Texas responds to Obama and his bathroom dream

[JustWinBaby]

(06-02-2016, 12:51 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, in addition to allowing access to participation in school activities regardless of sex, it says that schools that get federal funding can't discriminate against anyone on the basis on sex.

Did you mean gender?  Still confused...

[BmorePat87]

(06-02-2016, 04:42 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Did you mean gender?  Still confused...

The legal argumentthat has been used is that they are being discriminated against because their sex doesn't "match" their gender. 

[*bfine32*]

(06-02-2016, 06:07 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The legal argumentthat has been used is that they are being discriminated against because their sex doesn't "match" their gender. 

Do you think the courts are using the correct words when they are being discriminated against because of their sex? 

[JustWinBaby]

(06-02-2016, 06:07 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The legal argumentthat has been used is that they are being discriminated against because their sex doesn't "match" their gender. 

Which is a total BS argument...because regardless of what gender they feel they are, it doesn't change their physical sex.  It simply cannot be discrimination to tell a boy with a penis to use the boy's room.  Otherwise, you have to be talking "separate but equal' which must then necessitate unisex bathrooms for all.

Gender is not a protected class, and the POTUS cannot unilaterally make it one. 

[BmorePat87]

(06-02-2016, 06:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Do you think the courts are using the correct words when they are being discriminated against because of their sex? 

(06-02-2016, 07:55 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Which is a total BS argument...because regardless of what gender they feel they are, it doesn't change their physical sex.  It simply cannot be discrimination to tell a boy with a penis to use the boy's room.  Otherwise, you have to be talking "separate but equal' which must then necessitate unisex bathrooms for all.

Gender is not a protected class, and the POTUS cannot unilaterally make it one. 

Yes, they are using the correct word for their argument.

What they're arguing is that bathroom use is assigned by gender, so if you are telling a trans boy that he cannot use the boy's bathroom because his sex is female, then you are discriminating against him on the basis of sex. 

It's a controversial interpretation, sure. It might even be a stretch. This is what a federal appellate court upheld in Virginia, though.

[*bfine32*]

(06-03-2016, 01:26 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Yes, they are using the correct word for their argument.

What they're arguing is that bathroom use is assigned by gender, so if you are telling a trans boy that he cannot use the boy's bathroom because his sex is female, then you are discriminating against him on the basis of sex. 

It's a controversial interpretation, sure. It might even be a stretch. This is what a federal appellate court upheld in Virginia, though.

Good explination; however, I would ask the court one question: If bathrooms are assigned by gender rather than sex; then why are there urinals in male bathrooms and feminine hygene product dispensers in female bathrooms.

It is more than a stretch.

[BmorePat87]

(06-03-2016, 04:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Good explination; however, I would ask the court one question: If bathrooms are assigned by gender rather than sex; then why are there urinals in male bathrooms and feminine hygene product dispensers in female bathrooms.

It is more than a stretch.

Ask one of the federal judges. 

[JustWinBaby]

(06-03-2016, 04:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Good explination; however, I would ask the court one question: If bathrooms are assigned by gender rather than sex; then why are there urinals in male bathrooms and feminine hygene product dispensers in female bathrooms.

It is more than a stretch.

Exactly.

[JustWinBaby]

(06-03-2016, 01:26 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: What they're arguing is that bathroom use is assigned by gender

Which is bullshit.  It's simply untrue.  It's always been about your physical equipment - and the rather crude point about urinals is Exhibit A.  Gender is a societal construct...and up until about 15-20 years ago gender/sex was a distinction without a difference.

Heck, 20 years ago liberals were trying to stamp out gender identification altogether....or, at least, make everything gender neutral.  Then they realized there are literally, like, a handful of people that are victimized by gender classifications.....

[StLucieBengal]

(06-04-2016, 05:42 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Which is bullshit.  It's simply untrue.  It's always been about your physical equipment - and the rather crude point about urinals is Exhibit A.  Gender is a societal construct...and up until about 15-20 years ago gender/sex was a distinction without a difference.

Heck, 20 years ago liberals were trying to stamp out gender identification altogether....or, at least, make everything gender neutral.  Then they realized there are literally, like, a handful of people that are victimized by gender classifications.....

Why is this so hard for them to understand?