What rights are they saying they can't speak are they trying to imprison them without trial what rights are they denying?Accepting? They are denying them their rights.
The exact same rights they're denying to transgender people imaginary.What rights are they denying others and how are they doing that?
I'm not sure that they do they oppose the ideology but a man who identifies as a woman is the same thing as a woman that's a lie and it's 100% false. They also oppose inflicting this on children which is good.
Think about what you're saying here bathroom laws. This seems to be the cornerstone of this so-called Rights movement. You're not fighting for jobs you're not fighting for housing you're not fighting for education you're fighting over toilets. The civil Rights era of our day is over where you pee.
It's not an anti-transather bill it's an anti dudes in the women's bathroom bill. The only way it could possibly be misconstrued as anti-trans is if you're not pulling off your transition very well which means you probably not really trans.
Again a civil rights movement about toilets.
Is the 1960s called in the black civil rights leaders say they wish they had this problem.
Mostly the push to transition 12-year-olds and I don't know why people are whining about toilets. If you look enough for like a lady no one's going to say anything to you.
What rights are they saying they can't speak are they trying to imprison them without trial what rights are they denying?
The right to use whatever toilet they want which nobody has the right to do?
The exact same rights they're denying to transgender people imaginary.
If you can't go in public because you're not allowed to use the restroom of the opposite sex that's a you problem. I'm not allowed to use the women's restroom the same as every other man. This absolutely does not remove me from public life and you're never going to convince me that it does for anyone else.So how did we get from 54% of Republicans opposing bathroom restrictions and Trump saying he doesn't see it as a problem to a Trump EO "removing transgender and nonbinary people from public life wherever possible."?
If you can't go in public because you're not allowed to use the restroom of the opposite sex that's a you problem. I'm not allowed to use the women's restroom the same as every other man. This absolutely does not remove me from public life and you're never going to convince me that it does for anyone else.
Again when you were talking about rights but completely forgot to mention any rights that are being suspended.
But the main discussion point your addressing is toilets. And maybe people will take this much more seriously if when you mention rights you talk about actual rights."Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, specifically targeted transgender people in his ruling, stating that they had to simply deal with any kind of discriminatory treatment in their workplace...
I think not being able to fire someone who makes interacting with them a problem is an overstep by the supreme Court. Nobody should be forced to tolerate someone else's fantasy. Instead of course it's trampoline other people's rights. Again there is the right to association there is not the right to demand people refer to you as they them when you're clearly a woman.This all directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County ruling, which stated plainly that Title VII protects LGBTQ workers from identity-based firing and harassment."
So how did we get from 54% of Republicans opposing bathroom restrictions and Trump saying he doesn't see it as a problem to a Trump EO "removing transgender and nonbinary people from public life wherever possible."?
Bullshit. The right is protecting other people;'s rights.Accepting? They are denying them their rights. What rights are they denying others and how are they doing that?
How do you go from 54% of what you call support which probably isn't necessarily to drug writing in an executive order about bathrooms.You didn't answer the question.
Bullshit. The right is protecting other people;'s rights.
It is wrong, taking away other peoples privacy to have men in women's locker rooms. this should be criminal. It is wrong for men to compete in women's sports. We don't separate the sports because they wear different clothes. We have separate women's sports because the have a genetic disadvantage to men.
Stop violation girls and women, and they would accepted as much as gays and lesbians are.
They are not hated for being transgender, They hated for the violations against real women and children.
Their rights end when they take away other people's right. Why should they have special rights that takes away the rights of others.
Targeting childrenThey weren't accused of this in 2016. Trump said there seemed to get no problem with it. Most Republicans opposed it but are now. What explains the change?
I think people just absentmindedly squawk this. Let's stay single right that is being threatened.Accepting? They are denying them their rights.
Gun ownership Free speech free to associate.What rights are they denying others and how are they doing that?
I think people just absentmindedly squawk this. Let's stay single right that is being threatened.
Gun ownership Free speech free to associate.
No you think government is desperately wants to do that.Trans are doing that?
This all directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County ruling, which stated plainly that Title VII protects LGBTQ workers from identity-based firing and harassment."
I believe they would accept them if they stopped trampling on other people's right.
Do the gays force themselves into girls locker rooms in K-12 or compete against women in women's sports?
Predominantly that prove to not to be true. We have video recordings of transgender ideology being introduced in public schools.DARVO.
Social cons were falsely accusing gay men of flaunting their shit in men's locker rooms.
So why is it specific to the transgender rights activism that we transition children?Now that homophobia is out of style and replaced with transphobia, the same false accusations are firing off but in the other locker room.
I suspect it’s because they all fell for a trans woman at some point and followed through even after they realized it."Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, who holds a reputation for being a far-right activist judge, declared that while Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not protect LGBTQ people from workplace harassment based on their sexual or gender orientation. The case was brought forth by the Heritage Foundation, a far-right, culturally conservative organization that heavily influenced the writings and goals of Project 2025.
Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, specifically targeted transgender people in his ruling, stating that they had to simply deal with any kind of discriminatory treatment in their workplace. He deduced that “a male employee must use male facilities like other males,” an assertion that completely invalidates transgender identity in its entirety rather than actually acknowledging the issues they face at work. Kacsmaryk even went so far as to order federal employment policy to remove“all language defining ‘sex’ in Title VII to include ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity.”.
This all directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2020 Bostock v. Clayton County ruling, which stated plainly that Title VII protects LGBTQ workers from identity-based firing and harassment."
Link
Why do Republicans oppose transgenders so vigorously?
It wasn't always this way In 2016, polls showed most Republicans opposed anti-transgender bathroom laws.
There was quite a public backlash against NC's anti-trans bathroom bill.
In the 2016 election, Trump's seemed to personally support transgenders using the bathroom of their choice.
"Discussing the North Carolina law that prohibits transgender individuals from using a bathroom that does not match their gender at birth during a town hall event on NBC's Today on April 21, 2016, Trump said, "There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go. They use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate." Trump continued "There has been so little trouble."[10]
Link
What changed?
What rights are being removed though?I suspect it’s because they all fell for a trans woman at some point and followed through even after they realized it.
What is?So it’s overcompensation.
Trans porn tends to be the main kind of porn in anti-trans states, so there's something to this.I suspect it’s because they all fell for a trans woman at some point and followed through even after they realized it.
So it’s overcompensation.
What's trans porn?Trans porn tends to be the main kind of porn in anti-trans states, so there's something to this.
Cool.What's trans porn?
But what is it? What separates it from any other kind?Cool.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?