The Supreme Court recently allowed the Trump-era ban on transgender service members to go into effect, reigniting debates about personal freedoms, trust in public institutions, and the role of gun rights advocates in social issues.
This ruling permits the discharge or barring of individuals diagnosed with gender dysphoria from military service, prompting discussions about what this means for LGBTQ Americans and those who defend constitutional freedoms.
Wes Siler, a Montana Senate candidate, does not support Trump’s transgender military ban. You can follow him on Instagram. (Photo: Ben Godwin).
Wes Siler (follow on Substack), an outdoorsman, prominent 2A advocate, and Montana Senate candidate known for bridging communities, weighed in on the controversy in an exclusive correspondence with GunsAmerica:
“If a person is dedicated to protecting the freedoms promised to all Americans, and can pass the requirements necessary, why shouldn’t they be allowed to serve their country?” Siler asked pointedly.
Siler’s experiences with marginalized communities, especially LGBTQ youth, have shaped his understanding. Working directly with homeless youth, many of whom were transgender, he emphasized a truth: “Trans people are people, just like everyone else. If there’s anything that makes them different, it’s the challenges they face.”
Many believe those challenges are substantial. Trans individuals face a suicide risk 19 times greater than the general population and government-targeted discrimination can exacerbate this risk dramatically—by as much as 72 percent, according to Siler.
Addressing whether Trump’s transgender military ban erodes trust between LGBTQ Americans and public institutions, Siler remarked:
“It’s a remarkable testament to strength of character that people from a community targeted for hatred and discrimination would dedicate themselves to serve the very people who discriminate against them. That’s exactly the kind of person who has the capacity to lead.”
But should gun-rights organizations speak out more forcefully about such issues, or would that be outside their scope? According to Siler, it aligns squarely with their mission:
“The purpose of the Second Amendment is to give Americans the ability to defend their other rights. Any organization claiming to stand for 2A must also acknowledge the importance of the rights it was written to protect.”
For Siler, there’s no contradiction between robust 2A advocacy and pushing back against policies that marginalize LGBTQ individuals. In fact, he views self-defense as fundamental for those facing the highest risks:
“Trans people are four times more likely to be victims of violent crime, with risks compounded for women and people of color. A Black trans woman faces a greater threat of violence than virtually any other American. If anyone embodies the necessity of the Second Amendment for self-defense, it’s the trans community.”
Siler talks about the importance. of public lands.
Reflecting broadly on the issue, Siler highlights a historical pattern that should be considered:
“History’s villains have always risen to power by dividing cultures against themselves, persecuting those least able to defend themselves. The persecutions faced by Christians in ancient Rome or Jews in 1930s Germany are reminders playing out today with trans people and immigrants. History’s lessons are clear; it is our responsibility to learn from them.”
This intersection between LGBTQ rights and Second Amendment advocacy isn’t new, but maybe now, in light of recent developments, it demands renewed focus.
I mean, what do you think? Do you agree with Wes? Or do you support Trump’s transgender military ban?
Also, should pro-2A organizations actively engage in this dialogue, or does it stretch beyond their scope?
Genesis 19. Jesus burned the men of Sodom into ashes. If support the sods then you are not right with God.
krinkov 545May 25, 2025, 11:33 am
Siler is a Soddiemite. Got it. Read Leviticus 20:13 and see what Jesus thinks of him.
Robert ChaseMay 25, 2025, 2:27 pm
Uh Jesus wasn’t around at Leviticus time.
krinkov545May 26, 2025, 11:34 am
Jesus is eternal. He existed from eternity past. He had no beginning and he has no end. He is Leviticus 20:13 a eternal law of God and no government can invalidate his laws.
Robert ChaseMay 26, 2025, 1:11 pm
You are unbelievably stupid.
krinkov545May 26, 2025, 1:55 pm
I’m wise because I’m a Bible believing Christian before a patriot and conservative. You proved the fool because you despise the word of God Robert Chase.
krinkov545May 26, 2025, 1:59 pm
You tolerate homos. Jesus said death penalty for homosexuals no exceptions! Les Siler burns for eternity. No homos allowed in heaven.
krinkov545May 26, 2025, 2:19 pm
Hey Robert Chase, get a clue, the Bible is always right, therefore Jesus hates soddiemites like Les Stile. Leviticus 20:13 is an eternal law against the soddie. It will be enforced both on earth and in eternity sooner or later. Do you lefty nutters have any power over eternity? Laughable at best and worst. Hey your buddy Les Stiles will be where you are going in eternity.
Richard McVeyMay 24, 2025, 5:31 pm
You’re too young and stupid to remember when queers weren’t allowed in the military due to security risks. The military shouldn’t be responsible for your stupidity and pay for your sex changes or medical treatment.
J RMay 24, 2025, 2:44 am
This is TOTALLY outside the scope of any 2A concerns. Also, candidate Siler is off target – in a normal, responsible government, someone who is trans/gender dysphoric would not be considered fit for military service due to their mental condition, which is highlighted by their inability to accept themselves in their natural form. He even alludes to the high suicide rate in this group, which is an indicator of troubled mental state. Additionally, these individuals would (and have) present significant logistical expenditures to accommodate them, as well as increased needs for mental and other health services, likely contributing to a non-deployable status. It’s not worth the cost and disruption, so this Administration is making the right call, which is in the best interest of the country, regardless of how inartfully the subject is addressed.
SteveMay 24, 2025, 7:43 am
I will be cancelling my subscription, I see you are heading down the Woke trail. Zero tolerance for this crap.
Ellie Hugh ThomasMay 23, 2025, 7:39 pm
As was shown by Klinger on MASH, transgenderism, as well as all other similar issues, have been defined as a mental illness. Many of the mass murders have been committed by individuals suffering from gender dysphoria. Just because certain elements of our current culture have decided it is OK or even necessary to play along with these delusional fantasies. Much as the push to allow men to compete against women in women’s sports, which ignores physiological facts, allowing mentally ill individuals to “lead” combat forces shows the overall insanity that has possessed modern Western “culture”.
