A revived legal dispute over a Christian music teacher’s refusal to use students’ preferred names and pronouns will offer an early test of the US Supreme Court’s new standard for religious accommodations in the workplace.
A revived legal dispute over a Christian music teacher’s refusal to use students’ preferred names and pronouns will offer an early test of the US Supreme Court’s new standard for religious accommodations in the workplace.
I think I do need the transphobia argument, because transphobia is bad and it is good to argue against it. The fact “it could be fought with simple contract law if it had to be” not withstanding.
I’d amend your stance as well to “perceived sex”.
Oh for sure, and I’m not meaning to downplay the impact there. I’m speaking very strictly on the tightness of the legal argument.
“I have shown that this person is transphobic” may not necessarily convince a judge, whereas “I have shown that this person is discriminating on the basis of sex in blatant violation of Title IX” is a legal slam dunk.