House Dems introduce bill to criminalize alleged discrimination against transgenders; passage almost certain

A month or so ago I told you about yet another ghastly power-grab by the outlaw, leviathan Democrat- ruled regime: a bill introduced by Democrat congresscreeps into the Democrat-ruled congress that would intentionally make transgenders a new "protected class" under the old Civil Rights Act.  

The bill--ludicrously mis-named the "Equality Act"--would make it a federal crime for any state to attempt to prevent tranny males (i.e. men claiming to be women) from competing against women in sports, or from being able to shower and dress in womens' facilities.

Of course you don't believe that could POSSIBLY be true.  It's too absurd, too outrageous.  While a crazy Dem-ruled state might well try passing such a law, you can't believe any thinking person could possibly try to ram such a ghastly measure down the throat of everyone in the country.

You'd be wrong.  It's already been introduced.  You can read the text for yourself here.

Unfortunately, unless you're an attorney or a political analyst, you won't see a single worrisome thing about it.

That's because the bill has been cunningly disguised to look totally benign.

I mean, who could possibly object to a bill titled "the Equality Act," eh?  That's a wonderful thing, like sunshine or apple pie.  For example, here's the very beginning of the bill, right under the title:

SEC. 2. Findings and purpose.

(a) Findings.—Congress finds the following:

(1) Discrimination can occur on the basis of the sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition of an individual, as well as because of sex-based stereotypes. Each of these factors alone can serve as the basis for discrimination, and each is a form of sex discrimination.

All terms there are cut-and-paste from earlier civil rights laws...except one, sneaked into the middle so you don't think adding this exact term was the whole purpose.  Can you spot it?

Yep:  "gender identity."  That's the entire new twist, and it would create what most lawyers call a new "specially protected class." 

Other lawyers--those who specialize in filing lawsuits claiming violations of civil rights laws--call it "My new vacation home in Aspen."

And lest you think "gender identity" is just a casual reference, of no real significance...the phrase "gender identity" appears 73 times in this short bill.  It is the entire thrust of the bill, which otherwise does almost nothing new (except effectively demolishing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act--see below).  (The Democrats enshrined "sexual preference" as a protected class years ago, so that's not new).

(Interestingly, while most analysts believe "sexual preference" probably referred exclusively to homosexuals, the actual, y'know, words leave open the possibility of overturning a wide range of other "preference" laws at some future date.  Cuz the actual, y'know, words of the law don't limit the reach of "sexual preference" just to between same-sex adults, eh?  Or even to members of the same species.

The very next paragraph of the bill carefully lays the groundwork for endless wins by these attorneys by enabling jackpot-seekers to collect damages by claiming that sexual orientation or gender identity played even a small part in the alleged violation of the plaintiffs claimed rights under this law:

Discrimination against a pregnant lesbian could be based on her sex, her sexual orientation, her pregnancy, or on the basis of multiple factors.

The language above is carefully crafted to agree with language used in an outrageous ruling by the supreme court in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) that the prohibition on employment discrimination because of sex under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 inherently criminalized discrimination because of sexual orientation or transgender status--despite the absence of a single word of federal law giving transgenders the same "protected class" status previously extended to homosexuals.

Wait...I hear my liberal friends saying "That's outrageous speculation!  Congress wouldn't do that! You're just engaging in TOTALLY unwarranted speculation about the motives of the bill's drafters!"

Really?  Well except for the fact that the bill includes the exact wording above, referencing the court's ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County.  I've read the damn court's ruling.  Have you?

Oh, and for anyone who thinks a person could claim exemption from this draconian soon-to-be-law on the grounds that complying with this abomination violates their sincerely-held religious beliefs, as provided by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, take a look at this amazing piece of legislative compulsion:

“SEC. 1107. Claims.

“The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.) shall not provide a claim concerning, or a defense to a claim under, a covered title, or provide a basis for challenging the application or enforcement of a covered title.”.

So much for freedom of religion--at least if the Democrats don't agree with your beliefs.

The bill would make it a crime for parents to try to persuade one of their kids that he or she isn't really gay, or trans, or o try to dissuade them from taking puberty-blocking drugs, or opposite-sex hormones. An obvious man who showed up for a job interview in a dress, and wasn't hired, could successfully sue the company for damages simply by claiming that "unconscious bias against transgenders" played at least some part in that decision.

Naturally Biden* (NMP) released a statement the day after the bill was re-introduced, urging Congress to pass it.  

The House is expected to vote on the bill next week, and passage is assured.  And since the Dems have majority control of the Senate, the only thing that could keep the bill from passing that chamber as well would be a filibuster.  If Republicans--led by the spineless turtle--do filibuster, the Dems would have to get just ten GOP senators to defect to end the filibuster.  

Since five GOP senators voted to convict President Trump, it would seem that the Dems would need only five more defectors to pass the bill and send it to XiDen for signature.

And consider that this is just Day 31 of the American hostage crisis.