I can't get a share token to work but just spotted this from David Aaronovitch and couldn't see another thread on it www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-law-only-seems-to-protect-trendy-beliefs-hvwrfzpr0
Writing about Maya's case (and others)...
"The more I think about it, the more troubling this becomes. If Ms Forstater’s “absolutist” beliefs are not worthy of protection, then why is any orthodox Catholic or anti-reform Anglican not similarly to be disbarred from such protection for arguing against women’s rights over fertility, or the ordination of women or gays to the priesthood? Come to that, is the view that there is no such thing as a biological woman not a denial that is also arguably “incompatible with human dignity”? Indeed, given the two cases, you can’t help thinking that the real difference between Ms F and Mr C is that one is fashionable and the other is anything but".