Transgender Athlete Suing Princeton After Being Barred From Running In Women's Category

[Hardcore troubadour 16,234]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

A woman is killed and called a f-ing b-tch by the killer. All you “heroes” cheer for that. But you’re obsessing over this transgender controversy in the name of protecting women.

Seriously, F off. You don’t give a about protecting women. 

A woman has her throat slashed sitting on a train coming home from work and the killer is heard to say “I got that white girl” and you and your kind say nothing. You keep voting for the people that let murderers like that back on the street. Seriously, F off. You don’t give a about protecting anyone. 

[jerryskids 7,270]

12 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Not being thrilled with somebody = shoot them in the head and call them a f*cking b*tch.

What a delightful point of view. So funny.

I already told you what is funny.  You just don't like me showing that your position is idiotic.  HTH

[LaChup 285]

It's time to start telling your non-athletic, perverted sons, it's not ok to change in the girls locker rooms and steal trophies from the girls. 

[TimHauck 3,520]

5 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I think this could be interesting.  I would have to think that if SCOTUS actually makes a ruling, and is in favor of the transgender person, Title IX could be out the door.  Whether that's through the law or evolution, not sure... but it could be the beginning of the end of women's athletics.

Lol no it wouldn’t.  And yes I agree that biological men shouldn’t be in women’s sports

[dogcows 1,441]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I already told you what is funny.  You just don't like me showing that your position is idiotic.  HTH

Yes you definitely already told on yourself.

[FrancieFootball 373]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Great point.  If I got clipped by a woman with her SUV, I'd probably call her "esteemed citizen" or some such.   

If you stood in front of a running vehicle in a volatile situation, you getting clipped wouldn't surpise me.

[FrancieFootball 373]

19 minutes ago, HellToupee said:

Has @FrancieFootball weighed in?

I've weighed in several times that biologically born males have no business competing in women's sports.

[jerryskids 7,270]

1 minute ago, FrancieFootball said:

If you stood in front of a running vehicle in a volatile situation, you getting clipped wouldn't surpise me.

This is your second really dumb comment in as many nights.  The bar is pretty low for you, but are you OK? 

[dogcows 1,441]

3 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

This is your second really dumb comment in as many nights.  The bar is pretty low for you, but are you OK? 

She’s got a lot of catching up to do if she’s gonna match you.

[FrancieFootball 373]

5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

This is your second really dumb comment in as many nights.  The bar is pretty low for you, but are you OK? 

MAGAs are making out the ICE goons to be highly trained law enforcement officers who should be obeyed whatever they say and yet the handling of that situation completely went against law enforcement procedure that the Trump-stacked Supreme Court addressed.

Cops don't go stand in front a car during even the most least-threatening traffic stop, much less a highly charged one in which one masked, armed goon is screaming "get out of the focking car" is clawing at the driver. 

Go read something, mmm K?

[jerryskids 7,270]

10 minutes ago, dogcows said:

She’s got a lot of catching up to do if she’s gonna match you.

 

[Strike 6,139]

How the fock did this thread get hijacked by the anti ICE trolls?  

[dogcows 1,441]

Just now, Strike said:

How the fock did this thread get hijacked by the anti ICE trolls?  

Don’t worry, Max Overdose will start 20 more anti-trans threads for you in the next 5 minutes.

[Strike 6,139]

Here's a snippet transcript of one of the questions from yesterday's proceeding:

Quote

 

ALITO: To pick up on the issue of discrimination on the basis of transgender status, let me just go back to, let me go to some basics. Do you agree that a school may have separate teams for a category of students classified as boys, and a category of students classified as girls?

HARTNETT: Yes, Your Honor.

ALITO: If it does that, then is it not necessary for there to be, for equal protection purposes, if that is challenged under the equal protection clause, an understanding of what it means to be a boy or a girl, or a man or a woman?

HARTNETT: Yes, Your Honor.

ALITO: And what is that definition? For equal protection purposes? What does it mean to be a boy or a girl, or a man or a woman?

HARTNETT: Sorry, I misunderstood your question. I think that the underlying enactment, whatever it was, the policy, the law, the... we'd have to have an understanding of how the state or the government, was understanding that term, to figure out whether or not someone was excluded. We do not have a definition for the court.