LarrybomberMay 23, 2025, 7:06 pm
It is not about the individual that is trans, it’s about unit cohesion. If you can’t trust someone, or it is an issue to get up close, face to face, then that creates issues with the whole unit and that degrades warfighting capability. That is what the issue is. Not that the trans cannot do the physical part, but he until will leave him out there to die because some people may not jump up in machine-gun fire to go and save them. Destroys the no one left behind clause.
ChgoBillMay 23, 2025, 3:28 pm
Gender Dysphoria is mental health issue. Those individuals would cause unit disruption. Those that have transitioned will require costly LIFELONG hormonal therapy which would drain valuable resources from the VA medical system for a self-imposed condition. They should be excluded from military service.
American PatriotMay 23, 2025, 1:23 pm
This is a complete bullshit story!! Trump-on!
MahaMay 23, 2025, 12:44 pm
Siler’s remarks about how great it is that Transgenders want to serve in the military and how great their leadership would be is irrelevant. Their dysphoria is a mental illness that causes them to focus on pretending to be a sex they are not. It would disrupt unit cohesiveness and cost the taxpayer money that should not be spent on military members. Type 1 diabetics are not eligible for service. Neither are people suffering from coccidioidomycosis, tuberculosis, or chronic emphysema. People under cancer treatment are not eligible to join. This is the reality. Pretending to be the opposite sex is a lifetime medical battle. The last thing the taxpayer should be shouldering is the apex of the care, “transitional surgery”, which alone, results in lifetime medical problems.
CreosoteMay 23, 2025, 12:31 pm
Mental Deficients aren’t allowed to own firearms. Also veteran/personnel suicides are already high already. We don’t need people with a 50% suicide rate to increase those numbers further or endanger their comrades. These people need a priest.
Smedley ButlerMay 23, 2025, 12:29 pm
This is a complete crap article. 30 seconds of effort would have yielded that service members do not have 2A rights on base. HOWEVER, there are many illnesses that can prevent you from joining the military. Mental illness is one of them.
Dur PoiguyMay 23, 2025, 11:55 am
I can tell you from 20 years personal experience as. Military Police Investigator that gays in the military are definitely not a good thing. The instances of drug use, domestic violence among that community and other related crimes is far higher than among normal personnel. The human reliance risks are outweighed by the left’s ideas of DEI utopia! The presence of lgbtq persons in the force undermines Force Readiness, capabilities and unit cohesion, all strong factors in a strong military.
Michael ComerMay 23, 2025, 11:38 am
They still have the right to own firearms. I had a deep desire to serve as a career soldier but was kept out of the military because I lost a kidney to disease. But I still have the right to bear arms as a civilian. Whether or not you’re allowed to serve in the military is not a 2nd Amendment issue.
ManganeseMay 25, 2025, 2:31 pm
It’s truly amazing how many anti-trans pro-Trump totally stupid individuals have commented.
paul I'll call you what I want/1st AmendmentMay 26, 2025, 3:35 pm
what is more amazing is that you come here bad-mouthing people and expect change
BeoBearMay 23, 2025, 11:21 am
Transgender members were integrated into the Canadian military well over a decade ago without problems. It’s not trans people who were the problem. There’s been a statistically small percentage of people who are actually transgender since for decades, I think I read it was around 3% of the population until the Democrats took power. The original 3% of people were otherwise normal people and you would rarely be able to tell who they were because they had no agenda other than to live peacefully as the gender they felt they were. They didn’t claim they suddenly changed the definition of gender or any of the crazy things that we’ve all seen following Hillary Clintons loss. Once Clinton lost the election the Democrats weaponized the LGBTQ community. They gave them a voice and power. And, as usually happens when give a voice and power to a fringe group, they had zero control over themselves and this entire ordeal started. They started pushing the LGBTQ agenda on the most easily influenced, children, and our Democrats supported it. Suddenly it was cool for kids to claim they were transgender. The LGBTQ community made it seem fun for kids. They could get special treatment and attention for claiming to be gay or especially for being transgender. Then the psuedo-scientists moved in and started treating children for gender dysphoria and now they are convinced they are transgender. Parents proudly claimed their four month old infant was transgender because it became the cool thing for liberal parents as well. That entire debacle is going to implode and it’s the children who going to suffer as they move into adults. I think I read as of the beginning of the new Trump administration there were now 30% of people who identify as transgender although they have morphed the definition of “transgender” to mean whatever they want. Perhaps the most ironic part of all of this was that actual transgender children, teens and adults (that original approx 3% of the population) were pushed aside because most saw what was happening and were ostracized for not being on board with the new liberal agenda. Back to the original subject of the story, do I think banning them from the military infringes on the 2A? No. Do I think it violates the spirit of freedom our constitution was written to protect? Originally when transgender people were normal people, yes but because of the Democrats and the Biden administrations buffoonery, no. Unfortunately now, accepting transgender members doesn’t mean what it did when they were first accepted. Now it means having Pvt. Starfish needing to work from inside his or her personal Mr. Turtle pool or some other wacky nonsense. The previous administration not only brought the economic pain, homeland security danger and national security disasters but they destroyed the childhood of a generation or two of our children. Those kids they warped will now have to un-warp themselves because the people that caused this problem aren’t going to be there for them and sadly I think this will end tragically for several. Until we can somehow become unburdened by what has been, I don’t think the president has any choice but to remove transgender members from the military. It’s sad because prior to all this craziness, actual transgender Americans who love their country were serving seamlessly and without conflict. The Democrats ruined that like they ruin most things.
Robert WilsonMay 23, 2025, 11:12 am
I’m of the opinion all homosexuals should be banned from military service in order to promote good order and discipline. I’m retired Navy Seabee and saw the erosion of personal responsibility and physical fitness qualifications during my career. Females in combat units caused strife and they weren’t qualified for their role, homosexual men obsessed about sex and were often poor performers but both were given a pass for political reasons.
Tom WalkerMay 23, 2025, 10:04 am
I believe we should allow LGBTQRST,… to join if so inclined and they pass tests and training just like the rest of us. They should also have to dress and comport themselves in the fashion expected of someone with the chromosones they have. No elective surgery should be offered or given.
