 The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the merits of the Equality Act and for those of you who don't know this is a really important piece of legislation that would amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include protections for members of the LGBTQ community. So there'd be protections for people on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. So really if you don't think that people should be discriminated against, if they're part of the LGBTQ community, this piece of legislation is an absolute no-brainer. However, there are some people who are a little bit reluctant to support this and here's the excuse that at least one person has come up with to justify not wanting to support this legislation. I am concerned about the potential of bad actors who would exploit the provisions of this law for their own gain. Consider this possibility of President Trump or to say, I am not the first female president. Who would celebrate that? Would those who support the legislation think that's a good thing or would they be dismayed? Really? That's your argument? Who finds this persuasive? Does anyone find this argument persuasive? I totally support trans rights guys. I just am reluctant to codify protections for them into law because something Trump might declare that he's the first female president. What are you even saying? Do you hear the words coming out of your mouth? That makes no sense. So for those of you who are unfamiliar with him, first of all, I envy you. But this is Matt Gaetz. He's someone who is essentially a Trump sycophant and I really don't trust him at all. I think that, you know, I want to believe him when he says that he genuinely wants to protect transgender Americans. But to come up with this type of bullshit irrational argument as a reason as to why we shouldn't codify the Equality Act into law, it's laughable. Just a couple of years ago, less than a decade ago, the same types of arguments were made against gay marriage. Well, you know, I'm personally in favor of allowing gay people to get married. But if we allow them to get married, then people are going to want to marry their dogs. Then people are going to want to have five wives. It wasn't a persuasive argument then and this isn't a persuasive argument now because these bad faith actors that you keep talking about, even if there's one or two bad apples, that doesn't mean that the totality of the transgender community and LGBTQ Americans at large should not have protections because a couple of people might try to take advantage of said protections. I shouldn't have to explain this, but Trump obviously would not be a beneficiary of this law because Donald Trump is not transgender. He can't invoke some sort of transgender defense in order to stop a business owner from kicking him out because that's not the way that this works. It's meant to protect people that are genuinely transgender, meaning they live their lives as the gender that isn't associated with the sex that they were born with. And I think that it's safe to say that cisgender Americans and just straight people in general aren't going to be able to exploit these protections for LGBTQ Americans for nefarious purposes. And if they are able to exploit it, then they're not going to be able to do it easily without getting caught. And again, I want to go back to the LGBTQ argument, the gay and lesbian argument specifically because there was this fear mongering that if we allow gay Americans to be able to marry each other, if these same-sex couples have the same rights as straight couples, then what's going to happen? You're going to have straight dudes getting gay married in order to exploit the benefits that gay couples get. I mean, there were literally movies about this. I now pronounce you Chuck and Larry. Is that what it's called? Where Adam Sandler and who is it, Kevin James, they got a domestic partnership to take advantage of the system, to game a system that was intended to protect LGBTQ Americans. So this fear, it's completely irrational and it's unfounded. But now it's just being used to give people an excuse as to why they may not support the Equality Act, which is absolutely essential at protecting transgender Americans, gay Americans, lesbian Americans, bisexual Americans. It's crucial because in dozens of states, we can be fired just because we're gay. Business owners are allowed to kick us out of their stores just because they don't like that we're gay. It's completely inconceivable. If you want to live in an egalitarian society, then you have to codify these types of protections into law. Now, again, I want to believe Matt Gates when he says that he genuinely and sincerely supports trans rights. But for you to come up with this type of bogus argument, I'm sorry, it calls that into question. It makes you look ignorant. It makes it seem like you're just looking for any reason to give yourself an out so you don't get criticized if you ultimately vote against it. Well, I'm sorry, you have no rational and legitimate reason to vote against this. And if you vote against it, we're going to hammer you for it because there's no reason why in 2019, LGBTQ Americans can be openly discriminated against. No reason for that to be tolerated by a just and fair society. No reason whatsoever. So if you don't support it, then we are going to criticize you regardless of whatever bogus excuse you try to fabricate. Because what you're saying about Trump declaring himself transgender, let's say hypothetically speaking, Donald Trump does do that. Let's say that this law is passed. The Equality Act is signed into law by Donald Trump of all people. And he then declares I am the first woman president. What would happen then? Would the sky fall on us? Everybody would just look at him and say, um, no, you're obviously not transgender. You're not living as a woman. And you've never told us before that you feel as if your brain doesn't match your body. So you're not transgender. Shut up. That would be the response. This isn't some type of apocalyptic scenario, even in the worst case scenario that you came up with, Matt. So I mean, you have no reason to vote against this. Now again, I'd be more than happy to stand corrected if you end up supporting this ultimately. But for you to come up with that type of bogus excuse that was just used against gays and lesbians and bisexuals, like less than a decade ago, it calls into question whether or not you sincerely believe that LGBTQ Americans should be protected by law against discrimination. So we'll see. But, um, you know, I don't have much hope to see him come up with that type of argument. Um, it's it's honestly laughable. And I'm trying not to be a dick, but to demonstrate that level of ignorance. I mean, I can't help but think that you're just looking for a way to not be criticized if you vote against this. So I mean, we'll see. But you got to educate yourself, man, because regardless of how you feel, you are a member of the United States House of Representatives, regardless of how you feel about LGBTQ Americans. Sincerely, you represent them. It's your job to protect Americans, including LGBTQ Americans like it or not. That's your job. So, you know, I couldn't not talk about this because there's so much vitriol and hatred spewed against trans Americans that we need to more forcefully condemn it when we see it because that's what being a good ally to a marginalized group entails. It entails us standing up for them and being a voice for them because their voice is being drowned out. So as allies, I really think we need to be better about sticking up for the disadvantaged and calling out instances like this, where somebody is trying to convince people that we shouldn't stand up for trans Americans because something something Trump for a female president. Fuck out of here, dude. That's just such a stupid argument. I can't take it seriously.