By Robert Pear
Washington — Employers (click here) are moving to adopt or strengthen policies to prevent bias against transgender people after the latest in a series of court rulings that have extended protections for an increasingly diverse work force.
A federal appeals court, rejecting the position of the Trump administration, ruled this month that transgender people are protected by a civil rights law that bans workplace discrimination based on sex.
Lawyers who specialize in employment cases said that the decision, by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, was highly significant. The court held that job discrimination on the basis of transgender status was inherently sex discrimination, and that the employer in this case could not claim an exemption from the law because of his religious beliefs....
The work of removing discrimination of transgender Americans still has a few tasks to complete. The law removes discrimination, bias and criminal implications against people in statistical minority American populations, but, it doesn't end hate.
Now, (click here) anyone can marry in any of the 50 states, regardless of gender—and also regardless of whether someone’s gender is recognized by officials in the state where they live.However, transgender people and their families continue to face marriage-related problems in the wake of the historic Supreme Court ruling. Here are some examples:
- Some courts will continue to challenge certain parent-child relationships.
- Not all state or local officials provide a marriage license that reflects a person’s gender identity.
- Many states only have marriage licenses and certificates with “bride” and “groom” language, which may not be relevant for all couples.
- Some officials may insist that a person’s name and gender be registered according to what is listed on identity documents, even when the information is no longer accurate.
None of these scenarios affect the validity of a marriage, but some may have the effect of outing people, and parenting disputes often have serious repercussions....
Hate is still evident in the USA through racism and bigotry. Racism and bigotry can still kill. For some reason people that embrace hate and bigotry believe they are a special population that will change the face of the USA's laws as well. I don't see that happening and as the younger generations take over more and more frequently, the diluting of hatred's power becomes more evident.
To be more specific, "Hate Crime Law" adds brevity to a crime obviously inspired by hate or bigotry; but, it is not ending cultural hatred.
April 6, 2018
By Nina Golgowski
Residents of Anchorage, Alaska, (click here) defeated a ballot proposition that would have made it illegal for transgender people to use municipal restrooms, locker rooms and dressing rooms that match their gender identity, as opposed to the gender they were assigned at birth.
Proposition 1 went down Tuesday by a vote of 47.3 percent in favor and 52.7 percent opposed during the city’s first vote-by-mail election, according to the city’s Municipal Clerk.
The Fair Anchorage campaign argued that the proposal, which would have repealed parts of the city’s Non-Discrimination Ordinance, was discriminatory and would open the door to harassment.
“Transgender people simply want the same rights afforded to all other people — the ability to live openly and participate fully in the world, without the fear of being harassed, intimidated, or vulnerable to violence,” the coalition said in a press release.
Proposition 1 would have required people to provide proof of gender by birth certificate....
Louisiana on the other hand, can't get out of it's own way. One has to wonder what drives this mess. If it is based in religion, then it is religious bigotry and there wall between the state and religion needs strengthening. If it is the idea a child can be molded, either trans or not, to be identifying their gender differently, then it is based in ignorance and idiocy. Idiocy is when people continue to hold a specific discriminating belief when all information before them states otherwise.
Example:
People who are attracted to others of the same sex develop their orientation before they are born. This is not a choice. And scientific evidence shows their parents cannot be blamed.
Research proving that there is biological evidence for sexual orientation has been available since the 1980s. The links have been emphasized by new scientific research.
In 2014, researchers confirmed the association between same-sex orientation in men and a specific chromosomal region. This is similar to findings originally published in the 1990s, which, at that time, gave rise to the idea that a “gay gene” must exist. But this argument has never been substantiated, despite the fact that studies have shown that homosexuality is a heritable trait....
As a society, it is the obligation of any authority to evaluate dangerous ideas and trends. This is one of them.
I also find very upsetting the idea that understanding the "gene replication process" is a social responsibility to relieve the transgender woman or man from it's UNFORTUNATE genetic predisposition. What right does anyone have to say whether a transgender individual needs relief? It is completely bizarre to think a person is born with dysfunctional genetics, besides being a dangerous path to even begin to investigate.