Steve RelyeaMay 23, 2025, 10:04 am
The 2A covers civilians not the formal military and therefore the POTUS decision has nothing to do with 2A. Second the 2A groups has no need to focus on this topic.
J Ball, srMay 23, 2025, 9:19 am
I be canceling my subscription to this Guns America news letter. If I need discussions of the non gun related issues of the day, there are many other sites better suited for such discussions.
EricMay 23, 2025, 8:49 am
I 100% agree with Siler. If someone can show me any actual data or some specific incident that demonstrates allowing trans folks to serve somehow effects our warfighting ability, I’d reconsider. The truth is there’s no such data or incident. Trump reimposing the ban is just him pandering to Bible bangers. He’s dividing Americans to keep himself in power.
Something I’ve noticed as a lefty gun owner: folks sure love to talk about the Constitution right up until it impacts an area where they have a personal prejudice. Lots of of talk about God in other comments on this article, but I sure don’t see a lot of talk about Constitutional rights. Pretty sad if you ask me.
Well you bigots, hear this: I’m out here, and I’ve taught a lot of gay and trans folks to shoot, and about their Constitutional rights. They won’t forgot the kinds of things you ignorant commenters are saying.
paul I'll call you what I want/1st AmendmentMay 23, 2025, 2:18 pm
show me some proof on how they are a benefit and not some lefty bullshit that gets slung around…..
KaneMay 25, 2025, 9:18 am
Eric wants data. Maybe comparing recruiting data during the four years of the fake POTUS (genuine POS) administration and then the more recent smaller sample during the Trump administration would provide that evidence.
paul I'll call you what I want/1st AmendmentMay 26, 2025, 3:33 pm
i think they have their own constitution, which is basically word of mouth and nothing written down!
KaneMay 24, 2025, 9:01 pm
Just a couple of observations on Eric. He uses the term “Bible bangers” which seems to derive from ‘Bible thumpers,” although few if any use the version “bangers.” Despite a possible mix up, Eric intended to insult. Really not a big deal, insults are all part deal but try to have more consistency. Don’t go on later to act like you are so above the fray and pull out the line, “well you bigots, hear this,…” Eric, no one really cares that you out with “a lot of gay and trans folks.” Instead, I would rather hear how a “lefty gun owner” supports the 2A.
As far as the Constitution and military service, the Founding Father’s opposed a standing army. That changed a bit when Thomas Jefferson saw what would occur on the high seas with Muslim pirates and treacherous British as constant threats. Jefferson later supported the Navy.
Would like to hear Eric’s explanation if/how Constitution guarantees citizens universal rights to serve in the military.
EricMay 26, 2025, 10:39 am
Oh Kane, honey.
Around here, you hear Bible banger as much as you hear Bible thumper. Both terms are interchangeable. So today you learned something.
As for either term being insulting, meh. They’re more short hand than anything else. If you are upset by my ise of the term, you are working very hard to find something to be upset about. But just as an experiment, stack Bible banger on one side. Then go read what folks have called gay and trans folks in other comments on this article. You are more activated by the term Bible banger, but you’ll find more invective against gay and trans folks, spewed by folks like you. You know, devoutly religious hypocrites.
As for the Constitution, to the extent it describes qualifications for military service, it notes they are the purview of Congress. Despite that, the President, you know, the Executive, reimposed the ban on trans folks serving openly.
He did that to pander to Bible bangers. And rather than recalling that qualifications for military service fall to Congress, you Bible bangers just ate that right up.
KaneMay 28, 2025, 8:31 am
After feeding Eric’s post into Wiki translation, I got this reply.
Eric is unaware of his own intolerance, as a lefty Eric does NOTHING to support the 2A, Eric has no proof of a Constitutional guarantee for universal military service.
Learning is fun.
EricMay 28, 2025, 2:18 pm
Jeez Kane, you call your own mother a wiki? Seems rude to me.
I did address what the Constitution says about military service, specifically that Congress determines qualifications. You haven’t addressed the unconstitutional action of Trump reimposing the ban on trans folks serving openly. Instead you deflected and started talking past me, to the crowd.
Again, Congress gets to determine the qualifications for military service. Not your Cheeto Jesus.
KaneMay 28, 2025, 8:45 pm
I bet you cry when one of your little pets recounts how their pronoun preference was skewed and then you throw around a “mother” comment. You still the most offensive, intolerant, bigot on this thread, Eric.
Your 1st post- “Lots of of talk about God in other comments on this article, but I sure don’t see a lot of talk about Constitutional rights.”
My question- Would like to hear Eric’s explanation if/how Constitution guarantees citizens universal rights to serve in the military.
You latest reply- “As for the Constitution, to the extent it describes qualifications for military service, it notes they are the purview of Congress”
“Constitutional rights” and “qualifications for military service” are separate issues. You changed the focus of your complaint because the first point was without any basis in fact, just admit that much.
JakeMay 23, 2025, 8:47 am
The single most likely person to attempt mass shootings is the transgender individual. 40% are pedophiles. 51% have at least one clinically insane parent. Over 3/4 regret having transitioned. Add all the other things stated by other posts and you easily see why admitting those with special medical needs including many unavailable in a combat zone is madness. These are mentally ill and or psychologically damaged people who need help, outside of the Armed Forces. These unfortunates are just another of the coalition that trash like JB Pritzker attempt to lionize and hope to band together to win the Presidency in ’28. LGBTQ+, communist degenerates, teachers unions, illegal aliens.
JamesMay 23, 2025, 8:44 am
I don’t see how any link could be made here, there is already a large list of mental health issues that preclude you from military service, various stats show a 32%-50% increase in suicide attempts among the transgender community. Any other mental illness with that same rate would be a disqualifier and no one would bat an eye, now tack on the added cost in health care for transition related care and lack of deployability for medical conditions compared to the common service member and the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
Chuck HaggardMay 23, 2025, 8:44 am
This article is absolute bullshit. This has nothing to do with 2A freedoms and everything to do with having people in the military who can be deployed to austere locations during wartime. You can’t serve if you are diabetic, or have epilepsy, either. It’s about being deployable, nothing else. Trans people require a non stop regimen of hormones, just as a T! diabetic requires insulin, neither can be insured during wartime. This author is utterly clueless, and perhaps delusional.
dylan mozgovMay 23, 2025, 9:37 am
I agree, trans people shouldn’t be in the front lines where they’re making combat decisions. I actually think anyone who wants to join the military should have a fair shot at it, but not everyone should be able to be in a combat role.
