As the balance between law enforcement and liberty is tested, we want your thoughts. Join the discussion in Crosswalk Forums. #PolicingPolicy#FederalVsLocal#CrimeAndJustice#christianforums#crosswalkforums#forums#crosswalk#faithcommunity#faithforums
On May 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court permitted the Trump administration to temporarily enforce a ban on transgender individuals serving in the military while legal challenges continue.
Supporters argue that this policy enhances military readiness and cohesion. Critics contend it discriminates against capable individuals willing to serve their country.
As Christians, how should we approach this issue?
Does this policy align with principles of justice and equality?
How do we balance national security concerns with the rights and dignity of individuals?
Of course they shouldn’t! Transgender people are perfectly capable of serving in the military and defending our nation. If anyone is willing to put her/his life on the line and be in the armed services, s/he should be allowed to serve in any capacity!
The military is a top-down organization with the Commander-in-Chief Trump ordering a ban, as well as signing an exec order as President.
Christians serving in the miltary can follow those orders and still be faithful to God.
Benny, His & Her may not be this example-person’s pronoun and if the pronoun is their, then wouldn’t one surmise that you have to say: “to put their lives on the line” - even though you are speaking about one (1) person. Things get confusing pretty quick and this is a just smaller wrinkle.
The two cases in Seattle and D.C. Fed Districts are still in preliminary stages and arguments are not fully developed or ripe for their respective judges (or us) to rule on. The issue ruled on by the Justices was about the injunction. There may be compelling evidence to support either side.
Service in the Military Services is open to all persons who can meet the high standards for military service and readiness without special accommodations,” the memo stated.
We may find out surgical costs, procedures, trends, esprit de corps issues, accommodation impediments, MOS lockouts, UCMJ violations, etc.. There is some, albeit short, history to pull from to use as supporting evidence for each side. I am eager to to see it unfold.
At first blush, I presumed it was a bad idea, aside from Basic/Ait close quarters scenarios. Not all branches run peacetime, misson readiness the same and day jobs are very different from deployed missions and active warfare. Unfortuately, it seems that current political unrest may force us to test our forces in combat sooner rather than later and they/them/their readiness shouldn’t be [a] [in] question.
Please remember: when you disagree with someone on a specific topic, it is inappropriate to question their salvation or ask if they are a Christian based on that disagreement. Doing so implies that disagreement equals unbelief — and that crosses the line into spiritual judgment, which is a violation of our Terms of Service.
Let’s stay focused on the topic, engage with one another respectfully, and leave room for differences without questioning someone’s faith.
Thanks for helping keep Crosswalk Forums a place of grace and meaningful dialogue.
You may DM me with any questions or email Community @salemwebnetwork.com
Why are you so focused on a person’s gender? You should be focusing instead on who s/he is as a person, i.e., their character, their spirit, their behavior toward others. Focusing on a person’s physical qualities instead of their “heart” is simply wrong. => Love your neighbor as yourself <=
As a retired soldier and combat veteran, I emphatically say “Yes”. They should not be allowed to serve in the military. They are mentally unstable, require accommodations others do not and cause to much of a distraction from the mission of the armed forces. Military service is not like a civilian job or job place.
Amen Tony B…God made only male and female and it is imposible for a man to become a woman and vise-versa. If they dig up the bones of a trans woman 100 yrs from now, they will know they have not found the bones of a woman, but a man. They used to be called transvestites…just another new name for someone playing dress up even if they have mangled their bodies such as sex change (not assigment) surgery. God made us male and female.
This has NOTHING to do with the OP: Should the military ban transgender service members.
Jesus said to love your neighbor as yourself. That means that as Christians we should share God’s love with everyone. John 3:16-18 (with my emphases), “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. => For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world <=, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, [READ THAT AGAIN!] but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”
If God loves LGBTQs who believe in Him, why do you judge them otherwise???
On the contrary…it has everything to do why they should NOT be allowed in military service. Someone that doesn’t even know what they are, that is living in a make believe world of denying nature itself is menatly unstable. Just because you love someone doesn’t mean you have to promote every demonic and wicked agenda they may support.
Yes, God made them male and female—Genesis 1:27, straight from the Creator’s mouth, no edits needed. But let’s not act like that verse gives you a license to trade compassion for condescension.
You’re right that a man can’t become a woman, and a woman can’t become a man. Biology bows to no scalpel and no surgeon. You can dig up the bones, run the DNA, and the chromosomes will still preach the truth louder than a pride parade: XX or XY, stamped by the Maker, not altered by man.