Speculation on being Transgender (click here)
There are no clear identifying characteristics of gene expression or modification clearly pointing to what causes a brain to develop with a gender identity, nor a dysphoric gender identity. It is intriguing, however, that Histone Methyltransferases(HRTs) are affected when methyls are added, and Hormone Replacement Therapy(HRT) also involves a methylation process.
We can clearly extrapolate on the complex developmental process the genome and epigenome collude to create. Starting with viable hypotheses and from the data highlighted above, logical arguments have been postulated. Researchers from University of Maryland School of Medicine may have made a crucial first step toward that understanding, however.
What ethical consequences arise if science does determine what processes determine gender identity?
Transgender identity does NOT CAUSE CANCER!!!!!!!!!!!
It is very dangerous to a society of people when one person is viewed as more perfect in genetic content than another. To even imply there is such a PROBLEM is nothing but hatred and IF YOUR BIBLE teaches you to hate, then you have a very troubled Bible.
And since when does Moses in Deuteronomy replace Jesus or God as an authority of any values?
Women must not wear men’s clothes, and men must not wear women’s clothes. Everyone who does such things is detestable to the Lord your God. Deutoronomy 22:5 (CEB)
Deuteronomy is in the Hebrew Torah and the Christian Old Testament and written about Moses. You know, the guy with the burning bush. The one who gave the world the ten commandments that most USA southern politicians believe is intended to replace the USA Constitution. Yes, that Moses! None of that text is God or Jesus discussed as it's primary subject or author.
The point is that if children are born with a trans-DNA strand then the discussion is over. There should be NO DISCRIMINATION of a child in a school system. If there are wise guys within the class or school that like to identify as the opposite gender then they are lying. LYING. Why are legislators in Louisiana promoting lying, discrimination, bias, bigotry and hatred. The Louisiana legislature needs to be replaced when it states it is okay to practice hate as a social construct in schools.
Children are vulnerable to all kinds of values. Why would any legislative body promote hatred? Just as a matter of fact, there are white guys that are "Trans," too.
Enough.
March 26, 2018
By Julia O'Donoghue
Louisiana Sen. J.P. Morrell, D-New Orleans, (click here) pulled his legislation to outlaw discrimination against students based on sexual orientation and gender identity in public and private schools that receive state funding.
Senate Bill 228 also would have prohibited students from being excluded from any school that receives state funds -- including those that are private -- on the basis of race, disability, national origin or creed.
Currently in state law, only public schools are prohibited from turning away students based on race, disability, national origin or creed. An exception is also made for religious schools, who are allowed to pick students or provide a preference for students from a certain religious sect.
The socially conservative Senate Education Committee was likely to kill Morrell's legislation if it had come up for a vote Thursday (March 22), which may have been why the senator chose to pull the bill.
"I believe filing this bill is part of an ongoing dialogue," he said during the committee hearing. "No matter whatever circumstance they are in, kids should feel safe."...
"Warning, Will Robinson, Warning!"
This is the most idiotic idea of assessment of any court. Any court that hears appeals is made up of individuals. The court decisions are WEIGHTED by a majority of judges and passed down to the people. That means one individual can bring judgement to a court. It is ridiculous.
But, so long as lawyers find they are more successful before one judge or another; does it mean there is corruption within the USA court system? Answer that and then it might be understandable why this delineation of one court vs. another is actually relevant.
Every state is allowed States Rights because of it's simple geography and the difference in law that it can cause. It is easy to say one court is different from the other, establishing corruption or not, because of the same reason States Rights stands as constitutional.
Disagreement of a lower court with the Supreme Court is not a measure. Who is to say the Supreme Court is correct if it is corrupted?
There are many schools of thought. Is one better than the other and is it constitutional to state the same? Court decisions are based in MAJORITY. That simple designation and the fact there is a majority and minority assessment of most court decisions indicates there should never be condemnation of thought or values; with the exception where human rights are assigned as an enemy.
