The Supreme Court's redefining of sex

I have been struggling to understand why there has been such a negative reaction by conservatives to Gorsuch's recent Bostock decision. I understood the issue of Supreme Court legislating. Now Amy Contrada, writing in American Thinker, provides an articulation of the issues of concern.

On June 15, the Supreme Court issued its Bostock opinion redefining "sex" in discrimination law. Beyond the word's common biological meaning – linked to an innate and unchangeable characteristic – the Court says "sex" can now be used to protect homosexual behaviors and transgender delusions. By acknowledging "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" as valid concepts (while leaving them essentially undefined), the Court has embraced sexual-radical dogma.

Read the whole thing here.