IANAL but I’m fairly sure people are also protected in (UK) law under the characteristics of gender reassignment.
Wrong again. The relevant case law is Grainger vs Nicholson, which was about belief that climate change is real and important. "Belief" does not imply no evidence. http://www.oldsquare.co.uk/news-and-media/news/old-square-acting-in-two-prominent-cases-involving-transgender-issues …
-
-
I didn't actually say that "Belief" implies no evidence. I said you comparing your beliefs to religion is an admission on your part that YOUR beliefs have no evidential basis!
-
No I am arguing that my belief is covered under the Equality Act 2010 protected characteristic of "religion or belief". This does not imply or require lack of evidence underpinning the belief.
- 15 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thank you for bringing that page to the attention of us here though though ... the underlined (part) sentence is important. Your "belief" as in conflict with the fundamental rights of others; therefore your case should be thrown out!pic.twitter.com/hqgDFJe4WA
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.