 

 

[SaintsInDome2006 887]

If the Republicans just amended Title IX and the ADA it would end all this. No more litigation. It would probably be mostly popular & even Dems in purple districts would go along. 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,234]

Shouldn’t kbj recuse herself from this case? 

[TBayXXXVII 2,686]

42 minutes ago, Strike said:

Here's a snippet transcript of one of the questions from yesterday's proceeding:

 

Alito: What is a woman?
Attorney: I don't know.

LOL

[TBayXXXVII 2,686]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Shouldn’t kbj recuse herself from this case? 

You would think.  She said she doesn't know what a woman is.

[TBayXXXVII 2,686]

10 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

If the Republicans just amended Title IX and the ADA it would end all this. No more litigation. It would probably be mostly popular & even Dems in purple districts would go along. 

Amend T9 and ADA, in what way?  I think the Republicans and Democrat s in purple states, are fine the way things are.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,234]

Liberals foisted this retarded shitt on us. 

[SaintsInDome2006 887]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Amend T9 and ADA, in what way?  I think the Republicans and Democrat s in purple states, are fine the way things are.

Amend it to clarify a trans is not the opposite gender they are trying to compete in. Republicans raise this all the time, for good reason. Just amend the law, game over.

[Strike 6,139]

15 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

If the Republicans just amended Title IX and the ADA it would end all this. No more litigation. It would probably be mostly popular & even Dems in purple districts would go along. 

Nothing wrong with the law.   It's the bastardization of the laws and the meanings of words from lefties like you that is the problem.

[Strike 6,139]

Just now, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Amend it to clarify a trans is not the opposite gender they are trying to compete in. Republicans raise this all the time, for good reason. Just amend the law, game over.

No.  We talk about sex, not gender. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,686]

10 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Amend it to clarify a trans is not the opposite gender they are trying to compete in. Republicans raise this all the time, for good reason. Just amend the law, game over.

Trump's EO did clarify that.  That's what's being fought here.  The ONLY reason it's not in an amendment is because the Democrat politicians won't vote for it.  The next time a Democrat comes into office, they'll undo this EO.  Democrats on this board can say all that they want about not approving of men in sports, but you're going to vote for it if you vote for Democrats.

[SaintsInDome2006 887]

3 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Trump's EO did clarify that.  That's what's being fought here.  The ONLY reason it's not in an amendment is because the Democrat politicians won't vote for it.  The next time a Democrat comes into office, they'll undo this EO.  Democrats on this board can say all that they want about not approving of men in sports, but you're going to vote for it if you vote for Democrats.

But 1. A court could just not recognize that (Congress writes the laws), & 2. a Dem will just come along & reverse it.

I actually agree with you on this, it’s just way down my list of priorities. To me it’s a competition issue. I’m in Louisiana & it’s not an issue here but if it was the LHSAA, school board or parish would handle it. And the person suing in the OP per Fox is suing under Title IX, just change the law. Nobody can pass laws anymore is the problem.

[TBayXXXVII 2,686]

1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

But 1. A court could just not recognize that (Congress writes the laws), & 2. a Dem will just come along & reverse it.

I actually agree with you on this, it’s just way down my list of priorities. To me it’s a competition issue. I’m in Louisiana & it’s not an issue here but if it was the LHSAA, school board or parish would handle it. And the person suing in the OP per Fox is suing under Title IX, just change the law. Nobody can pass laws anymore is the problem.

I agree... but to change T9 and the ADA, you still need Democrat support and that's not going to happen.  You need Democrat support because at some point in the future, they will control Congress and the WH, they'll just change it back.  So like I said, you (and everyone else), can say that men should not be allowed in womens spaces/sports, but when you vote Democrat, you're voting against that.  That's just the way it is.  The only way to prevent it, is the way it's happening now.  I think we just have to hope that the Republican's in the SC do the right thing and tell this person "no", and that by the time the Democrats control the WH, Congress, & Supreme Court, this fad will have run it's course.  The only real way to end this, is in the constitution, and we all know that's not going to happen.