“consistent with science, common practice and perhaps human decency. “
Actually inconsistent with each of those. Wow, a trifecta of willful ignorance.
Don’t need to show oictures.
Wow, were new chromosomal combos just discovered, to add to the XX and XY that have defined humans since the very beginning of our existence?
from the judge: “To refer to them as “males,” period, is not accurate . . .”
I go along with whatever the attorneys do to push back on that, but in the mean time those attorneys should be able to refer to those males as “chromosomally XY individuals, as opposed to those with XX chromosomes who we commonly refer to as females”.
Ain’t no way any judge can claim that’s not accurate - unless that judge wants to “deny the science”.
This judge it there to stay and to make sure the girls lose.
Does this judge believe in science and DNA evidence or feelings and radical political agendas?
Ask the judge if the girls’ locker room is going to be opened to some boys, why do they still enforce segregation against other boys entering?
The pic is an easy test for one’s TransGenDAR.
Man this judge is some piece of work....A Clinton nominee:
“Opposition has centered upon judicial restraint and attitude toward sexual offenders.[4] On March 5, 2010, one of the prosecutors in the Ross case, Michael E. O’Hara, Supervisory Assistant State’s Attorney for the State of Connecticut, wrote a 12-page letter to the U. S. Senate Judiciary Committee to elaborate upon the complaint that was filed and dismissed in 2005/2006, stating that Judge Chatigny’s actions “certainly call into questions [sic] Judge Chatigny’s fitness to serve on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.”[5] A May 26, 2010 Washington Times editorial enumerated 1) that Chatigny served as co-counsel for director Woody Allen when he unsuccessfully complained against a prosecutor who had publicly stated he had probable cause grounds for Allen’s reportedly abusing a minor stepchild; 2) that Judge Chatigny was reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001 “when the judge tried to rule against one aspect of his state’s sex-offender registry”; 3) that the sentences imposed by Judge Chatigny in 12 child-pornography cases were “either at or more lenient than the recommended minimum - with most downward departures involving sentences less than half as long”; and 4) that, in the Ross case, Judge Chatigny “threatened to take away an attorney’s law license if the lawyer failed to appeal the death sentence of an eight-time murderer of girls and young women. The judge claimed the killer’s ‘sexual sadism’ was a mental disorder that made the murderer himself a victim.”
This “judge” is a biased political creature and a fool. To spend hundreds of thousands of dollars writing briefs, getting depositions, hiring experts etc. etc. just to have this fool sit there grinning and then “rule” would be a monumental waste of time and resources.
The most accurate term is “transvestite”. These are boys who portray themselves as female, but are not.
Okay, how about “freaks with masculine abilities?”
they should ask him to step down because he’s too ignorant to understand basic biological facts
A judge has no right to dictate such a thing as this. All of this authortarianis I’m is getting out of hand.
Assisting a delusional person in their delusion isn’t “decent”. It isn’t honest and it isn’t right.
In a COURT OF LAW attempting to ajudicate the truth, limiting the truthful words being used is pre deciding the case.
This purely biased judge has already decided the case. His ruling makes it obvious he’s already decided the case.
Uh, no. Neither Female nor Male needs any further qualifiers. It is illogical to put a qualifier in front of either one of these. “Biological male” or “trans female” are illogical. Each word stands on its own, A person is either male or female, and there is no middle ground between the two.