House Dems unanimously vote to add transgenders to Civil Rights Act of 1964 protections

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been turned on its head, at least among the Democratic Caucus of the House of Representatives.  That landmark legislation added real teeth to the enforcement of equal rights for African-Americans, and setting off a revolution in race relations, bringing about complete legal equality.  I wonder how African-Americans feel about their law (yes, it is their law, created to address their issues) being applied to people who want to be the other sex.

Now House Democrats — without a single voice of dissent, and with eight Republicans' support — have voted to treat males who think they ought to be women and women who think they ought to be men as a protected class under that law, opening the door to litigation and heavy damages, with attorneys' fees paid by the loser; court orders; DoJ prosecutions; and a whole host of severe enforcement measures against anyone who dissents.

Because people can and do change their minds on their sex (the expression "gender-fluid" implies that it can change day by day or even minute by minute), a person can gain or lose protected class status on a whim.  This is a travesty compared to the genuine serious issues historically faced by African-American descendants of slaves who faced enduring discrimination based on their immutable racial characteristics.  To equate someone whose classification is subjective and changeable with a person whose classification is historic, genetic, and immutable makes a mockery of the suffering of the latter group.

If this were to become law — don't worry right now; the Senate won't pass this lunacy, and president wouldn't sign it — the consequences would be far-reaching and impossible to fully anticipate.  But a marker has been laid down, with the Democrats — the oldest political party in the world — fully embracing the belief unscientific that a person can change from male to female or vice versa merely by wishing it to be true.  I realize that the bullies who enforce progressive orthodoxy will call me a hater, but we do all have chromosomes in every cell of our bodies that tell us we are either male or female, and to deny that is folly.

Peter Hasson reports in the Daily Caller:

The Democratically controlled House of Representatives voted Friday 236-173 in favor of the Equality Act (snip)

Eight Republicans crossed party lines to vote for the bill, which had unanimous Democratic support.

The bill amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to make "sexual orientation and gender identity" protected characteristics under federal anti-discrimination law.

The first visible consequences will be in locker rooms, bathrooms, and girls' athletic competitions.

Hasson notes that the legislation would "expand female athletic teams to include biological males who identify as transgender girls."  That is a serious matter to every girl athlete who dreams of pushing herself toward excellence by in effect allowing males, with their biological advantages in most sports, to take home the prizes in athletic competitions.

"People need to wake up. This radical bill is going to totally eliminate women's and girls sports," Republican Arizona Rep. Debbie Lesko warned in an op-ed Thursday.

Republican Missouri Rep. Vicky Hartzler and a half-dozen other House Republicans held a press conference Thursday in opposition to what Hartzler dubbed the "Inequality Act."

"Congress enacted Title IX to provide equal opportunities for women in education and sports. All this is erased under H.R. 5," Hartzler said at the press conference.

Three former elite female athletes, Doriane Coleman, Martina Navratilova and Sanya Richards-Ross, warned that the Equality Act would wreak havoc on women's sports in an April 29 Washington Post op-ed.

"The legislation would make it unlawful to differentiate among girls and women in sports on the basis of sex for any purpose. For example, a sports team couldn't treat a transgender woman differently from a woman who is not transgender on the grounds that the former is male-bodied," the former athletes wrote.

"Yet the reality is that putting male- and female-bodied athletes together is co-ed or open sport. And in open sport, females lose," the three women warned.

This all true, and all consequential for the girls (and their families) whose championships will be taken away by athletes with Y chromosomes.

But all of the sanctuaries that civil society and law have created for females, to protect them from males whose genetic makeup inclines them to spread their seed to females (an impulse that civilization must channel in a positive direction), would disappear under a barrage of lawsuits and federal guidelines.  No more girls' bathrooms or locker rooms.  Mark Dice has assembled on Twitter a catalogue of abuses that already have occurred:

I think that the Democrats have abjectly surrendered to the transgender lobby, and that this will cost them support on Election Day. I have never seen a poll of the public on their beliefs about transgenderism. For instance:  Is a male who "transitions" an actual female?  Does such a person deserve civil rights protection?

My inference is that the media who commission polls realize that the general public does not buy into their latest dogma, and do not want to offer any ammunition to opponents. Therefore, the House Democrats have no genuine sense of the public's real feelings on the matter.

And with the level of bullying applied to people who speak their minds on the subject — Haters! Transphobes! — feedback from the general public is suppressed.

With actual female athletes facing a future where their championships are dominated by males, a new victim class is forming.