Not sure the article is bullshit though. If you read it, they’re clearly just reporting what actual politicians are saying about it and it’s important to be aware.
Ford PrefectMay 23, 2025, 9:50 am
If you join a branch of the military, you are saying, that if called upon, you are capable of fighting in the front lines. If you want to assist the military, but are not qualified to serve in the front lines, you can work for that branch as a civil servant. There are thousands of civil servants who support the warfighters, but never don a uniform, or carry a rifle.
FrankMay 23, 2025, 8:33 am
This is one of the dumbest-damn articles ever printed in GOA. For ANYONE to even briefly consider that the delusions of mentally-ill people are somehow related to God-given rights?!?… only shows that person is mentally ill as well.
GOA… stick to your lane, with the people who pay your bills. Leave the psycho-babble to the quacks.
FrankMay 23, 2025, 8:19 am
Well, here’s why…. The trans service members require extensive and expensive medical procedures and drugs to support their dysphoria.
This process compromises their ability to actively serve, and this is also a COMPLETELY elective process, the costs of which should not be borne by US taxpayers.
If someone wants to butcher their body, and destroy their chemistry with drugs, that is their choice. But If they are incapable of making a rational decision to protect their own body health and safety, we are not going to trust them to protect the rest of us.
And don’t ask us to pay for it either.
FrankMay 23, 2025, 9:53 am
Hi there, Frank. Great comment! I’m the other “Frank” who has been posting here on GOA for years. Is there any way I can talk you into including your middle or last initial (when you post) so that we won’t be confused for one another? Just a thought. Have a great day!
G-MANMay 23, 2025, 9:59 pm
BOTH “FRANK” POSTS ARE SPOT ON ! MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE HAVE NO PLACE IN THE MILITARY OR POSSESING FIREARMS.
BobMay 23, 2025, 8:13 am
When the military begins to completely mirror society it becomes dysfunctional! There must be rules in place to make it function as a nation defender! Allowing people to run around claiming to be a different gender does not aid in that! And I know there will be all kinds of arguments defending them instead of looking at it as a mental problem!
Austin AndersonMay 23, 2025, 12:30 pm
Thank you for calling a spade a spade. The madness has gotten out of hand because people were afraid to.
Austin AndersonMay 23, 2025, 7:26 am
This ridiculous nonsense is why we lose our 2A rights in the first place. The same worldview that perverts God’s truth that He made them male and female is the worldview that says government grants rights and not God. If govt grants rights, then govt can take away rights. Thinking you are a different sex is a mental disorder based in sin. These people need prayer and help. They should not to be on the frontlines of defense. Absolutely SHAMEFUL of GunsAmerica to even consider posting this.
TomMay 23, 2025, 6:54 am
Serving in the military is a privilege, not a right. Why would the military want people who have psychological problems and can’t figure out what sex they are?
KaneMay 21, 2025, 9:33 pm
“Siler’s experiences with marginalized communities, especially LGBTQ youth, have shaped his understanding.”
I remember years ago when I was in high-school, the then current plea of the “gay” community was for a little “tolerance.” After all, gay youths are more prone to suicide and people gradually became more “tolerant” of the lifestyle. Over the years, the initial plea for “tolerance” has completely morphed into a violent demand that people acknowledge the complicated and ever-growing lists of pronouns and other societal transforming deranged hang ups. Tolerance is no longer enough, now one is expected to be an advocate everything the LGBTQ demands. Sports teams have been forced to wear the rainbow colors; families have foolishly taken very young children to inappropriate drag shows; little schoolgirls are expected to dress in the same locker room as naked ass men. Even members older of the “gay” and lesbian community do not relate to the LGBTQ movement and see some of the aspects and tactics as grooming young children.
Stable leadership is in crisis in our most crucial institutions including religious, political and the military. The recently deceased, “Pope” Francis supported the “gay” lifestyle while turning his back on traditional Catholics. This Jesuit fraud never once spoke out while the FBI profiled Catholic Church members. He fired great leaders like Cardinal Strickland and excommunicated Arch-Bishop Vigano for being true in their faith. He never once spoke up while the “sisters of perpetual indulgence” desecrated Christianity’s most sacred iconography will being exulted at LA Dodgers stadium. The intolerant LGBTQ community has long been intolerant and has only become worse the more others reached out to them. For instance, an artist named Robert Maplethorpe years ago created a hazmat display using Catholic icons mixed in with urine, called the hate display art and the NYC taxpayers footed the bill, never once did a “gay” leader criticize this or the hate display in LA. Still, the inherently intolerant LGBTQ community, demands everyone be well versed in pronouns and advocacy while making a mockery of the symbols of others.
I saw a YouTube clip where a quiet elderly couple was being escorted by police to their car from Riley Gaines presentation. During the long walk the couple was being verbally assaulted by two LGBTQ members who were shouting disgusting taunts including their suggestion that the two go home and kill themselves. Now, the original call for tolerance has come full circle to show the duplicity and true toxic nature of LGBTQ. The neutered LEO should have arrested the LGBTQ members.
People like Siler are well meaning buffoons. For years the military was the best example of US social integration particularly among the many races and religions of this nation. Then the leftwingers gained control and placed the military in a serious crisis. In the Marine Corps (I am sure other branches have a version) we often heard how to prioritize the two most vital issues. First came the accomplishment of the mission, and then the welfare of the troops. The LGBTQ lifestyle is a race to the bottom of a bottomless pit and will only hurt the mission of each specific branch of the military and identity politics will never serve the 2A cause well.
paul I'll call you what I want/1st AmendmentMay 22, 2025, 3:15 pm
it’s all carefully executed plans of the communist left to gain total control of our country. fear and conflict are powerful tools to achieve that goal. the funny and most ironic thing about it is those who support it don’t realize their lifestyles wont slide after control is achieved and they will either change or gotten rid of!
paul I'll call you what I want/1st AmendmentMay 21, 2025, 3:22 pm
so a democrat is using the 2a to push an agenda, wtf….no one is taking their guns! no, trannys in the military bad idea, it hurts readiness and cohesion. besides while they are under treatment they wouldn’t be world wide qualified! all it boils down to who pays for their sexual whims, answer the tax payer not themselves!!!
