This just in: Liberals' heads explode trying to decide who to support

Transgender Woman Sues After Muslim Refuses Body Waxing Service

"An unnamed male-to-female transgender is suing a spa in Canada after a female Muslim employee refused to wax him, citing religious grounds.

According to the filed complaint, the trans woman tried to get a body waxing at Mad Wax beauty spa in March but was turned away when no one was available to perform the waxing. The employee who typically waxes male customers was out on sick leave, and the other employee working, a Muslim woman, refused, as she will not make physical contact with any male she is not related to."

https://www.dailywire.com/news/30807/transgender-woman-sues-muslim-amanda-prestigiacomo

This should be good. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, the agency being called on to decide the case, is known for being ultra-PC, so picking its way through this PC minefield should be fairly entertaining. Personally, I would throw the case out without comment, making it unusable as stare decisis.

 

Simple, businesses should have a right to refuse service to anyone. Case closed.

 

They don't in Canada and in the US, not without a civil rights lawsuit. And certainly not without a major public relations blowback that can put a business out of business.

 

Perhaps you can explain something to me... Why is it okay with leftists to be homosexual or transsexual, but the go-to insult for liberals is to call conservatives homosexual or transsexual? If it's okay, why is it an insult? Or if it's an insult, doesn't that mean that it's not okay?

 

Insult?

You know only Gay people are obsessed with Gay people. Speaking as a Heterosexual, we just don't care. We don't post stories like this because it's about Gay issues and those are their issues.

And always Vice President Pence's issue which tell you all you'll ever not want to know about him.

 

Michelle Obama immediately come to mind.

 

It's because generic leftists were ordered to believe and support by their leadership and so the average leftist overtly believes and supports like the good little sheeple that he/she/it has become. Deep down inside, however, some of them express their repressed sense of rebellion along these lines by way of endless slips of the tongue.

 

I get it! Like African-Americans in a Birmingham cafe.

 

Sheeesh, what a pathetic response.

Steve

 

Obviously in this case you are correct. The ultra conservative Muslim won’t even touch a man she’s not related to.

 

Sure. My pancakes, my rules. If an African American wants to bar Muslims from his establishment, that’s his prerogative.

 

Not to mention we know which bathroom to use. To bad the same can't be said for Left-etts.

 

Not sure what thread you’re reading. The topic of this thread is not homosexuality.

 

Because for some odd reason the left thinks they are good at bringing the Diss. Until they come across one on the Right that plays that game better than they do. Then you will see them run for the ignore button.

On the streets you just see them run away.

 

Well, of course the Left will support this lawsuit as they are already on record saying that no one can refuse service on religious grounds.

 

Time once again for another posting of....

The Medieval Man Leftist Hierarchy of Victimhood© Chart:

I've discovered leftists love to wallow in identity politics. To make it successful they first had to convince minorities, women, Muslims, etc that they were victims. And not just run of the mill victims, but the victims of those evil white males.

With the rise of the left's culture of victimhood, they've realized some leftists are more 'equal' than others.

With all these victims there are bound to be conflicts, such as the gay men trying to stay at a bed and breakfast owned by a Muslim, a Hispanic women being passed over for promotion by a black woman, blacks voting against gay marriage in California a few years ago, etc.

This has led to the Medieval Man Leftist Hierarchy of Victimhood© chart, which allows normal American to figure out the rules our fringe leftist friends use to determine who is more important in their identity politics hierarchy:

Blacks
Gay
Hispanics
Non white handicapped
Muslim
Women
Not US citizens*
Jews~
Poor
Elderly
Asians+
Evil white guys


*Assorted people from other countries: Simple rule; dark skinned = good; light skinned = evil (immigrants of any kind, however, are ranked above white native American men. This is why leftists love the French.)

~Leftist Jews can be victims; Zionists are evil.

+Only evil smart Asians who take the spots of minorities at universities are at the bottom of the scale; leftists are the only people who can figure out if any individual Asian is a victim. They'll let you know.

 

Yes, insult. You implied that conservatives get off thinking about a tranny getting a body wax. If you didn't think that was a bad thing, you wouldn't have posted it.

Liberals like to imagine that everyone who opposes homosexual rights is a closet homosexual, but it's just not so. Moses, for example, was not a flamer.

 

Or Conservative women groups at a Women's March!

 

Segregation was mandated by law. I don't think law should govern how races are treated. I don't think it should be illegal to be a jerk.

 

And I don't agree. We are a lawsuit happy country and its costing our businesses. What about weight, height, and looks? Should businesses be able to discriminate based on those in hiring?

 

You should have put Palestinians in there near the top. And shouldn't that be white disabled? A black Muslim midget woman in a wheelchair would outrank everyone.

Here's a clue on the victim/evil Asian scale: (Jungle Asians are the repressed ones)

 

Actually, a black Muslim midget woman in a wheelchair who was a lesbian would be ranked higher.

Once you figure out the liberal/progressive/socialist rules to this, it's rather easy for normal American to follow...

 

Haven't some night clubs been doing this for years - deciding who gets in based on looks?