aileron_ron

Not being racist or what ever but this ruling is going to cause a lot of trouble, Example a lgbt is lazy not doing their work so the employer fires the bum. That bum can say they was fired for being lgbt.

NakedWarrior

Saying you were fired for a certain reason and proving it is what makes a court case. There's a reason you don't see a lot of these cases because they are very hard to prove.

winners_history

There is no "trans" because there are no 'genders'.

"Gender" DOESN'T EXIST . It was made up in the 1950s by a pervert who would have been right at home working for Dr. Mengele.

It's a data-element on some government forms , not science .

  1. There are two sexes and a minuscule percentage of birth-defects .
  2. No amount of Unit-731 butchery or endocrine poisoning has changed the chromosomes of a single person.
  3. Trans™ is a mental illness. "Believing" you're something you objectively aren't is a delusion , just like 'believing' you're Napoleon, a dog or Jesus.
  4. A society that celebrates delusional behavior to the point of:
    a. Equating it with genuine civil rights , as in discrimination protections for race, sex , age, etc., that people are "born with".
    b. Enforcing 4a. with government-sanctioned punishments

... is doomed.

Ken_bingo2

Gender is a language device used by romance languages. Sex is the correct word.

allahead

Most of the Dr. Mengele stories are jew propaganda.

Tyrone_Biggums

A reminder that most of the books Hitler burned were to do with transgender research. Those mentally ill complain that he set research back 100 years. They destroyed the JEWISH center for transgenders in Germany and all the research was gone. We have Hitler to thank that it’s not far more advanced. But nothing is stopping them now.

Maat4u

Most likely fake af. I hope so

Obrez

Yeah, its naturalnews.com the dame disinfo pushers that said corona virus turned people into violent zombies.

The actual ruling used the existing basis for discrimination based on sex as it's crux.

Gorsuch wrote the court's opinion and he described the basis of the existing civil tights law like so:

If you have an expectation negative or positive of an employee based upon sex that is sexual discrimination. If a male has long hair, and you allow female employees to keep long hair, expecting him to cut his hair to get or keep his job is a civil rights violation because you are discriminating based on sex. Meaning that male/female dress codes,are legally discrimination now. The intention of this suit was to make it illegal to fire someone for being gay and the ruling does such by saying that objecting to a man having a sexual/romantic relationship with another man when you wouldn't object to a woman having a sexual relationship with a man is discrimination based on sex.

By the same "virtue" it's sexual discrimination to expect a man or woman to use a specific bathroom.

Welcome to the land of confusion.

Maat4u

Why do loud babies with mental handicaps always get bent to? Fuck that. I’d pay to keep them away from the rest of contributing members of society, like the looney bin.