KaneMay 21, 2025, 9:36 pm
A+
paul I'll call you what I want/1st AmendmentMay 22, 2025, 4:33 am
all this dei crap does is destroy the military system of uniformity and rank! a supervisor now has to worry about how to treat a person with a turbin, gold chain, earings, corn rolls, religious beliefs, and the numerous genders when making assignments and promotions. if you can’t be a team player then you don’t need to be there!!!
Russ WhiteMay 21, 2025, 2:26 pm
Should there be any physical limits beyond “passing a test?” For instance, if someone with Parkinson’s can pass the physical today, but will not be operationally available 50% of the time in the future, should we still say: “Please join the military?” Regardless of how you think about transgenderism, the surgeries involved are massive, with long periods of recovery, permanent hormone usage, lots of potential problems, etc. It seems, to me, that the reasons Trump gave for the ban are sound and necessary.
KaneMay 21, 2025, 9:56 pm
Siler thinks the military is another feel good social program.
NateMay 21, 2025, 12:03 pm
The Constitution doesn’t specify which Americans have the right to its freedoms – it applies to all Americans. And if an American wants to defend those freedoms by volunteering for military service, how could I say no?
KaneMay 21, 2025, 9:53 pm
Maybe there was a loosening of standards but in the past people who were overweight where restricted from enlisting. The last administration kicked out tens of thousands of military people who refused the “jab,” and the fake POTUS (genuine POS) never cared about their patriotism. Recently, a VA nurse was telling me very quietly that employees who got the “jab” are having all sorts of health problems and have no legal recourse. She said she was of the few that fought the mandate. I am afraid many in the military might now regret acquiescing to the medical demands. Members who become disabled are usually discharged and then the military turns them over to the VA without any advocacy.
DanMay 23, 2025, 10:20 am
I developed back issues while serving in the Army. Following surgery, which included installing bolts and steel plates in my spine, I had some limitations, but could still do my primary job. However, the Army decided that I was “no longer world-wide deployable under battlefield conditions” and medically retired me. No one who requires ongoing medical treatment or medication is deployable under battlefield conditions, as no treatments can be guaranteed.
Furthermore, no one with a pre-existing medical condition should be allowed to join the military, particularly if they will require very expensive elective surgery and ongoing treatments, all funded by the taxpayer, for a condition that was not caused by their military service.
That’s how you can say no to transgender people wishing to serve in the military.
Forrest C AdcockMay 21, 2025, 11:30 am
Articles where the author won’t even sign their own name are stupid and so are people who don’t understand why transgender people fall under the “can’t go into combat because they require prescription drugs being sent to the front lines.”
The military isn’t about protecting your precious feelings. Shut up and sit down, ma’am.
KaneMay 21, 2025, 9:53 pm
A+
Joel BrainMay 21, 2025, 11:21 am
Probably a natural tendency to be against those things we don’t understand. Two edged sword, that.
Siler’s an idiot.
Genesis 19. Jesus burned the men of Sodom into ashes. If support the sods then you are not right with God.
Siler is a Soddiemite. Got it. Read Leviticus 20:13 and see what Jesus thinks of him.
Uh Jesus wasn’t around at Leviticus time.
Jesus is eternal. He existed from eternity past. He had no beginning and he has no end. He is Leviticus 20:13 a eternal law of God and no government can invalidate his laws.
You are unbelievably stupid.
I’m wise because I’m a Bible believing Christian before a patriot and conservative. You proved the fool because you despise the word of God Robert Chase.
You tolerate homos. Jesus said death penalty for homosexuals no exceptions! Les Siler burns for eternity. No homos allowed in heaven.
Hey Robert Chase, get a clue, the Bible is always right, therefore Jesus hates soddiemites like Les Stile. Leviticus 20:13 is an eternal law against the soddie. It will be enforced both on earth and in eternity sooner or later. Do you lefty nutters have any power over eternity? Laughable at best and worst. Hey your buddy Les Stiles will be where you are going in eternity.
You’re too young and stupid to remember when queers weren’t allowed in the military due to security risks. The military shouldn’t be responsible for your stupidity and pay for your sex changes or medical treatment.
This is TOTALLY outside the scope of any 2A concerns. Also, candidate Siler is off target – in a normal, responsible government, someone who is trans/gender dysphoric would not be considered fit for military service due to their mental condition, which is highlighted by their inability to accept themselves in their natural form. He even alludes to the high suicide rate in this group, which is an indicator of troubled mental state. Additionally, these individuals would (and have) present significant logistical expenditures to accommodate them, as well as increased needs for mental and other health services, likely contributing to a non-deployable status. It’s not worth the cost and disruption, so this Administration is making the right call, which is in the best interest of the country, regardless of how inartfully the subject is addressed.
I will be cancelling my subscription, I see you are heading down the Woke trail. Zero tolerance for this crap.
As was shown by Klinger on MASH, transgenderism, as well as all other similar issues, have been defined as a mental illness. Many of the mass murders have been committed by individuals suffering from gender dysphoria. Just because certain elements of our current culture have decided it is OK or even necessary to play along with these delusional fantasies. Much as the push to allow men to compete against women in women’s sports, which ignores physiological facts, allowing mentally ill individuals to “lead” combat forces shows the overall insanity that has possessed modern Western “culture”.
It is not about the individual that is trans, it’s about unit cohesion. If you can’t trust someone, or it is an issue to get up close, face to face, then that creates issues with the whole unit and that degrades warfighting capability. That is what the issue is. Not that the trans cannot do the physical part, but he until will leave him out there to die because some people may not jump up in machine-gun fire to go and save them. Destroys the no one left behind clause.
Gender Dysphoria is mental health issue. Those individuals would cause unit disruption. Those that have transitioned will require costly LIFELONG hormonal therapy which would drain valuable resources from the VA medical system for a self-imposed condition. They should be excluded from military service.
