Windy wrote:The problem is that your goals require forcing other people to believe that a transgender person is their identified gender.
How is this in any way a problem?
Windy wrote:The problem is that your goals require forcing other people to believe that a transgender person is their identified gender.
gisambards wrote:I have to take real issue with this:Windy wrote:The problem is that your goals require forcing other people to believe that a transgender person is their identified gender.
How is this in any way a problem?
Windy wrote:gisambards wrote:I have to take real issue with this:Windy wrote:The problem is that your goals require forcing other people to believe that a transgender person is their identified gender.
How is this in any way a problem?
The same reason why forcing your religion onto others usually doesn't end well.
A Combustible Lemon wrote:Death is an archaic concept for simpleminded commonfolk, not Victorian scientist whales.
You're saying being against this law requires "forcing" someone to accept that transgender people exist.
Ericthebearjew wrote:That law ain't being repealed anytime soon, it seems.
A Combustible Lemon wrote:Death is an archaic concept for simpleminded commonfolk, not Victorian scientist whales.
CarrieVS wrote:You do have to allow me to beleive it and to not pretend that I don't. Otherwise you would be forcing your beliefs on me.
You do have to allow me to do anything you'd allow someone who presents as their birth gender to do.
You can't make a rule that I can't follow without going against my belief that I'm male, unless you can show that it's necessary. Now if you insist that all people assigned female at birth use female toilets, I can't use your toilets without either breaking that rule or going against my belief. That's indirect discrimination.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests