Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

Isn't part of the model policy about use of bathroom and locker facilities? The 4th Circuit already ruled on that, as did SCOTUS, in favor of Gavin Grimm, a transgendered boy. So the case might not be as difficult as a PP is making it seem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

Ok well APS has a terrible general counsel. They have expensive outside counsel though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

PP again. I urge you to listen to the interview with the BBC investigative journalist Hannah Barnes that I posted on the trans thread. It is eye opening and illuminating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

PP here. Also given the title of the thread, wanted to throw in my two cents and say I like Dr Durán. I don’t want to see him go. I think APS’ policy is misguided and Youngkin’s policy goes too far. But parents should know if their child is trans - that is the part I agree with. I like what dr Durán did with the English curriculum and how he cares about improving the writing curriculum. It’s a vast improvement over what we had before. I kept my kids home during Covid even after schools opened in March. They wore masks the entire year after. They only stopped wearing masks this year. I know it’s hard for you to understand but people don’t fit into boxes. I am not right wing. I’m anti trump. Pro vax. Believe in Medicare for all, free college, unions, and a host of progressive causes. I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren’s regulatory positions and I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Biden in the elections. Yet at the same time I believe that the trans rights movement is misguided and dangerous and the medical establishment in the US has been ideologically captured. The medical establishment in the UK and Europe were the same way but thankfully realized their mistake and are moving to a different direction. The difference is that Europeans have government healthcare (of different types). But what that means is they collect better data than the US for profit healthcare system and follow up on what happens (there were failures in this regard but over all the government has an incentive to know whether certain treatments are working or not). After following up on kids who went through the Dutch protocol and the more expansive gender affirming care, and collecting data in general, they realized there is no evidence to back up this type of care and that they are doing more harm than good. That’s why they abandoned it. In the US, we aren’t collecting data so the debate, on both sides, is driven by ideology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Why would I bring a challenge? I don’t care that much. I just think it’s hilarious that people who are pro-trans seem to think Youngkin’s policy is a violation of some federal law, a child’s civil rights or the constitution. I am saying that if you believe that is true, bring a case in federal court. Make the legal argument. There is none.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

It’s gross to see you rooting against trans kids civil rights. But I don’t think APS has to do anything right now. They said they are sticking with their current policies which are pro trans rights. We will see if the right wing nutters (maybe you?) bring a legal challenge. Your move nutters.

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

That’s great. They should take it all the way to the Supreme Court. APS taking this to federal court is what any of us critical of APS’ policy would dream of. Can’t wait to see what happens! 🤣🤣🤣

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Well the APS lawyers apparently disagree with you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new policies do not infringe in anyone’s civil rights.

You may have heard of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

Equal Protection Clause of 14th Amendment?

Wow. People should really take a civics class. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not part of the quality protection clause. It is from the Declaration of Independence.

PP: I wasn’t saying the EPC was part of the Declaration. I posted that reference to the EPC as a rebuttal to the idea that these policies do not violate civil rights. I wasn’t the one who posted about the Declaration bc obviously that’s not going to be the basis for a cause of action, but the EPC certainly could be.

Why don’t you test that out in federal court and see what they say. I believe Arlington falls under the Eastern District of Virginia which isn’t known for its liberal leanings. But it’s ok you can then appeal to the 4th Circuit, which again is not known to be particularly liberal. But it’s ok you can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I’m sure you will get the decision you are seeking 😂😂.

All I’m saying here is arguing that this is a violation of the equal protection court is probably not the best strategy - it’s not something you want to test out.