“trampled on the common culture and religious sentiments.
Ty Unglebower

“And common culture is dictated by whom, you…”

Well, if none of the list of things you mention can define “common culture” (what we are discussing here is more properly called “social mores”), then you certainly don’t want the courts dictating it, either, do you?

My larger point is that we are a culturally diverse, geographically disperse nation where the social views of a NYC dweller or Los Angeles resident are quite different from a person in Louisiana. At some point, we have to recognize this, stop disparaging each other, and look for workable solutions to address social disparities.

In ROTH v US, which was a pornography case where the court had to define what pornography was (good luck with that one!), Justice Brennan’s test referred to the application of “contemporary community standards.” So, there you have a wonderfully vague but effective way of defining what is considered proper or improper in a given community.

My suggestion then, revised above in my last response to Ms. O’Leary because she insisted a good solution should spend less money (although I am not really sure you should be putting price tags on social justice), allows communities to address the issue according to their standards…..but does insist that they address the issue. I can’t think of a better way to solve the problem of transgender discrimination whilst being sensitive to community standards on the issue.

Your thoughts?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.