man than female.Is he truly a transgender? Anyways my opinion is ah dont think the army or prison should pay for anyone's tranny surgery or transformation no matter who that person is. Tats their own responsibility AND YES, the army should and MUST allow him to transform into a trans if he wishes or else that would be discrimination but of course with his own money. He should be allowed to serve(but not forced) in an army as a transgender or as i said---wood be discrimination if they dont allow it.---you get it?--"wood be discrimination".

And this is how the army/government describes transgenderism or born as intersex-"gender confusion-ambiguous genitalia". Theres no confusion, its a variation or mixed gender,thats all, naut a confused gender.

[xoxJanexox]

Neither....If you had that information, you would have been buried next to JFK, RFK, etc...


Oswald had that info right? How did it go for him?

How could you be sure? Were you the last one to survive from the group(i.e special force)?

Smart answer, you knew where I was heading and played chess!

[Shyla Wild]

How could you be sure? Were you the last one to survive from the group(i.e special force)?

Smart answer, you knew where I was heading and played chess!

Would you expect anything less of me?

[tommygun]

Here is how the laws break down and apply in "modern" societies. The following is a copy and past from the US Supreme Court decision in Shaw v. Murphy, which was referred to in your post:

Traditionally, federal courts did not intervene in the internal affairs of prisons and instead "adopted a broad handsoff attitude toward problems of prison administration."Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U. S. 396, 404 (1974). Indeed, for much of this country's history, the prevailing view was that a prisoner was a mere "slave of the State," who "not only forfeited his liberty, but all his personal rights except those which the law in its humanity accords him." Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners' Labor Union, Inc., 433 U. S. 119, 139 (1977) (Marshall, J., dissenting) (quoting Ruffin v. Commonwealth, 62 Va. 790, 796 (1871)) (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted). In recent decades, however, this Court has determined that incarceration does not divest prisoners of all constitutional protections. Inmates

---

229retain, for example, the right to be free from racial discrimination, Lee v. Washington,390 U. S. 333 (1968) (per curiam), the right to due process, Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U. S. 539 (1974), and, as relevant here, certain protections of the First Amendment,Turner, supr

If prisoners have no constitutional rights entirely, then how could the courts hear their claim at the first place!

I never commented on the Geneva Act, because it is wholly irrelevant here as it an international law meant to deal with War prisoners!

Military laws in each country are made internally and although more "stringent" compared to civil laws must still conform to the constitution. I find it illogical to presume that a military person who is supposed to fight for his own country, is the first to be stripped down "fully" from "all" its constitutional rights. Yes, in the military there are some restrictions to maintain order, but these are viewed to be necessary and fair to maintain order.

So, if you want to focus the argument on military prisoners, then the way to compare, is really to the right of an average military person to change his/her gender? If the law is permissive for an average military person to change their gender, then a military prisoner should not be restricted from that right. If the law is not permissive, then one must ensure that the law was not challenged before the courts before putting a dogmatic answer!

Again, the funding issue seems to be thrown in despite my clear previous position about it! Prisoners, whether military or civilians, are not entitled to a preferential treatment compared to their respective populations!

Something that people need to keep in mind is that the constitution and normal rights for Americans don't apply to servicemen the way they do to civilians. Soldiers accept restrictions on certain freedoms when they enlist. Freedom of speech is the biggest example. of this. They cannot join the military without consenting to being governed by the UCMJ. The Uniform Code of Military Justice is the chief legal doctrine that applies here and what it says determines what his rights are. As Gene Hackman, from Crimson Tide, so eloquently put it, "we are here to preserve democracy, not practice it".

[Shyla Wild]

Something that people need to keep in mind is that the constitution and normal rights for Americans don't apply to servicemen the way they do to civilians. Soldiers accept restrictions on certain freedoms when they enlist. Freedom of speech is the biggest example. of this. They cannot join the military without consenting to being governed by the UCMJ. The Uniform Code of Military Justice is the chief legal doctrine that applies here and what it says determines what his rights are. As Gene Hackman, from Crimson Tide, so eloquently put it, "we are here to preserve democracy, not practice it".

Thank you. That is what I was trying to explain, but I didn't know that it was governed by the UCMJ. I figured that being a traitor, she would have been considered a POW under the Patriot Act and the war on Terrorism.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[xoxJanexox]

Something that people need to keep in mind is that the constitution and normal rights for Americans don't apply to servicemen the way they do to civilians. Soldiers accept restrictions on certain freedoms when they enlist. Freedom of speech is the biggest example. of this. They cannot join the military without consenting to being governed by the UCMJ. The Uniform Code of Military Justice is the chief legal doctrine that applies here and what it says determines what his rights are. As Gene Hackman, from Crimson Tide, so eloquently put it, "we are here to preserve democracy, not practice it".

Gays were prohibited from the U.S military for allegedly moral reasons until recently. Gay men who were in the military were prohibited from expressing their sexual orientation. Several decades after this non sense and with society becoming more tolerant, Gays are now accepted for who they are in the U.S military because people with evolution realized that the previous by-laws were "too much of a restriction".

The whole issue about prisoners is that their rights are "restricted" and not completely gone. The is a case by case analysis. This thread started with a proposition that prisoners have "no rights" at all. Just a place to eat and get rid of their wastes! And that is what the Supreme Court case explains eloquently.