But here’s where the cart starts wobbling off the theological trail: calling it just “dress-up” or tossing around terms like “mangled bodies” turns what should be a sober, truth-telling moment into a sideshow of mockery. That’s not discernment—that’s disdain dressed in church clothes.
And let’s not pretend that calling someone a “transvestite” is a spiritual mic drop. That’s just vintage sneer, not New Testament clarity. Jesus didn’t sugarcoat sin, but He didn’t ridicule sinners either. He called them to repentance with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.
Yes, this world is drowning in gender confusion, and yes, the enemy is behind it. But if the Church’s response is just to shout, “You’re playing dress-up!” from a distance, don’t be surprised when nobody listens. Truth without grace is just noise—and we’re not called to be cymbals clanging for applause, we’re called to be ambassadors of a Kingdom that both confronts and redeems.
So let’s preach the immutability of male and female with backbone, yes—but let’s do it with enough spiritual maturity to remember that mockery is not a fruit of the Spirit.
“Bigotry!” you shout, like that word still means something in a world where it’s been used to describe everything from murder to misgendering. Let’s cut through the emotional fog and hit this with some biblical clarity and common sense.
You say anyone willing to die for the country should be allowed to serve. So let’s follow that logic down the road a bit. What about someone mentally unstable, with delusions that they’re Napoleon? Willing to die? Sure. Fit for service? Not a chance. The military isn’t a playground for personal identity experiments—it’s a war machine designed for cohesion, clarity, and combat readiness. And no, tailoring boot camp around someone’s pronouns isn’t strategic genius—it’s sabotage in slow motion.
This isn’t about hate. It’s about order. It’s about truth. Romans 1 isn’t some dusty footnote—it’s a red-alert warning about what happens when a society trades the Creator’s design for a designer delusion. When confusion becomes a qualification, and truth is sacrificed on the altar of inclusivity, don’t call it progress—call it rebellion.
And rebellion doesn’t make for good soldiers.
Love the person? Absolutely. Respect their sacrifice? Yes. But lie to them—and ourselves—about what male and female mean just to avoid being called “bigoted”? That’s cowardice wrapped in a flag.
God doesn’t bless disorder. And a military that tries to do so won’t be blessed either.
You’re waving John 3:16-18 like it’s a free pass to affirm whatever someone feels, so long as they slap a Jesus fish on it. But let’s read it all the way through, not just the feel-good bits in bold.
Yes—God so loved the world that He gave His Son. But you left out the context: salvation is from something. From what? From sin. From wrath. From condemnation. The verse doesn’t deny judgment—it presumes it. “Whoever does not believe stands condemned already.” That’s not a hug—it’s a warning flare.
And let’s not pretend belief is some vague, watered-down “I like Jesus” sticker. Belief in the biblical sense means submission, obedience, repentance, and regeneration. God doesn’t rubber-stamp rebellion just because it marches under a rainbow and says “I love Jesus” with glitter on top. James 2:19: “Even the demons believe—and shudder.”
You ask, “If God loves LGBTQs who believe in Him, why do you judge them otherwise?” First, judge them otherwise? No sir—I’m judging them by the Word. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 slices straight through the fog: “Do not be deceived… neither the sexually immoral… nor men who practice homosexuality… will inherit the kingdom of God.” Love doesn’t mean pretending sin isn’t sin. Love means telling the truth because you care where someone spends eternity.
So no, this isn’t “off-topic.” It cuts to the core. Can a military built on order function when it’s forced to affirm delusion? And can the Church stand for truth if it trades the gospel for a group hug?
Being in the military is contractural. Under contract the military decides what you must wear, what you will eat, where you will sleep, what time you go to bed, what duties you are required to fulfill, what hair cut you must maintain, etc. These mandates are enforced based on leadership’s knowledge and experience of what contributes to the most effective military force. These leaders should not be forced to develop protocols and SOP’s based on feelings, social pressures, social norms, personal ideologies, or public opinion. I believe the leaders of the United States military should be given the respect and latatude to form a military force that they believe is the most effective for it’s inteded purpose.
No, YOU don’t know who they are; they know very clearly. They are living in the same world as you and I, not living in a “make believe” world, and they are not “denying nature”. They are living true to THEIR nature (but that is for a separate discussion). And they are most definitely NOT mentally unstable! (You just think they are.)
Your last sentence is particularly outrageous. It’s simply your opinion that their choice of sexuality is “demonic and wicked” and many are not promoting any agenda. They just go about peacefully living their lives and hoping that others won’t attack them.
BTW, how do you explain 2 Samuel 1:26? And John 13:23? And Ruth 1:16-17?
