The compelled speech angle wasn't fully explored in Shahdin's op-ed, which I understand was abbreviated to fit space constraints @CanLawMag, but the directive requires ALL lawyers to state their own pronouns, not just extend a courtesy to those who may prefer something different.
https://twitter.com/JChiummiento/status/1358150878444851200
Most lawyers are respectful toward individuals who identify themselves differently. But the main point of contention is that this goes beyond courtesy into enforced complicity in controversial gender ideology.
As with most contentious issues, it is important that the conversation be allowed to take place in the public square. Naturally, those demanding everyone else fall in line want the article pulled. Hopefully @CanLawMag holds firm & permits different perspectives to be heard.
There are privacy issues as well, which may adversely impact the very people that this directive is meant to support: reddit.com/r/asktransgend…
Sadly, @CanLawMag caved to the social justice hectors, who cannot countenance the existence of an opinion that challenges their orthodoxy, let alone debate it in good faith.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
