DOJ: Woman can be fired for wearing pants

DOJ is fighting hard for the Christian American employer and has suggested that they can force woman to wear skirts and if they refuse they can be fired.

The DOJ’s stance is so appalling that the EEOC refused to sign onto the brief. The argument of Solicitor General Noel Francisco, a Trump nominee, is that Title VII is limited only to discrimination based on “biological sex” only and therefore doesn’t cover the firing of Stephens for being transgender. Put another way, the DOJ is arguing that Title VII applies when, say, women are treated worse at a job then men are, but not when transgender workers are treated worse at work than non-transgender workers.

It gets worse. The DOJ brief endorses the view of the funeral home owner, Thomas Rost, who said “the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a biological male to deny his sex by dressing as a woman or for a biological female to deny her sex by dressing as a man” and that he would fire any woman who refused to wear a skirt while at work.

If you don’t like your employer’s dress code, go and find a different employer. He’s not forcing you to stay in his employ.


Nope, change the code.

Okay. I actually cut employers a lot of slack, so I could go along with this if they don’t work with the government. If they do though, well that sucks for the employer. Then they have to do what their employer says(government). Otherwise they can quit and find somewhere else to work(non government work). Simply out of curiosity, would you be fine with a private company requiring hijabs for women?

1 Like

Religion has no place in the workplace,save your petty bigotry for the places of worship.


To whom are you posting?

Yes. I would.

I agree with you.

The employer has every right to require women to wear hijabs and a woman has every right to accept or deny…the job.

To anybody who imposes their religious views on people,it wasn’t a reply to another poster just my general opinion.

1 Like

That has what to do with DOJ policy?

They are pushing to allow people to discriminate against people based on belief.

The DOJ dress code is based on religious beliefs?

We are discussing the article above are we not?

I’m discussing your rant above.

It’s hardly a rant.

I am against people be allowed by law to implement discriminatory actions based on religious belief,this is seemingly what the DOJ is pushing for by supporting the employer in this matter.

1 Like

Ok, if you say so.

This solicitor general has been on the wrong side of numerous lawsuits and court cases.

He’s wrong on this one too…


So basically you’re in favor of corporate mandated sharia law.


They really aren’t even trying to hide it anymore. I’m eagerly awaiting all the Trump Rubes ready to defend someone refusing to hire or serve black people.

A lot of people whined when dress codes were implemented in schools, too. Policy remains in effect.