This is a complete bullshit story!!
Trump-on!
Siler’s remarks about how great it is that Transgenders want to serve in the military and how great their leadership would be is irrelevant. Their dysphoria is a mental illness that causes them to focus on pretending to be a sex they are not. It would disrupt unit cohesiveness and cost the taxpayer money that should not be spent on military members. Type 1 diabetics are not eligible for service. Neither are people suffering from coccidioidomycosis, tuberculosis, or chronic emphysema. People under cancer treatment are not eligible to join.
This is the reality. Pretending to be the opposite sex is a lifetime medical battle. The last thing the taxpayer should be shouldering is the apex of the care, “transitional surgery”, which alone, results in lifetime medical problems.
Mental Deficients aren’t allowed to own firearms. Also veteran/personnel suicides are already high already. We don’t need people with a 50% suicide rate to increase those numbers further or endanger their comrades. These people need a priest.
This is a complete crap article. 30 seconds of effort would have yielded that service members do not have 2A rights on base. HOWEVER, there are many illnesses that can prevent you from joining the military. Mental illness is one of them.
I can tell you from 20 years personal experience as. Military Police Investigator that gays in the military are definitely not a good thing. The instances of drug use, domestic violence among that community and other related crimes is far higher than among normal personnel. The human reliance risks are outweighed by the left’s ideas of DEI utopia! The presence of lgbtq persons in the force undermines Force Readiness, capabilities and unit cohesion, all strong factors in a strong military.
They still have the right to own firearms.
I had a deep desire to serve as a career soldier but was kept out of the military because I lost a kidney to disease. But I still have the right to bear arms as a civilian. Whether or not you’re allowed to serve in the military is not a 2nd Amendment issue.
It’s truly amazing how many anti-trans pro-Trump totally stupid individuals have commented.
what is more amazing is that you come here bad-mouthing people and expect change
Transgender members were integrated into the Canadian military well over a decade ago without problems. It’s not trans people who were the problem. There’s been a statistically small percentage of people who are actually transgender since for decades, I think I read it was around 3% of the population until the Democrats took power. The original 3% of people were otherwise normal people and you would rarely be able to tell who they were because they had no agenda other than to live peacefully as the gender they felt they were. They didn’t claim they suddenly changed the definition of gender or any of the crazy things that we’ve all seen following Hillary Clintons loss. Once Clinton lost the election the Democrats weaponized the LGBTQ community. They gave them a voice and power. And, as usually happens when give a voice and power to a fringe group, they had zero control over themselves and this entire ordeal started. They started pushing the LGBTQ agenda on the most easily influenced, children, and our Democrats supported it. Suddenly it was cool for kids to claim they were transgender. The LGBTQ community made it seem fun for kids. They could get special treatment and attention for claiming to be gay or especially for being transgender. Then the psuedo-scientists moved in and started treating children for gender dysphoria and now they are convinced they are transgender. Parents proudly claimed their four month old infant was transgender because it became the cool thing for liberal parents as well. That entire debacle is going to implode and it’s the children who going to suffer as they move into adults. I think I read as of the beginning of the new Trump administration there were now 30% of people who identify as transgender although they have morphed the definition of “transgender” to mean whatever they want. Perhaps the most ironic part of all of this was that actual transgender children, teens and adults (that original approx 3% of the population) were pushed aside because most saw what was happening and were ostracized for not being on board with the new liberal agenda. Back to the original subject of the story, do I think banning them from the military infringes on the 2A? No. Do I think it violates the spirit of freedom our constitution was written to protect? Originally when transgender people were normal people, yes but because of the Democrats and the Biden administrations buffoonery, no. Unfortunately now, accepting transgender members doesn’t mean what it did when they were first accepted. Now it means having Pvt. Starfish needing to work from inside his or her personal Mr. Turtle pool or some other wacky nonsense. The previous administration not only brought the economic pain, homeland security danger and national security disasters but they destroyed the childhood of a generation or two of our children. Those kids they warped will now have to un-warp themselves because the people that caused this problem aren’t going to be there for them and sadly I think this will end tragically for several. Until we can somehow become unburdened by what has been, I don’t think the president has any choice but to remove transgender members from the military. It’s sad because prior to all this craziness, actual transgender Americans who love their country were serving seamlessly and without conflict. The Democrats ruined that like they ruin most things.
I’m of the opinion all homosexuals should be banned from military service in order to promote good order and discipline. I’m retired Navy Seabee and saw the erosion of personal responsibility and physical fitness qualifications during my career. Females in combat units caused strife and they weren’t qualified for their role, homosexual men obsessed about sex and were often poor performers but both were given a pass for political reasons.
I believe we should allow LGBTQRST,… to join if so inclined and they pass tests and training just like the rest of us. They should also have to dress and comport themselves in the fashion expected of someone with the chromosones they have. No elective surgery should be offered or given.
The 2A covers civilians not the formal military and therefore the POTUS decision has nothing to do with 2A. Second the 2A groups has no need to focus on this topic.
I be canceling my subscription to this Guns America news letter. If I need discussions of the non gun related issues of the day, there are many other sites better suited for such discussions.
I 100% agree with Siler. If someone can show me any actual data or some specific incident that demonstrates allowing trans folks to serve somehow effects our warfighting ability, I’d reconsider. The truth is there’s no such data or incident. Trump reimposing the ban is just him pandering to Bible bangers. He’s dividing Americans to keep himself in power.
Something I’ve noticed as a lefty gun owner: folks sure love to talk about the Constitution right up until it impacts an area where they have a personal prejudice. Lots of of talk about God in other comments on this article, but I sure don’t see a lot of talk about Constitutional rights. Pretty sad if you ask me.
Well you bigots, hear this: I’m out here, and I’ve taught a lot of gay and trans folks to shoot, and about their Constitutional rights. They won’t forgot the kinds of things you ignorant commenters are saying.
show me some proof on how they are a benefit and not some lefty bullshit that gets slung around…..
Eric wants data. Maybe comparing recruiting data during the four years of the fake POTUS (genuine POS) administration and then the more recent smaller sample during the Trump administration would provide that evidence.
i think they have their own constitution, which is basically word of mouth and nothing written down!
