[Travis McGee]

[IamConservative]

I hope there is follow up on this case. I would like to know how this young girl enjoys dressing for PE in the boys locker room. I am certain the experience will do wonders for her mental condition.

[ClearCase_guy]

[SunTzuWu]

Bookmark.

[rlmorel]

"...I can only conclude that anti-smoking hysteria isn't and never was about second-hand smoke..."

I don't, and never have smoked cigarettes, but that has always been clear to me: It was all about nanny state behavior control.

[angryoldfatman]

This is cultural terrorism as initiated by Gorgy Lukacs back near the turn of the 20th Century.

http://www.examiner.com/article/cultural-terrorism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaRRB3OUTW8 (NSFW, start at 6:20 for Lukacs, even though the entire 25 minute video is a good overview)

Why are the neo-Marxists doing this? Conversion of Christian-based Western civilization to “egalitarian” Communism. Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB Soviet defector, told us the details of the plan that neo-Marxists had for us - all the way back in the 1980s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Iz3VjoHXLA

[mrsmel]

With male teenagers being taken at their word that they consider themselves females, no proof required, and they can consider their gender to be “fluid” and go back and forth, I don’t know how any parents can stand to send their children to public schools now. If all the previous things didn’t bother them, I don’t know how this can’t be the straw which breaks the camel’s back.

Then if enough parents pull their kids out of public school, the US will do like Germany does and force parents to send their kids to the state (public indoctrination) schools.

[i_robot73]

Ah, Title IX. Another piece of useless lawyer legalize that does more to pervert our Republic than strengthen it. Flowery words with little to no substance, other than to create the revolving-door of judicial activism (depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is). Just a way for the Left to shoehorn their ideals where they are unwanted and unwarranted.

[Albion Wilde]

Today "sex" can even mean "sexual orientation," which is almost always code for sexual conduct. It was not interpreted this way until 2016 when a Clinton-appointed federal judge put a new spin on a 44-year old law. Now Title IX is being treated as if it axiomatically applies to "sexual orientation." In time people will forget that there was ever a time that it didn't. Title IX was supposed to be a women's rights bill but it became a "gay" "rights" bill, then a "trans" "rights" bill because judges decreed it to be so.

This should be a warning to legislators to stipulate definition of terms and limits to overinterpretation of those terms in the writing of each bill. Terms are a part of most business deals for precisely these reasons -- to prevent a future distortion of meaning or limits.