Mike the Usurper wrote:

Stefanie wrote:

Dead on! ...and legislators wonder why their collective approval rating is lower than the President's. Here's a related San Francisco Chronicle article: Many in Bay Area call anti-bias measure an act of betrayal. Betrayal is an accurate way to describe it, but I can't say that I'm surprised.

Sorry, not seeing this one. Discrimination based on gender is already barred. With this adding discrimination based on orientation as protected, what then is not covered? As far as I can tell, this sounds like an issue where the TS/TG community is screaming bloody murder because they didn't get their own special section of the bill. Now, if you'd like to explain how having gender protected and orientation protected fails to protect TG/TS, I'm all ears, but at the moment I'm hearing "look at me! I'm an attention whore!"

(that is more sarcastic than normal, I'm never up this early and don't like it much)

You're also not supposed to discriminate based on creed, but I doubt a satanist would have a very strong case unless the bill said satanist. The bill says "gender" not changing gender. Thats enough of a difference.

Soon they're going to start discriminating against fat people. Your weight is largely determined by genetics, so this borders on eugenics . We need comprehensive equal rights to preserve and alloow for cultural enrichment in our country. The law should have been more inclusive. Not oonly for transgender but for fat people, smokers, people who like to paint themselves blue for that matter. Your job worthiness should be determined by your relevant background and everyone with equal qualifications deserves a fair shot no matter what their habits are. Anything else is not fair.

RE: Limbaugh - 'Democrats Shaft Transgenders'