This seems to have failed on two points, firstly the claim of religious discrimination, and secondly the threat to the 'safety' of NWCI personnel.
The religious grounds Ms Adams cited were her “lack of belief that people can change sex”, as she accused the NWCI of taking a “religious” position on the rights of transgender people and that she was therefore entitled to be protected from discrimination under the equality legislation.
There's a well-established understanding of what a religion is in Ireland, and, alas, what religious discrimination is. Although we often say that trans ideology is like a religion, it's not a religion.
She also claimed the Irish word “creideamh” used in the equality legislation had a broader meaning than the English word “religion”.
B'fhéifir, ach ..maybe, because 'creideamh' literally means 'belief' not religion, with echoes of beliefs being ruled WORIADS in the Forstater case; but this argument seems to be beyond the remit of the WRC. Maybe there'll be an appeal to a higher court where this argument could be made?
The 'we felt unsafe' claim is a familiar one, and unfortunately years of 'we are the most marginalised group in society', and presenting GC activists as hysterical headbangers, have taken root, and rejecting the unwelcome presence of one of 'them' probably seemed reasonable enough to the WRC.
Ms Adams is the second activist from the group to lose a discrimination complaint over the events of June 9th 2022, her fellow Countess activist Sarah Holmes having also referred a claim on similar grounds.
Thank you to Sandra and Sarah for stepping up, and sorry the rulings went against you.
Plan B for future legal challenges? Adoption of undefined terms like 'gender', 'durable' , 'strive to' etc into law? Eradication of one of the Protected Categories by eliminating the definition of the category through self-identification?