December 2012
By Mark Walsh
For some time, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (click here) has suffered a reputation as being the circuit most at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court. The San Francisco-based court has frequently been the most reversed among the circuit courts, with one term in the mid-1990s seeing 27 of its 28 decisions reversed or vacated by the high court.
Conservatives decry the 9th Circuit’s perceived liberal bent. As candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, Newt Gingrich practically recommended abolishing the circuit, while Rick Santorum suggested that its judges be banished to Guam.
But more recently, another federal circuit has reigned as the most reversed. The 6th Circuit, based in Cincinnati, has had a particularly dismal record before the high court. In the seven Supreme Court terms completed since the fall of 2005, the 6th Circuit has been reversed 31 out of 38 times, for an 81.6 percent reversal rate, based on figures compiled by two Philadelphia lawyers. That leads all the federal circuits for that time period, with the 9th Circuit coming in as the second most reversed—100 out of 128 cases, or 78.1 percent....
April 6, 2018
By Nina Golgowski
Residents of Anchorage, Alaska, (click here) defeated a ballot proposition that would have made it illegal for transgender people to use municipal restrooms, locker rooms and dressing rooms that match their gender identity, as opposed to the gender they were assigned at birth.
Proposition 1 went down Tuesday by a vote of 47.3 percent in favor and 52.7 percent opposed during the city’s first vote-by-mail election, according to the city’s Municipal Clerk.
The Fair Anchorage campaign argued that the proposal, which would have repealed parts of the city’s Non-Discrimination Ordinance, was discriminatory and would open the door to harassment.
“Transgender people simply want the same rights afforded to all other people — the ability to live openly and participate fully in the world, without the fear of being harassed, intimidated, or vulnerable to violence,” the coalition said in a press release.
Proposition 1 would have required people to provide proof of gender by birth certificate....
Louisiana on the other hand, can't get out of it's own way. One has to wonder what drives this mess. If it is based in religion, then it is religious bigotry and there wall between the state and religion needs strengthening. If it is the idea a child can be molded, either trans or not, to be identifying their gender differently, then it is based in ignorance and idiocy. Idiocy is when people continue to hold a specific discriminating belief when all information before them states otherwise.
Example:
Research proving that there is biological evidence for sexual orientation has been available since the 1980s. The links have been emphasized by new scientific research.
In 2014, researchers confirmed the association between same-sex orientation in men and a specific chromosomal region. This is similar to findings originally published in the 1990s, which, at that time, gave rise to the idea that a “gay gene” must exist. But this argument has never been substantiated, despite the fact that studies have shown that homosexuality is a heritable trait....
As a society, it is the obligation of any authority to evaluate dangerous ideas and trends. This is one of them.
I also find very upsetting the idea that understanding the "gene replication process" is a social responsibility to relieve the transgender woman or man from it's UNFORTUNATE genetic predisposition. What right does anyone have to say whether a transgender individual needs relief? It is completely bizarre to think a person is born with dysfunctional genetics, besides being a dangerous path to even begin to investigate.
There are no clear identifying characteristics of gene expression or modification clearly pointing to what causes a brain to develop with a gender identity, nor a dysphoric gender identity. It is intriguing, however, that Histone Methyltransferases(HRTs) are affected when methyls are added, and Hormone Replacement Therapy(HRT) also involves a methylation process.
We can clearly extrapolate on the complex developmental process the genome and epigenome collude to create. Starting with viable hypotheses and from the data highlighted above, logical arguments have been postulated. Researchers from University of Maryland School of Medicine may have made a crucial first step toward that understanding, however.
What ethical consequences arise if science does determine what processes determine gender identity?
Transgender identity does NOT CAUSE CANCER!!!!!!!!!!!
It is very dangerous to a society of people when one person is viewed as more perfect in genetic content than another. To even imply there is such a PROBLEM is nothing but hatred and IF YOUR BIBLE teaches you to hate, then you have a very troubled Bible.