Just a couple of observations on Eric. He uses the term “Bible bangers” which seems to derive from ‘Bible thumpers,” although few if any use the version “bangers.” Despite a possible mix up, Eric intended to insult. Really not a big deal, insults are all part deal but try to have more consistency. Don’t go on later to act like you are so above the fray and pull out the line, “well you bigots, hear this,…” Eric, no one really cares that you out with “a lot of gay and trans folks.” Instead, I would rather hear how a “lefty gun owner” supports the 2A.
As far as the Constitution and military service, the Founding Father’s opposed a standing army. That changed a bit when Thomas Jefferson saw what would occur on the high seas with Muslim pirates and treacherous British as constant threats. Jefferson later supported the Navy.
Would like to hear Eric’s explanation if/how Constitution guarantees citizens universal rights to serve in the military.
Oh Kane, honey.
Around here, you hear Bible banger as much as you hear Bible thumper. Both terms are interchangeable. So today you learned something.
As for either term being insulting, meh. They’re more short hand than anything else. If you are upset by my ise of the term, you are working very hard to find something to be upset about. But just as an experiment, stack Bible banger on one side. Then go read what folks have called gay and trans folks in other comments on this article. You are more activated by the term Bible banger, but you’ll find more invective against gay and trans folks, spewed by folks like you. You know, devoutly religious hypocrites.
As for the Constitution, to the extent it describes qualifications for military service, it notes they are the purview of Congress. Despite that, the President, you know, the Executive, reimposed the ban on trans folks serving openly.
He did that to pander to Bible bangers. And rather than recalling that qualifications for military service fall to Congress, you Bible bangers just ate that right up.
After feeding Eric’s post into Wiki translation, I got this reply.
Eric is unaware of his own intolerance, as a lefty Eric does NOTHING to support the 2A, Eric has no proof of a Constitutional guarantee for universal military service.
Learning is fun.
Jeez Kane, you call your own mother a wiki? Seems rude to me.
I did address what the Constitution says about military service, specifically that Congress determines qualifications. You haven’t addressed the unconstitutional action of Trump reimposing the ban on trans folks serving openly. Instead you deflected and started talking past me, to the crowd.
Again, Congress gets to determine the qualifications for military service. Not your Cheeto Jesus.
I bet you cry when one of your little pets recounts how their pronoun preference was skewed and then you throw around a “mother” comment. You still the most offensive, intolerant, bigot on this thread, Eric.
Your 1st post-
“Lots of of talk about God in other comments on this article, but I sure don’t see a lot of talk about Constitutional rights.”
My question-
Would like to hear Eric’s explanation if/how Constitution guarantees citizens universal rights to serve in the military.
You latest reply-
“As for the Constitution, to the extent it describes qualifications for military service, it notes they are the purview of Congress”
“Constitutional rights” and “qualifications for military service” are separate issues. You changed the focus of your complaint because the first point was without any basis in fact, just admit that much.
The single most likely person to attempt mass shootings is the transgender individual. 40% are pedophiles. 51% have at least one clinically insane parent. Over 3/4 regret having transitioned. Add all the other things stated by other posts and you easily see why admitting those with special medical needs including many unavailable in a combat zone is madness. These are mentally ill and or psychologically damaged people who need help, outside of the Armed Forces. These unfortunates are just another of the coalition that trash like JB Pritzker attempt to lionize and hope to band together to win the Presidency in ’28. LGBTQ+, communist degenerates, teachers unions, illegal aliens.
I don’t see how any link could be made here, there is already a large list of mental health issues that preclude you from military service, various stats show a 32%-50% increase in suicide attempts among the transgender community. Any other mental illness with that same rate would be a disqualifier and no one would bat an eye, now tack on the added cost in health care for transition related care and lack of deployability for medical conditions compared to the common service member and the juice isn’t worth the squeeze.
This article is absolute bullshit. This has nothing to do with 2A freedoms and everything to do with having people in the military who can be deployed to austere locations during wartime.
You can’t serve if you are diabetic, or have epilepsy, either. It’s about being deployable, nothing else. Trans people require a non stop regimen of hormones, just as a T! diabetic requires insulin, neither can be insured during wartime.
This author is utterly clueless, and perhaps delusional.
I agree, trans people shouldn’t be in the front lines where they’re making combat decisions. I actually think anyone who wants to join the military should have a fair shot at it, but not everyone should be able to be in a combat role.
Not sure the article is bullshit though. If you read it, they’re clearly just reporting what actual politicians are saying about it and it’s important to be aware.
If you join a branch of the military, you are saying, that if called upon, you are capable of fighting in the front lines. If you want to assist the military, but are not qualified to serve in the front lines, you can work for that branch as a civil servant. There are thousands of civil servants who support the warfighters, but never don a uniform, or carry a rifle.
This is one of the dumbest-damn articles ever printed in GOA. For ANYONE to even briefly consider that the delusions of mentally-ill people are somehow related to God-given rights?!?… only shows that person is mentally ill as well.
GOA… stick to your lane, with the people who pay your bills. Leave the psycho-babble to the quacks.
Well, here’s why….
The trans service members require extensive and expensive medical procedures and drugs to support their dysphoria.
This process compromises their ability to actively serve, and this is also a COMPLETELY elective process, the costs of which should not be borne by US taxpayers.
If someone wants to butcher their body, and destroy their chemistry with drugs, that is their choice. But If they are incapable of making a rational decision to protect their own body health and safety, we are not going to trust them to protect the rest of us.
And don’t ask us to pay for it either.
Hi there, Frank. Great comment! I’m the other “Frank” who has been posting here on GOA for years. Is there any way I can talk you into including your middle or last initial (when you post) so that we won’t be confused for one another? Just a thought. Have a great day!
BOTH “FRANK” POSTS ARE SPOT ON ! MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE HAVE NO PLACE IN THE MILITARY OR
POSSESING FIREARMS.
When the military begins to completely mirror society it becomes dysfunctional! There must be rules in place to make it function as a nation defender! Allowing people to run around claiming to be a different gender does not aid in that! And I know there will be all kinds of arguments defending them instead of looking at it as a mental problem!
