Kansas Crimson

kubandalum wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:01 pm Elizabeth Warren recently announced her plan for ordering the federal government to put prisoners who are biological males, but who identify as females, into women's prisons. Although she also plans to have taxpayers pay for gender reassignment surgery for those prisoners, she did not say that she would make that surgery mandatory for those who "identify" as such. That got me to thinking about the Equality Act, and what that might mean. It was passed by 100% of the Democrats in the House, and all the Democrat candidates for president have voiced support for it. I've read opposition to it saying that it would destroy women's sports, which is likely true, but what would it also entail? Would
it also mean that women and girls would have to accept personswithpenises (who "identify") in their locker rooms, public restrooms, college sorority and dormitory rooms,battered women's shelters, and rape crisis centers?

I looked up the text of the act:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-con ... ill/5/text

It does not define the terms "transgender" or "gender identity" as only applying only to those who have had reassignment surgery. The words "surgery," "surgical," "operation",and "reassignment" are nowhere in the text of the act. If you poo-poo the idea that it could mean women and girls being forced to accept biological males in all of those places, do a CTL-F in the text of the act, and look up "locker," "restrooms, "shelter," and "segregation." If you think, "They'll never require that," go back to what Warren said.

I think the Democrats have a winning issue here. They should print up flyers fully explaining all of these implications and hand them out to people outside mosques and black churches and on college and high school campuses all over the country.

Prediction: No one at CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, the Washington Post, or the New York Times will ask any Democrat about this before the election. After all:



While we're on the subject, if those on the left truly believe that a "transman" is a woman, exactly why do they need the qualifier, "trans." Why don't they just call the person a "woman." Why is there a "T" in LGBTQ?

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:03 pm Why are you guys obsessed with this stuff? I know trans-people who are not as obsessed with this.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:00 pm

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:03 pm Why are you guys obsessed with this stuff? I know trans-people who are not as obsessed with this.

lulz

Feral wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:28 pm The "conservative" republican obsession to control everything in the general vicinity of American vaginas is creepy beyond description.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:00 pm

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:03 pm Why are you guys obsessed with this stuff? I know trans-people who are not as obsessed with this.

lulz

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:18 pm Well, why are Republicans so legally obsessed about this?

Leawood wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:18 pm Well, why are Republicans so legally obsessed about this?

Leawood wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:15 pm This is your most compelling non-issue? You are a weirdo.

Leawood wrote: ↑Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:48 pm
And Psych, it isn't your money. It is God's money. Do you tithe? Probably not since you face that whopping $1,600 per month child support bill for one 16 year old based upon your lucrative outside work in Hooterville, KS that's home to some two bit Bible college. By the way, do you teach students that are at your Bible college based upon federally funded loans that probably will not be re-paid? And do you still live next to Mexicans with cars on cinder blocks in their front yard?