Random Politics & Religion #22

That type of talk shows a cognitive dissonance and how unattached this person is from actual society. I have no problem with them undergoing whatever operation needs to be done to make them a woman, or even if they believe they had feminist aspect their whole life but simply using the word "assigned" as if they were given a number in a factory. No, you were born as male. You choose to be a female at one point in your life and use the correct means to get there, but you WERE born a male, not assigned that title.

H&H contends only that Dawson is without evidence sufficient to establish an inference of sex discrimination because she cannot show that she received less favorable treatment than similarly-situated employees, who are not members of her protected class.

...

H&H's proffered reason for terminating Dawson is that she threatened to sue Remington and did so without first discussing her work-related problem with her immediate supervisor, as required by H&H's employment handbook. Holloway testifies that on September 17, 2012, the day he terminated Dawson, Remington employees Virgil Bennett and Danny Hopkins ("Hopkins") beckoned him to a meeting.[19] According to Holloway, Hopkins told him that he called the meeting because a Remington employee overheard Dawson state that she could sue Remington because she had not received safety training under her legal name. Holloway further testifies that Hopkins stated: "We don't appreciate one of your employees making a comment about Remington and where we work. We feel like you need to remove her from our job site due to, you know, the threat that she made."

You know I wouldn't be surprised if it happened? Because you can be fined up to $250,000 in New York for using the wrong pronoun. It's not a huge logical leap we're talking about.

Now, I want an apology for your insensitivity to drought victims in Yemen.

I refuse to apologize for my insensitivity to the plight of the people in Yemen...

Look, you are (very lazily) asserting that this is a self-identifying trait only.

You clearly do not understand the legal difficulties associated with adding just 1 gender to various laws (every single law would have to go straight back to various local, state, and federal legislation if that law even hints at targeting a specific gender. Over 50% of the cases ever made throughout US history has been about interpretation of law, which makes laws that are very clear about a gender who is targeted must be altered to include any additional genders if they are considered to exist. And every law must be changed by legislation, meaning it goes through the entire process to be created/amended, and every law must be individually amended meaning you can't write a bill that is a one-size-fits-all and amends them all, especially when we are talking about business/civil/criminal laws.

It was a pain in the *** for states who had to alter all the insurance regulations and laws just to add the ability for same-sex individuals to be covered as married. Also took years to get it done.

Do you honestly think this dramatic change will occur overnight or even in the same legislative session?

And that's just the legal side of it. There's also a bureaucratic side to it too, which runs slower than the legislative side.

Seriously, just drop it. You are inferring a problem that doesn't exist (transgenders being fired for being transgender) and now you are stating things you very clearly do not understand (law).

I refuse to apologize for my insensitivity to the plight of the people in Yemen...

It still hasn't gone to jury trial though. Been over a year and a half.

That's a very harsh conclusion, what about she believes she's born female but with male genitals?

A phobia is an extreme and/or irrational fear of something. How does he argument go that "because you won't deem irrelevant Bruce Jenner's chromosomes, you must have an irrational fear of him"?

Enlighten me you nausiphobe.

Bah your forgetting that he intends to help usher in the new government that consists of only properly educated people with politically approved beliefs. This way there is no need for such feudal concepts as states, liberties or personal freedom. The Righteous Central Administration will determine that there are 84 individual genders and then approval all policies concerning them.

Kinda scary thinking that people like flav actually desire that kind of "right thing" government.

Sounds like she got fired for constantly make her work about her gender and not about work.

Enlighten me you nausiphobe.

I think it breaks down to people just wanting to feel "special" without doing a *** thing with their lives. We raise this generation of idiots who parents made them and told them they were special and could do anything, then they get older and realize they are nothing special. Your just as normal as anyone else. So they make up all these genders and self identifications so they can be in their "special little group." Do for me I'm special, give me ***I'm special, let me in to your ivroy league school for free cause I'm *** special.

Get over yourself people.

Is this another one of those things Rav as talking about where people accuse you of things you've never said? Lol...

It is an argument strategy used here. It involves getting nice pretty suit that resembles the person you are arguing with and then filling it with straw and made-up ideas that you want or think the person has. When its full you mount it up and attack that instead of your opponent. Kind of like an arguing voodoo doll.

To emphasis, she has a case against the supervisor, but not against the company.

She should have sued the supervisor, not the company, but ACLU made that decision and they always go after the biggest bite.

The point being that you can have an opinion that isn't necassarily true... hell the people using them might not even know they're true meaning... what you're saying though is like if I were to call you an *** I would literally be saying that you are the hope in ones ***...

To be honest, she has a case, but she needs to prove that she was fired because she went from a he to a she and was fired solely on it.

Her case revolves around a bunch of paperwork when she was told to identify herself as per prior sex. The supervisor was probably wrong about that, and should have made her sign as whatever her name is now.

But all the company (being sued) has to do is prove that she threatened to sue the third party for not signing her name on safety paperwork and she is done. Which, by the looks of it, they have the evidence.

I'm now interested about this case. I think if it goes her way, it will make national headlines. The whole reason why it's not covered as strongly as it generally should is because she doesn't have much of a legal case against her ex-employers.

Maybe this person just filed a compliment to get a job at the ACLU...