Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestions7mos ago

In your opinion, does the current debate about transgender athletes reflect deeper societal values around fairness and equality?

+
Expand
+ Settings

Filter by author

Narrow down the conversation to these participants:

Ideology:

Political party:

Province/Territory:

Engaged Voters

These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of

@9ZHBQHX
#1 Engaged Voter
Test Your Knowledge

112 Replies

 @9V28522New Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

Personally, I think transgender men should not be able to compete in women's sports and vise versa. I say this because men naturally are stronger then women because they have a higher testosterone level, it is scientifically proven.

 @9TYSC3GNew Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

Let transgender people play on the sports team they identify with

 @9VHJRBBNew Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

Transgender people should be considerd illegals and be deported

 @9V8GSR6New Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

It reflects false ideas about the way transitioning works.

 @9W2Y7JKNew Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

I do not agree that a transgender female should be able to play on a women’s team, they just will naturally have many physical benefits. However, I also do not believe it would be fair to the individual or to the team to have to play on their cis genders team. I truly don’t know what to think.

 @9W2M2H5New Democraticfrom Ontario  answered…6mos6MO

It is not a matter of fairness or equality when people can get seriously injured.

 @9VZ3QBMNew Democraticfrom Ontario  answered…6mos6MO

Let trans athletes compete in their preferred gender's category. The side effects of HRT outweigh any biological benefit they may have anyways.

 @9VXFBPFfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

People are too concerned with transgender individuals. They are people who want to live their life as happily and authentically as possible. There is too much bigotry and fear mongering towards transgender people that has only increased with this “athletics” discussion. Sure maybe sometimes transgender people may have “biological advantages”, but so do numerous cisgendered athletes and that’s just life. Sometimes people are gonna be better at things than you and you’re just gonna have to get over it. You don’t have the right take away opportunities from people because you feel hard done by.

 @9VCK229New Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

not really. It's a highly specific issue that I don't think is comparable to any others really

 @9TX52F7New Democraticfrom Ontario  answered…6mos6MO

I think it just acts as a cover for people's ignorance and allows them to put forth more radical opinions with the blanket rationalization that "it's just not fair" in sports. They seem to care a lot about elementary school sports all of a sudden where cases of Transgender athletes are shown to be few and extremely far between

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Supreme Court Clears The Way For Trump Sentencing

Donald Trump will face sentencing over his New York “hush money” conviction on Friday, after the US Supreme Court declined to grant him a last-minute reprieve.The decision will force the president-elect to face public proceedings in the criminal case that he has fought strenuously to avoid. His lawyers had appealed to the high court on Wednesday to postpone the proceeding, claiming that allowing it to go ahead days before his inauguration would create a “constitutionally intolerable risk of disruption to national security” and interfere with his efforts to get his 34 felony convictions overturned.In a 5-4 decision handed down just hours before the sentencing was set to go ahead in a state court in lower Manhattan, a majority of the justices declined to do so, saying “the burden that sentencing will impose on the president-elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial” especially as Trump was unlikely to face any prison time. They added that any issues with the evidence presented at trial — some of which Trump’s lawyers have claimed was inadmissible — “can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal”.Trump-appointed Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the three liberals on the bench in refusing to grant Trump’s appeal.Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he appreciated the Supreme Court’s time but vowed to continue fighting the case. “For the sake and sanctity of the Presidency, I will be appealing this case, and am confident that JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL,” he said.Lawyers representing Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Trump’s sentencing was repeatedly postponed while he mounted his third campaign for the White House and pursued various appeals against his conviction. Last week Judge Juan Merchan, who oversaw the “hush money” trial in New York earlier this year, finally set a firm date, in order to bring what he called “finality to this matter”.Trump will probably not face any punishment when he is sentenced, however, as the judge previously indicated he would not impose a fine or condemn Trump to prison time.

▲  1619 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

Starmer Throws Netanyahu Under the ICC Bus: UK Backs Arrest Warrant for Israeli PM

Sir Keir Starmer has backed the International Criminal Court (ICC) after it issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister.When asked about the issue, Sir Keir’s official spokesman said the Government respected the independence of the court.He declined to say whether Mr Netanyahu would be arrested if he arrived in the UK.The spokesman said: “We respect the independence of the ICC, which is the primary institutional institution for investigating and prosecuting the most serious crimes in relation to international law.“This Government has been clear that Israel has a right to defend itself in accordance with international law. There is no moral equivalence between Israel, a democracy and Hamas and Lebanese Hezbollah, which are terror groups.“We remain focused on pushing for an immediate ceasefire to bring an end to the devastating violence in Gaza.”Under the Conservatives, the British government had told the court it intended to challenge the plans for the arrest warrants.However, weeks after coming to power, Sir Keir’s government reversed that position and said it would not object.Downing Street also declined to say whether Mr Netanyahu would be welcome to visit Britain in the future.Sir Keir’s spokesman said: “We never comment on future international visits but my position on the Prime Minister’s support for Israel in terms of its right to defend itself in accordance with international law is very clear.”The spokesman repeatedly declined to “go into hypotheticals” about whether Mr Netanyahu would be arrested if he arrived in the UK.He added: “It’s not up to the Prime Minister to determine other world leaders’ travel schedules. He engages and will continue to engage with the prime minister of Israel in support of Israel’s right to defend itself.”Pressed on what he meant by his comments about the court, the spokesman said: “It means that we respect the independence of the ICC. We respect the fact that the ICC is the primary international institution for investigating and prosecuting the most serious crimes of international concern.”The spokesman went on to say the Government’s “focus” remained an end to the violence in the Middle East, which has been ongoing for more than a year after the Oct 7 terror attacks by Hamas.

▲  148 replies