Thank you for calling a spade a spade. The madness has gotten out of hand because people were afraid to.
This ridiculous nonsense is why we lose our 2A rights in the first place. The same worldview that perverts God’s truth that He made them male and female is the worldview that says government grants rights and not God. If govt grants rights, then govt can take away rights. Thinking you are a different sex is a mental disorder based in sin. These people need prayer and help. They should not to be on the frontlines of defense. Absolutely SHAMEFUL of GunsAmerica to even consider posting this.
Serving in the military is a privilege, not a right. Why would the military want people who have psychological problems and can’t figure out what sex they are?
“Siler’s experiences with marginalized communities, especially LGBTQ youth, have shaped his understanding.”
I remember years ago when I was in high-school, the then current plea of the “gay” community was for a little “tolerance.” After all, gay youths are more prone to suicide and people gradually became more “tolerant” of the lifestyle. Over the years, the initial plea for “tolerance” has completely morphed into a violent demand that people acknowledge the complicated and ever-growing lists of pronouns and other societal transforming deranged hang ups. Tolerance is no longer enough, now one is expected to be an advocate everything the LGBTQ demands. Sports teams have been forced to wear the rainbow colors; families have foolishly taken very young children to inappropriate drag shows; little schoolgirls are expected to dress in the same locker room as naked ass men. Even members older of the “gay” and lesbian community do not relate to the LGBTQ movement and see some of the aspects and tactics as grooming young children.
Stable leadership is in crisis in our most crucial institutions including religious, political and the military. The recently deceased, “Pope” Francis supported the “gay” lifestyle while turning his back on traditional Catholics. This Jesuit fraud never once spoke out while the FBI profiled Catholic Church members. He fired great leaders like Cardinal Strickland and excommunicated Arch-Bishop Vigano for being true in their faith. He never once spoke up while the “sisters of perpetual indulgence” desecrated Christianity’s most sacred iconography will being exulted at LA Dodgers stadium. The intolerant LGBTQ community has long been intolerant and has only become worse the more others reached out to them. For instance, an artist named Robert Maplethorpe years ago created a hazmat display using Catholic icons mixed in with urine, called the hate display art and the NYC taxpayers footed the bill, never once did a “gay” leader criticize this or the hate display in LA. Still, the inherently intolerant LGBTQ community, demands everyone be well versed in pronouns and advocacy while making a mockery of the symbols of others.
I saw a YouTube clip where a quiet elderly couple was being escorted by police to their car from Riley Gaines presentation. During the long walk the couple was being verbally assaulted by two LGBTQ members who were shouting disgusting taunts including their suggestion that the two go home and kill themselves. Now, the original call for tolerance has come full circle to show the duplicity and true toxic nature of LGBTQ. The neutered LEO should have arrested the LGBTQ members.
People like Siler are well meaning buffoons. For years the military was the best example of US social integration particularly among the many races and religions of this nation. Then the leftwingers gained control and placed the military in a serious crisis. In the Marine Corps (I am sure other branches have a version) we often heard how to prioritize the two most vital issues. First came the accomplishment of the mission, and then the welfare of the troops. The LGBTQ lifestyle is a race to the bottom of a bottomless pit and will only hurt the mission of each specific branch of the military and identity politics will never serve the 2A cause well.
it’s all carefully executed plans of the communist left to gain total control of our country. fear and conflict are powerful tools to achieve that goal.
the funny and most ironic thing about it is those who support it don’t realize their lifestyles wont slide after control is achieved and they will either change or gotten rid of!
so a democrat is using the 2a to push an agenda, wtf….no one is taking their guns! no, trannys in the military bad idea, it hurts readiness and cohesion. besides while they are under treatment they wouldn’t be world wide qualified! all it boils down to who pays for their sexual whims, answer the tax payer not themselves!!!
A+
all this dei crap does is destroy the military system of uniformity and rank! a supervisor now has to worry about how to treat a person with a turbin, gold chain, earings, corn rolls, religious beliefs, and the numerous genders when making assignments and promotions. if you can’t be a team player then you don’t need to be there!!!
Should there be any physical limits beyond “passing a test?” For instance, if someone with Parkinson’s can pass the physical today, but will not be operationally available 50% of the time in the future, should we still say: “Please join the military?” Regardless of how you think about transgenderism, the surgeries involved are massive, with long periods of recovery, permanent hormone usage, lots of potential problems, etc.
It seems, to me, that the reasons Trump gave for the ban are sound and necessary.
Siler thinks the military is another feel good social program.
The Constitution doesn’t specify which Americans have the right to its freedoms – it applies to all Americans. And if an American wants to defend those freedoms by volunteering for military service, how could I say no?
Maybe there was a loosening of standards but in the past people who were overweight where restricted from enlisting. The last administration kicked out tens of thousands of military people who refused the “jab,” and the fake POTUS (genuine POS) never cared about their patriotism. Recently, a VA nurse was telling me very quietly that employees who got the “jab” are having all sorts of health problems and have no legal recourse. She said she was of the few that fought the mandate. I am afraid many in the military might now regret acquiescing to the medical demands. Members who become disabled are usually discharged and then the military turns them over to the VA without any advocacy.
I developed back issues while serving in the Army. Following surgery, which included installing bolts and steel plates in my spine, I had some limitations, but could still do my primary job. However, the Army decided that I was “no longer world-wide deployable under battlefield conditions” and medically retired me. No one who requires ongoing medical treatment or medication is deployable under battlefield conditions, as no treatments can be guaranteed.
Furthermore, no one with a pre-existing medical condition should be allowed to join the military, particularly if they will require very expensive elective surgery and ongoing treatments, all funded by the taxpayer, for a condition that was not caused by their military service.
That’s how you can say no to transgender people wishing to serve in the military.
Articles where the author won’t even sign their own name are stupid and so are people who don’t understand why transgender people fall under the “can’t go into combat because they require prescription drugs being sent to the front lines.”
The military isn’t about protecting your precious feelings. Shut up and sit down, ma’am.
A+
Probably a natural tendency to be against those things we don’t understand. Two edged sword, that.