House passes bill to ban transgender student-athletes from women's sports

[dderatz]

@Guvnah

Having said that, an individual is perfectly within bounds to express what he considers marriage to be. It may or may not agree with the societal definition at the government level, but as a member of that society, he has to live with what the government does/says, like it or not. He doesn’t have to participate in it, nor even recognize it as a marriage in his own opinion and his own personal life.

I can’t say I fully agree with that. For example, would you be OK if someone referred to a wife/husband, etc. as a girl/boy-friend or domestic partner? It seems to me that one needs to recognize and acknowledge the status for what it is - a marriage. Or if you were the subject of ridicule for the nature of the relationship? You can think whatever you want, but can’t denigrate someone’s relationship.

[WuWei]

@dderatz

but can’t denigrate someone’s relationship.

Why not?

[Guvnah]

@dderatz

I can’t say I fully agree with that. For example, would you be OK if someone referred to a wife/husband, etc. as a girl/boy-friend or domestic partner?

I really wouldn’t care. Truly, really wouldn’t care.

[peek-a-boo]

@dderatz

I can’t say I fully agree with that. For example, would you be OK if someone referred to a wife/husband, etc. as a girl/boy-friend or domestic partner?

Why would I care?

It seems to me that one needs to recognize and acknowledge the status for what it is - a marriage.

Why?

Or if you were the subject of ridicule for the nature of the relationship? You can think whatever you want, but can’t denigrate someone’s relationship.

I’m free to do whatever I want. The subject of that ridicule is free not to associate with me.

Having said that, if I were to go out of my way to seek out someone I didn’t like and harass them, that would be something else altogether.

[peek-a-boo]

Another sordid tale. I am so sick of this stuff.

Illinois mom says her daughter being forced to change in locker room with...