• FreedomAdvocate
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    4 hours ago

    “An unprecedented degree of animus towards transgender people animates and permeates the ban: it is based on the shocking proposition that transgender people do not exist,” the lawyers wrote.

    Someone needs to hire new lawyers cause that’s not even being discussed.

    • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      What are you talking about? You really can’t see how this is just an expression of what the lawyer is describing? Transgender people aren’t allowed to exist. Texas literally has a law on the table right now to make it a felony, “gender fraud,” to not use your assigned at birth pronouns. Wake the fuck up dude.

      • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 minutes ago

        They are a transphobe. Even tagged then as such the previous time they tried to pass off their hate as “just stuff everyone knows is true”.

        I wouldn’t bother.

      • FreedomAdvocate
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        This executive order by trump literally acknowledges people with gender dysphoria and excludes them from the military. It’s not saying “trans people don’t exist”. It’s saying they DO, and they’re excluded from military service.

          • FreedomAdvocate
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 hours ago

            It seems like maybe you don’t. Please explain to me how what I said is wrong? If their position is that trans people don’t exist, how can they ban them from the military?

            • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              The same way banning the use of pronouns other than those assigned to you constitutes erasure. It’s about restricting or removing rights until either it’s a crime to be a certain way and/or people are too scared to come out anymore

              • FreedomAdvocate
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                33 minutes ago

                Can you please answer in the context of what we’re actually talking about? This EO does not “claim trans people don’t exist” which was the lawyers statement. This EO is saying that trans people are excluded from the military - how can it do that while also saying trans people don’t exist? That makes no sense. They need to exist in order to exclude them.

                • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  40 minutes ago

                  I said what is happening. Legalese nonsense is not a substantive argument nor does it undo what they are attempting to do. This is erasure.

                  • FreedomAdvocate
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    30 minutes ago

                    OK so you can’t show how this “denies that trans people exist”. We got there in the end.