And since when does Moses in Deuteronomy replace Jesus or God as an authority of any values?
Women must not wear men’s clothes, and men must not wear women’s clothes. Everyone who does such things is detestable to the Lord your God. Deutoronomy 22:5 (CEB)
Deuteronomy is in the Hebrew Torah and the Christian Old Testament and written about Moses. You know, the guy with the burning bush. The one who gave the world the ten commandments that most USA southern politicians believe is intended to replace the USA Constitution. Yes, that Moses! None of that text is God or Jesus discussed as it's primary subject or author.
The point is that if children are born with a trans-DNA strand then the discussion is over. There should be NO DISCRIMINATION of a child in a school system. If there are wise guys within the class or school that like to identify as the opposite gender then they are lying. LYING. Why are legislators in Louisiana promoting lying, discrimination, bias, bigotry and hatred. The Louisiana legislature needs to be replaced when it states it is okay to practice hate as a social construct in schools.
Children are vulnerable to all kinds of values. Why would any legislative body promote hatred? Just as a matter of fact, there are white guys that are "Trans," too.
Enough.
March 26, 2018
By Julia O'Donoghue
Louisiana Sen. J.P. Morrell, D-New Orleans, (click here) pulled his legislation to outlaw discrimination against students based on sexual orientation and gender identity in public and private schools that receive state funding.
Senate Bill 228 also would have prohibited students from being excluded from any school that receives state funds -- including those that are private -- on the basis of race, disability, national origin or creed.
Currently in state law, only public schools are prohibited from turning away students based on race, disability, national origin or creed. An exception is also made for religious schools, who are allowed to pick students or provide a preference for students from a certain religious sect.
The socially conservative Senate Education Committee was likely to kill Morrell's legislation if it had come up for a vote Thursday (March 22), which may have been why the senator chose to pull the bill.
"I believe filing this bill is part of an ongoing dialogue," he said during the committee hearing. "No matter whatever circumstance they are in, kids should feel safe."...
"Warning, Will Robinson, Warning!"
This is the most idiotic idea of assessment of any court. Any court that hears appeals is made up of individuals. The court decisions are WEIGHTED by a majority of judges and passed down to the people. That means one individual can bring judgement to a court. It is ridiculous.
But, so long as lawyers find they are more successful before one judge or another; does it mean there is corruption within the USA court system? Answer that and then it might be understandable why this delineation of one court vs. another is actually relevant.
Every state is allowed States Rights because of it's simple geography and the difference in law that it can cause. It is easy to say one court is different from the other, establishing corruption or not, because of the same reason States Rights stands as constitutional.
Disagreement of a lower court with the Supreme Court is not a measure. Who is to say the Supreme Court is correct if it is corrupted?
There are many schools of thought. Is one better than the other and is it constitutional to state the same? Court decisions are based in MAJORITY. That simple designation and the fact there is a majority and minority assessment of most court decisions indicates there should never be condemnation of thought or values; with the exception where human rights are assigned as an enemy.
December 2012
By Mark Walsh
For some time, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (click here) has suffered a reputation as being the circuit most at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court. The San Francisco-based court has frequently been the most reversed among the circuit courts, with one term in the mid-1990s seeing 27 of its 28 decisions reversed or vacated by the high court.
Conservatives decry the 9th Circuit’s perceived liberal bent. As candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, Newt Gingrich practically recommended abolishing the circuit, while Rick Santorum suggested that its judges be banished to Guam.
But more recently, another federal circuit has reigned as the most reversed. The 6th Circuit, based in Cincinnati, has had a particularly dismal record before the high court. In the seven Supreme Court terms completed since the fall of 2005, the 6th Circuit has been reversed 31 out of 38 times, for an 81.6 percent reversal rate, based on figures compiled by two Philadelphia lawyers. That leads all the federal circuits for that time period, with the 9th Circuit coming in as the second most reversed—100 out of 128 cases, or 78.1 percent....
