Polyamory recently received two glowing write-ups in one of the world’s most influential newspapers: The New York Times.
The Supreme Court effectively just told Americans that they must consider men women and women men in the workplace. This will not end well.
The Supreme Court’s ruling obliterates any commonsense distinctions between the sexes and makes a defining of sex clearly subjective and superfluous.
It’s laughable to argue that anyone who wrote — or read — the Civil Rights Act of 1964 understood ‘sex’ to mean anything other than male or female.
Federal judges will need no more than an imagination and a political agenda to use the Equal Rights Amendment for all sorts of mischief.
If what Trump’s administration is doing is ‘erasing’ LGBT people, then being erased must be the same thing as equality and assimilation — and that looks like progress to me.
Trans cycling champion Rachel McKinnon, who has called female competitors ‘losers,’ claims that ‘genital preferences’ are ‘transphobic.’
The ‘Equality’ Act doesn’t really protect anybody. It undermines human freedom and dignity by legally stripping Americans across the board of inalienable rights.
Despite the universal appeal of the name and its noble promises, the act poses a major risk to those who value religious freedom, state independence, and women’s rights.
In New York City, a therapist can tell a man with gender dysphoria that he is a reincarnation of Napoleon, but not that he is a man.
Once upon a time, the idea that Bert and Ernie were not merely roommates but shacking up was borne of immature humor that would be condemned in many quarters today.
If lesbians marching in an LGBT Pride parade can be viewed as a dangerous threat requiring denunciation from authorities, what chance is there to have an honest conversation?
Most discussion of the bill has focused on its potential ban of Bible sales. More likely, the bill will make religious education programs the target of ‘death by litigation.’
A refusal to make two homosexuals a cake for a gay wedding, when paired with an offer to serve them in any other way, is not some sly strike at an individual for his identity.
The problem is this: academics and lawyers don’t agree on what ‘sexual orientation’ actually is. The term is infamously ambiguous.
It is ostensibly a ban on gay and transgender ‘conversion therapy,’ but the bill’s vague and sweeping text could affect essentially every institution of every religion that affirms sexual complementarity.
- Mask Fanatics Have Officially Abandoned Science To Control Your LifeThis is our world in 2020: Not even the experts can keecontinue reading >
- Joe Biden Botches Pledge Of Allegiance In Wisconsin"I pledge allegiance to the United States of America, ocontinue reading >
- There’s No Downside To Trump Nominating Amy Coney BarrettThis election was always going to be about culture. Trecontinue reading >