After a turbulent first six months in office, President Donald Trump stirred up controversy once more by ordering the Pentagon to ban transgender individuals from joining the United States military.

Though the directive was only signed in late August, President Trump initially brought up the issue in July via Twitter, citing the allegedly high cost of transgender medical services and surgeries in the military as the primary reason for the ban. In doing so, the Trump Administration rescinded Obama’s policy, which allowed transgender service members to join and serve openly in all U.S. armed forces.

According to a study conducted by The RAND Corporation, a nonprofit that researches the U.S. military, between 1,000 and 7,000 active duty members of the American armed forces identify as transgender. However, not all of these individuals will actually seek treatments or surgeries to reassign their gender while serving, as the study estimates that only 29 to 129 servicemembers each year will pursue such medical services.

Already, this pokes holes in President Trump’s argument: how can an entire group of people be punished for costing the military a supposedly high sum of taxpayer dollars when many of those targeted will never request a single penny from the military for the services in question?

Even then, the “tremendous medical costs” of transgender individuals in the military mentioned by Trump only amount to anywhere between 2.4 and 8.4 million dollars—a tiny fraction of the U.S. military’s almost 600 billion dollar spending budget. In fact, the armed forces spend 84 million dollars a year on Viagra and other erectile dysfunction-related medications—approximately ten times that of gender reassignment medical services. Treatment for erectile dysfunction, a syndrome that commonly affects older men who cannot have sex, hardly seems necessary for service members to continue carrying out their official duties.

Why does the military spend more on a luxury than medical services necessary for the emotional and physical well beings of transgender individuals? Transgender soldiers should not be held to a higher financial standard. If the U.S. government follows the argument of cutting components of the military associated with high medical costs, then President Trump should also ban cisgender men who have erectile dysfunction.

Trump may have claimed high medical costs as the reason why transgender individuals should not be allowed to serve, but this rationale is hypocritical and nothing but discriminatory and offensive to the thousands of service members who risk their lives every day to serve our nation.

Nevertheless, the fiscal argument as to why transgender individuals should be allowed to serve openly in the military is second to the moral and patriotic fact that transgender service members, like all other members of the military, tirelessly and selflessly choose every day to put themselves in danger in the name of the U.S. It hardly makes sense that President Trump, who ran on an “America First” platform, would discourage anyone from fighting for their country.

Transgender people join the armed forces despite discriminatory policies, commanders, and fellow service members that might normally turn away those who are not ready to deal with the extra burden of being a minority of any kind in the military.

Transgender service members show how loyal they are to a country that often does not accept or even tolerate them by joining the military, a traditional display of patriotism as old as the U.S. itself—we as a nation must allow them to continue doing so. Rather than a burden to taxpayers, transgender service members are the unsung heroes whom we should all admire and aspire to be.