I choose freedom, and always will. To that ideology, I am very really loyal,
Thank you, Mr. "They are free to do as they like within their congregations or in their kitchens, but not in a public sociology class.". Thank you, Mr. "You cannot teach those beliefs as facts.".
Also true. You want to start a
private school that teaches your wacky religion, you're free to do so, but public schools are the purview of the public, and the responsibility of scholars.
And scholars are a law unto themselves individually, not a law unto themselves collectively with a collective responsibility to police one another's speech. It's called "academic freedom"; the SCOTUS has ruled that the 1st Amendment protects it. Scholars are allowed to teach their own beliefs as facts even when you or the majority of other scholars disagree with them. Some other professor's public sociology class is not your private property; neither is it your ideological team's public property. It's the property of the public, and the public has elected to fund colleges where academic freedom is practiced instead of funding madrassas where a ruling class's orthodoxy is preached without challenge from dissidents.
Further, you calling Emily's opinion that H. sapiens lacks true hermaphrodites a "wacky religion" is ludicrous -- it takes a lot more than simple disagreement to make something a religion. She makes substantive arguments for her opinion, and she doesn't promote it with ad hominems or treat it as a loyalty oath defining in-group and out-group -- unlike some of the nonsense I've seen you advocate: nonsense that's propounded as if it were fact in some professor's classroom or other in pretty much every public college in America. So if you think she's wrong, well, you're free to tell your own public sociology class why she's wrong.
Your blatant hypocrisy aside, the fact that you preached that scholars ought not to be allowed to teach the opinion that H. sapiens lacks "true hermaphrodites" in a public sociology class establishes that you do not, in point of fact, always choose freedom. You're loyal to the ideology that academics should be free to agree with you.
(* Incidentally, you used the phrase "public schools". If you meant that to suggest your dispute with Emily was about K-12 classrooms, it wasn't. What government employees get to say to a government-supplied captive audience of children is a different matter from what they get to say to 18-and-up volunteers.)
I will be damned before I let the government define how I am "allowed" to identify or on what terms.
So where the hell do you see anyone advocating the government not "allow" you to identify any way you damn well please?
You've not read the ruling the rest of us are discussing, I take it? It makes the basis on which the law is executed the government's opinion as to a person's biological sex.
So what? How the bejesus do you figure "If you hire that transwoman onto your board of directors, we the government will not count that appointment toward your 50%-women hiring quota. You'll have to hire another biological woman too." has the mystical power to stop that person from identifying as female?
