@LouHotel
What existing rights are being debated? Seriously question because the equality act has been in place since 2005.
The question of existing rights being debated as presented above and in Twitter was a hypothetical questions, but I suppose the question should be answered more fully and more seriously.
I probably should have mentioned this before as well, but I'm based in the US, so there may be some discrepancies in the discussion as a result of that.
In the US, it is legal in most or many states to forcibly evict, refuse healthcare (emergency medical, etc), fire from employment, refuse housing to anyone who is LGBTQIA+. There's also rampant discrimination on matters of credit, public spaces, public services, federal programs. This tends to happen more often with trans people, particularly with regards to healthcare, and there are plenty of articles where trans people have been refused care by medical professionals for instances all the way from car accidents (see Tyra Hunter) to cancer treatment (Jay Kallio). There's dozens of reports from trans people of being denied for surgeries, appointments being cancelled once doctors learn they are trans, and, if they are offered services, often they are delayed, improperly diagnosed, or otherwise experience medical malpractice.
In some states and local municipalities, there are laws or restrictions against teaching LGBTQIA+ history, including and with particular emphasis on trans history. People are generally gagged from expressing themselves in gender, sex, and sexuality within schools, sometimes with punishments of being fired (for teachers and staff) or suspension and in-school punishments (for students).
A lot of these situations revolve around "religious freedom exemptions," pushed by the far right, which are currently being touted as the main opposition against the US's Equality Act which would add gender and sexual identity as protected categories along with race, ethnicity, sex, etc, and thusly provide equal protections to the entirety of the LGBTQIA+ community for all of the above. As it stands, Title IX also covers sex based discrimination, which the courts have determined to also cover gender based discrimination since discrimination of trans people always involves consideration of their sex as well as their gender identity; for similar reasons, Title IX has been used to protect gender non-conformity, sexual identity, and other sex related discriminations. However, there has been recent debate on this as well, debate which will not only hurt trans people if followed through, but the entirety of the LGBTQIA+ community.
It should also be noted on the basis of work place discrimination and firing, that many states in the US are "right to work" states, meaning that employers do not have to provide reason for firing a person, making it all the more difficult for us to fight this discrimination in a court of law.
All of this is considered as "debate" because there are some laws that provide protections or are interpreted as providing protections, but interpretation really only works when or if the court (or people, more generally speaking) in question has interpreted said laws as protecting these minorities. Generally, these protections are unevenly distributed as well.
Tl;dr -- Rights to housing, employment, freedom from discrimination, equal and equitable healthcare access, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and more are being debated. These are covered (in theory) through interpretation of existing laws, but can still be subverted by the insertion of other laws or guidances which limit interpretation in one way or another.