Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
So you think trans people are just genitalia. That’s creepy and also offensive.
I do not. Try not to put words in other people's mouths. You have a real problem with it.
Well you keep talking about genitals and keep talking about them. So obviously you think it’s all about genitalia since you keep obsessing over it. Trans people are more than their genitalia.
Interesting. You think you know my views. I’ve yet to state them other than scotus need to address the issue.
I have shared what I wanted to share. I think scotus needs to clarify.
From the article.
Only SCOTUS can clarify.
Gender and sex are not the same thing. Sounds like you agree with Indiana that biological men should use the male bathrooms since their sex is male.
It isn’t illegal discrimination to keep males out of the female bathroom. It appears you don’t really understand the court case or the words sex or gender. Discriminate doesn’t mean what you think it means. It means to pick. As long as you don’t do it on a protected class, it’s legal. Sex is a protected class. Gender identify is not.
They are letting it worth through the lower courts before making a statement. Typically, they wait for the lower courts and appellate courts to make decisions before reviewing the cases.
I think now you are starting to see the issue. Slowly, but I think you are getting there. VII uses the term sex. Gender is not used in the document even once.
Are you starting to understand the issue? You can't say the two wards are different and then say they mean the same thing.
When the Civil Rights Act was passed, we used the words the same but also being gay was illegal.
I suspect SCOTUS will punt this back to congress and tell them to create a law.
I am aware but that is SCOTUS creating law which is the same issue with Roe VS Wade.
I think you are slowly catching on to the issue. The courts have not been consistent and as such they need to clarify. If you remember the case, people were surprised Gorsuch voted the way he did but it is consistent with his beliefs.
I think the court was incorrect in its ruling using the Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act does not cover this topic. As such congress needed to amend it to cover sexuality or gender identity.
Otherwise, we have courts making laws which I am against. Alito spoke out that since it was defined, it wasn't protected.
I am not against the protections, but I am against the courts writing law. If you haven't read the case, I would suggest doing so as you will see the issue. They defined sex as orientation or identity which is not how the word was ever used.
This is exactly why Roe was overturned.
The correct way to fix this is congress has to pass a law.