If you're to willing label that input -- i.e., MA's and NY's faith-based definitions of gender -- as garbage, then perhaps we can find common ground.
No, Lisa. I didn't say neuroscience research on gender identity doesn't exist. I said it's never, ever used as a standard in operative gender law. And we both know I'm right about that.
She's destroyed you in this exchange, so when you say you both know something, it seems like one of you doesn't.
Whoever's side you're on should be worried.
Oh, I refuse to take you seriously on this subject. She can keep humiliating you.
No, you're refusing to engage in the debate because if you did you'd eventually have to acknowledge that I am right, and your chest-thumping about anyone "humiliating me" would be proven to be empty bluster
That neuroscience is the basis of gender law. It could not be otherwise. Your pedanticism in defense of bigotry is hilarious.
There is no such thing as faith based definition because gender is not a religion. The fact that religious belief is also a protected class doesn't help your nonsense argument.
Excellent, if that's the case you should be able to cite a law that makes that claim. Can you?
I already have in SCOTUS decisions. You just dont understand how the law works. The law does not rubber stamp scientific discoveries as you seem to think or want it to do.
^^^ BTW, ever notice that all one needs to do to earn a charge of "bigotry" from a trans idealog is to simply ask them to prove their point?That neuroscience is the basis of gender law. It could not be otherwise. Your pedanticism in defense of bigotry is hilarious.
Is sexual orientation also faith based?
There is no such thing as faith based definition because gender is not a religion. The fact that religious belief is also a protected class doesn't help your nonsense argument.
Cite a passage.
How many times do I need to post this before you understand the implications of the decision?
I can tell by this response you feel like the big winner here.
medicine.yale.edu
No it isn’t.
Puberty blockers are not FDA approved for “trans kids”.
He has nothing and he knows he doesn't. Somehow he expects politicians to debate medical science and approve it, which they don't do and are not equipped to do, just because his arguments support gender denying bigotry. He wants to be able to harass and misgender people w/o consequence by saying that gender is a religious belief that has nothing objective to support it.
You cannot demonstrate higher suicide rates among children who aren’t subjected to child abuse (mutilating surgeries and irreversible harmful effects from puberty blockers)
Puberty blockers are mostly used for non-gender purposes such as precocious puberty and they are very reversible. The other uses for them are various cancers such as breast and prostate.
www.mayoclinic.org
my.clevelandclinic.org
A link doesn't cut it. Cite the passage in a law where neuroscience is the basis for defing gender. Either you can produce such a passage or you cannot, which is it?How many times do I need to post this before you understand the implications of the decision?
In Gorsuch opinion, SCOTUS rules gay and transgender workers are protected by Title VII
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday that the ban on sex discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects gay and transgender workers.www.abajournal.com
Do you think you're fooling anyone with this clumsy dodge?