Andrew Klavan

What was it like, Merlin, to be alone with God?

Is that who you think I was alone with?

There is a new part of work in the world.

I've seen it.

A god who sacrifices what he loves for us.

I learned of Yezu the Christ.

And I have become his follower.

Trust in Yezu.

What matters to you now, mistress of lies?

The Pendragon Cycle.

Rise of the Merlin.

A seven-part series.

Premieres January 22nd.

Only on Daily Wire+.

What is that definition for equal protection purposes? What does it mean to be a boy or a girl or a man or a woman? Sorry, I misunderstood your question. I think that the underlying enactment, whatever it was, the policy, the law,

We'd have to have an understanding of how the state or the government was understanding that term to figure out whether or not someone was excluded. We do not have a definition for the court. And we don't take issue with the... We're not disputing the definition here. What we're saying is that the way it applies in practice is to exclude birth sex males categorically from women's teams, and that there's a subset of those birth sex males where it doesn't make sense to do so according to the state's own interest.

How can a court determine whether there's discrimination on the basis of sex without knowing what sex means for equal protection purposes? I think here we basically know that they've identified pursuant to their own statute, Lindsay qualifies as a birth sex male. And she's being excluded categorically from the women's teams as the statute. So we're taking the statute's definitions as we find them and we don't dispute them.

Se oli ensimmäisessä tapauksessa, Hecox, ja sitten se tapahtui toisessa tapauksessa BPJin kanssa, kun siellä oli syrjintäjohtaja. Title IX vahvistaa syrjintäjohtajan perusteella. Se on perusteellinen termi. Se pitäisi tarkoittaa jotain. Olet vastaamassa, että tässä on syrjintäjohtajan perusteella.

How can we decide that question without knowing what sex means in Title IX? It could mean biological sex, it could mean gender identity, it could mean whatever a state wants to define it to mean. But it has to mean something. How can we decide that without knowing what the statutory term means? I think there are a whole range of sex-based characteristics that can give rise to discrimination.

Ymmärrän, että kysymys ei ole, onko se seksin perusteella, vaan onko se seksin perusteella, joka on seksin perusteella, joka on seksin perusteella, joka on seksin perusteella, joka on seksin perusteella