Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act

I disagree — it’s all that’s relevant

 

Then you clearly didn't understand what she wrote.

 

It's hard to tell what you're referring to since you like to shift the goalposts.

 

No, Bruce Jenner would not have competed against the girls. He's against trans hurting girls' sports.

 

That's what's telling to me.

 

Excuse me?

 

Start a thread. You are attempting to mix apples, keeping women's sports competitive between women with oranges, abortion rights, to score an imaginary win.

 

Given this obvious war on women, the democrats are waging, you would think that women would be moving off the Democrat's plantation in groves. If they don't, it might be just demonstrative of the breakdown of critical thinking in voters. For many it's just the D or R that matters.

 

He wrote they are trying to protect girls — I simply showed that wasn’t the case looking at other policy platforms.

I didn’t know it was that difficult to understand and even used the smallest words I could in an effort to make those points comprehendible.

 

He's also trying to sneak in a criticism of Christians into the mix. Typical nonsense, when you really can't address the topic of the thread with reasonable arguments.

 

You inserted they “have their backs” — I am simply showing how they do not. You introduced the topic.

 

You did an odd whataboutism.

 

So you're opposed to protecting women on the basis of sexual discrimination?

 

I'm not sure what you missed.

 

Looks like you're derailing the topic with a whatabout. As I already mentioned, start a thread and you can bash abortion states' rights and Republicans there, but on this thread, let it be known that Republicans, many Independents, and even some Democrats support the bill, the "Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act", even if it's symbolic in nature only. They DO have their backs on this particular legislation.

 

Okay, so you're not interested in expounding on your point then.

Next . . .

 

What about the point was something that you didn't understand? I'm asking you what you want me to expound on and you are refusing to answer. This ain't rocket surgery.

 

How is protecting women....
Big government nanny state "conservativism"?

How will it fail?

 

It's really very simple. She doesn't understand the point you were making, so try to make it clearer. Unless you really didn't have a point that's not asking for much.

 

Why should it be the feds who dictate this? Why not leave it up to the individual sports organizations? That's what is big government. And it will fail because it won't ultimately pass. You see, the Senate also has to pass this, and then the President has to sign it without vetoing it. Do I seriously need to reference Schoolhouse Rock?

 

Since, you are terming this big government interference, It's more telling how 100% of the Democrats voted against the bill.

Plus, Kelley Robinson, president of the LGBT activist group the Human Rights Campaign, condemned the House for passing the bill in a statement:

“Rather than focus their energy on doing literally anything to improve the lives of children, House Republicans have prioritized attacking transgender youth as a political ploy. ... All kids — including transgender, nonbinary and intersex kids — have the right to enjoy the benefits of camaraderie, teamwork, self-discipline and sportsmanship that come from school sports. Instead, anti-equality extremists just don’t want to let kids play. We know that attacking trans kids didn’t work in the 2022 election, and it won’t work in 2024 either.”

If an effort to keep women and girls' sports competitive, Kelley misrepresents the entire purpose of the legislation. Calling it anti-equality, and them, House Republicans, the extremists. Argh!

Source for quote above:
House Democrats vote against bill to protect women's sports | Politics News (christianpost.com)

 

And how 100% of the Republicans voted for big government interference. I'm glad we agree that 100% of the Republicans favored big government interference in this case and 100% of Dems voted against it.

 

Are you opposed to all Federal regulations, or only those that SW oppose? If you have a problem with Federal regulations then regulations relative to climate change should be dropped as well.

 

It protects fairness in sports for girls who play high school sports. The bill would change Title IX's definition of sex to one "based solely on a person's reproductive biology and genetics at birth". IMO, long overdue.

Btw, I thought the Democrats were the party of fairness. Hmm.

The Republicans pledged for enacting this legislation when they campaigned during the 2020 midterms. What's so awful about keeping one's campaign promise?

 

If the campaign promise is big government bull ****, then no, I don't find it admirable. But you do you. I'll keep criticizing this big government bull **** and you can keep defending it.