This will not end well.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been turned on its head, at least among the Democratic Caucus of the House of Representatives.  That landmark legislation added real teeth to the enforcement of equal rights for African-Americans, and setting off a revolution in race relations, bringing about complete legal equality.  I wonder how African-Americans feel about their law (yes, it is their law, created to address their issues) being applied to people who want to be the other sex.

Now House Democrats — without a single voice of dissent, and with eight Republicans' support — have voted to treat males who think they ought to be women and women who think they ought to be men as a protected class under that law, opening the door to litigation and heavy damages, with attorneys' fees paid by the loser; court orders; DoJ prosecutions; and a whole host of severe enforcement measures against anyone who dissents.

Because people can and do change their minds on their sex (the expression "gender-fluid" implies that it can change day by day or even minute by minute), a person can gain or lose protected class status on a whim.  This is a travesty compared to the genuine serious issues historically faced by African-American descendants of slaves who faced enduring discrimination based on their immutable racial characteristics.  To equate someone whose classification is subjective and changeable with a person whose classification is historic, genetic, and immutable makes a mockery of the suffering of the latter group.

If this were to become law — don't worry right now; the Senate won't pass this lunacy, and president wouldn't sign it — the consequences would be far-reaching and impossible to fully anticipate.  But a marker has been laid down, with the Democrats — the oldest political party in the world — fully embracing the belief unscientific that a person can change from male to female or vice versa merely by wishing it to be true.  I realize that the bullies who enforce progressive orthodoxy will call me a hater, but we do all have chromosomes in every cell of our bodies that tell us we are either male or female, and to deny that is folly.

Peter Hasson reports in the Daily Caller:

The Democratically controlled House of Representatives voted Friday 236-173 in favor of the Equality Act (snip)

Eight Republicans crossed party lines to vote for the bill, which had unanimous Democratic support.

The bill amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to make "sexual orientation and gender identity" protected characteristics under federal anti-discrimination law.

The first visible consequences will be in locker rooms, bathrooms, and girls' athletic competitions.

Hasson notes that the legislation would "expand female athletic teams to include biological males who identify as transgender girls."  That is a serious matter to every girl athlete who dreams of pushing herself toward excellence by in effect allowing males, with their biological advantages in most sports, to take home the prizes in athletic competitions.

"People need to wake up. This radical bill is going to totally eliminate women's and girls sports," Republican Arizona Rep. Debbie Lesko warned in an op-ed Thursday.

Republican Missouri Rep. Vicky Hartzler and a half-dozen other House Republicans held a press conference Thursday in opposition to what Hartzler dubbed the "Inequality Act."

"Congress enacted Title IX to provide equal opportunities for women in education and sports. All this is erased under H.R. 5," Hartzler said at the press conference.

Three former elite female athletes, Doriane Coleman, Martina Navratilova and Sanya Richards-Ross, warned that the Equality Act would wreak havoc on women's sports in an April 29 Washington Post op-ed.

"The legislation would make it unlawful to differentiate among girls and women in sports on the basis of sex for any purpose. For example, a sports team couldn't treat a transgender woman differently from a woman who is not transgender on the grounds that the former is male-bodied," the former athletes wrote.

"Yet the reality is that putting male- and female-bodied athletes together is co-ed or open sport. And in open sport, females lose," the three women warned.

This all true, and all consequential for the girls (and their families) whose championships will be taken away by athletes with Y chromosomes.

But all of the sanctuaries that civil society and law have created for females, to protect them from males whose genetic makeup inclines them to spread their seed to females (an impulse that civilization must channel in a positive direction), would disappear under a barrage of lawsuits and federal guidelines.  No more girls' bathrooms or locker rooms.  Mark Dice has assembled on Twitter a catalogue of abuses that already have occurred:

I think that the Democrats have abjectly surrendered to the transgender lobby, and that this will cost them support on Election Day. I have never seen a poll of the public on their beliefs about transgenderism. For instance:  Is a male who "transitions" an actual female?  Does such a person deserve civil rights protection?

My inference is that the media who commission polls realize that the general public does not buy into their latest dogma, and do not want to offer any ammunition to opponents. Therefore, the House Democrats have no genuine sense of the public's real feelings on the matter.

And with the level of bullying applied to people who speak their minds on the subject — Haters! Transphobes! — feedback from the general public is suppressed.

With actual female athletes facing a future where their championships are dominated by males, a new victim class is forming.

This will not end well.