SCOTUS will rule whether men MUST be considered women just because they say they are
A very good discussion of the landmark “Aimee Stephens” case, with Kara Dansky and Natasha Chart on Derrick Jensen’s
From Paula Densnow:
The trans agenda serves multiple functions, from rolling back the rights and privileges gained by women in the last 50 years in the US, to enriching drug companies and plastic surgeons, to allowing the government to take control of people’s perceptions and language.
The Harris/Stephens case before the Supreme Court is presented by the self proclaimed Legitimate Media as a woman’s rights issue, that is, whether women can be forced to wear skirts at work.
This is a lie.
The case is about a man who has no problem with the sex-based dress code at his place of employment. His issue is that he wants to wear dresses, because he says that he is a woman. His employer says that he is a man and cannot wear a dress to work.
The Patriot Act, rolled out the week after 9-11, attacked our First Amendment rights to speak out and say what we believe to be true.
The Supreme Court will be ruling in the Harris case on whether we can all be forced to say what we know is untrue.
The trans agenda has been framed as a human rights issue, a liberal expansion of the rights of women to men who believe they are women. It is mostly liberals who have adopted the cause, who vociferously defend their adoption as pure and true, and who viciously attack those people who prefer to remain Reality Based.
Therefore, it is assumed that the conservative Supreme Court will not rule in favor of the trans-identified man.
But this agenda is clearly fully backed and pushed by the ruling class. The media, the government, schools, NGOs, the medical industrial complex, sports, the military, prisons, the police, social workers, libraries….are all onboard.
I predict that the Supreme Court will rule that all Americans must alter their language and their perception of reality to suit the demands of others. And that the official media will spin this as a victory for human rights and a shocking decision for a ”conservative” court to make.